General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLake Mead -the nation's largest water reservoir - is only at 40% capacity
Link to tweet
?s=20
Lake Mead - the nations largest reservoir - is at only 40% capacity, triggering a declaration of water shortage for the first time ever.
Arizona will lose 18% of its annual water apportionment and Nevada will lose 7%.
Carlitos Brigante
(26,500 posts)still arguing whether it's real or not. Instead of actually doing Jack shit about it.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)water supply have been aware for a very long time that it would eventually be gone. It's not what you're talking about, but those responsible for keeping the water flowing so their regions don't die have been doing some of the jack shit they had the power and authority to do.
They've taken a whole range of steps over the decades to maximize the water they could get while it was there, from constructing giant tunnels drawing from the bottom of Lake Mead, to much more sophisticated plans for what comes next.
Those who have the authority to do a partial job have been dealing with a very imperfect situation, in of course imperfect ways, to meet their responsibilities to very imperfect "the people" who've been ignoring and refusing their responsibility all their lives.
Carlitos Brigante
(26,500 posts)vacuum. These are interconnected. And the reality is our institutions have failed to address climate change in the macro. The 2000s were pretty much time wasted, which we won't get back. The last 4 years were also a complete waste at the highest levels. Local institutions have to do what they have to do. But if this isn't treated holistically, we're pretty much fucked. We're way behind on this and the fact that large swaths of our population need this explained to them again and again, like they're infants. Keeps us from moving forward. If one can't even agree on obvious reality. How exactly is this going to be addressed?
So, right back at 'cha.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)What you say is all so true, of course. We can't get around the reality that THE BIG WE, the electorate, are by far the biggest, controlling institution, the one that creates and empowers, or disempowers and destroys, all other institutions.
Baked into the problem of us is that democracies almost always let problems go until enough of us feel enough pain to start objecting. But we've fucked ourselves huge, not just pretty much, by this perfect storm of massive social dysfunction and climate crisis.
I have a lot more faith at this point in the judgement and willingness of people overall in our subordinate institutions to do what needs to be done than in the electorate overall. The right's been voting for decades to keep our institutions from doing their job properly and electing increasingly extremist anti-government politicians. Opposition has crippled much government action, a vacuum of leadership causing private industry to take some actions and also research solutions.
But among our resources, we've always had better people than we bothered to look for running our institutions because those fields tend to draw people who care about them. Real needs have also set much firmer, though low, limits on the take of corruption than citizens typically bother to; when the lights or water go off and stay off, the electorate starts caring BIG time. Many people have big plans and are eager to leap to them, once we let them. Also we do have much of the planet's most advanced private institutional resources.
And above all unfocused and unused electoral resources on the left. Look at the people we've known over the past 30 years who won't leave a faucet running wastefully and we probably have a fair estimation of how many have been conscientiously voting water and climate responsibility. We could always have been a far more powerful force. We still can and will need to be.
At this point the right seems to have decided that surrender to climate devastation, insisting that nothing can or should be done, is their best way to still "win" their insane factional war. But that's at least movement, and when it's their own asses on fire, there's going to be more movement. And when it's our own asses on fire, more of us are finally going to develop the conviction to vote for what needs to be done.
Anyway, that's my best prediction for how we're going to address this. We're in a godawful mess, fucked for life, but not without resources. "Optimism" 2021 style.
Hekate
(90,643 posts)Californias been trying for decades
dalton99a
(81,450 posts)VGNonly
(7,486 posts)The situation will likely get far worse when Lake Powell becomes a "dead pool". That is when available precipitation does not compensate for evaporative losses.
hatrack
(59,583 posts)Powell's at 31.55%:
http://lakepowell.water-data.com/
Powell's currently at 3551 feet (it's full at 3700 feet); minimum power pool is 3490 and dead pool is 3370. Dead pool is when the reservoir falls so low that even the lowest release system (the river outlets) are above the water level.
With no increase in reservoir level likely before April or May of 2022, the odds are decent that there's another 30' or so for Powell to fall, though USBR runs a range of water-year minimum projections.
https://qcnr.usu.edu/coloradoriver/files/FillMeadFirst_Exec_Summary.pdf
VGNonly
(7,486 posts)more than 50 feet of water in the last year. It may need to be shutdown to spillway level to keep Lake Mead viable. Lake "Foul" should never have been built.
hatrack
(59,583 posts)Powell had 27 million acre-feet at construction; it has 24.3 million acre-feet now.
Mead had 32 million care-feet capacity at construction; it has 25.9 million acre-feet now.
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)Hell, living there is about to become impossible.
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)Those TWO crops use more than 10% of all agricultural water in California.
So... 80% of ALL WATER used in California is Agricultural Water.
So EVERYTHING ELSE including sewer, sanitation, landscaping and human use is 20%.
Thus Almonds and Rice combined probably use MORE water than humans in the State use to drink and shower combined.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)... other nuts for awhile because they need so much water, yet they're often grown in dry California!
Seeds require much less water than nuts, as agricultural products, and they're nutritionally similar.
If I buy rice, it's "Asian Best" which is grown in Thailand... a place that actually gets plenty of rain!
It's great that places like California and Arizona get lots of sunshine to efficiently grow some of the "thirsty" agricultural products like alfalfa, but it's past time for the people in those places to realize there's just not enough water for such things.
VGNonly
(7,486 posts)comes from the Sacramento Valley and adjacent water abundant areas, which is not desert. California only produces less than 20% of US rice production, most of it in Arkansas.
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)Rather than draining aquifers and the Colorado River/Lake Mead?
Obviously Big Ag pulls the strings in gov't
VGNonly
(7,486 posts)production in California, they'll have plenty of water. The average US person uses 1500 gallons of water daily in a meat/dairy situation, only about 450 gallons for vegans.
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)80% of ALL water used in California is used by Agriculture.
Think about it... why grow Rice in California when Arkansas is the #1 rice growing State?
Look at a map. Tell me the difference between Arkansas and California. Use Google Maps, you'll see that Arkansas is basically covered in water. California is not.
Hekate
(90,643 posts)That work for you?
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)Living in a desert is inefficient.
And so is agriculture.
Hekate
(90,643 posts)WarGamer
(12,436 posts)Like I said... rice is #1 in Arkansas because they have fertile soil and lots of water.
Maybe the South can be reinvigorated by increased agriculture? The Mississippi Delta is perfect, has been for centuries. PLUS it's an impoverished area, might be good for it.
Hekate
(90,643 posts)
game that out.
WarGamer
(12,436 posts)Would give more water to humans and landscaping, etc...
former9thward
(31,980 posts)The cities have no water issues in AZ. Farmers will face issues but that is it. They send food to the east coast. That will probably have to be curtailed.
NickB79
(19,233 posts)That's almost 10% of the state's GDP, and a big chunk of the tax base.
Beyond that, AZ cities get a substantial portion of electricity from Hoover Dam, which is currently producing far less than it used to. And with temps climbing, demand for AC will rise as well.
Just because the taps are still flowing doesn't mean the cities won't be harmed substantially. And that's assuming they're sane enough to rein in new suburban development that's currently booming.
former9thward
(31,980 posts)CA gets most of it.
https://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/powerfaq.html
This is not an on and off situation. I said it will affect agriculture. It will not end it. If there are limits it will affect food prices on the east coast mainly.
wackadoo wabbit
(1,166 posts)Lake Mead is the Colorado River reservoir for the Hoover Dam. In July, the water level at the Hoover Dam fell to the lowest level since the dam was constructed in the 1930s. (I don't know about since then, but I doubt that it's become significantly higher.)
What many people don't realize, however, is that the electrical output from the dam is partially based on the water level. And if the water level drops low enough, the dam's electrical output will need to be completely shut down.
So not only less water, but no electricity, too!
Twenty-nine million people get at least some of their electricity from the Hoover Dam.
Climate change is fun.
former9thward
(31,980 posts)wackadoo wabbit
(1,166 posts)of looking at the same thing.
The link says, "Hoover Dam generates, on average, about 4 billion kilowatt-hours of hydroelectric power each year for use in Nevada, Arizona, and California - enough to serve 1.3 million people."
While the Hoover Dam generates electricity that is "enough to serve 1.3 million people," that number is if the only power these people receive is that generated by the dam.
However, power can come from different sources. And 29 million people get at least some of their electricity from the dam, and the rest of their power from elsewhere.
Edit: left off a period
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)It is a strange time.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)... is equivalent to ALL of the water used in California for a year, including the water used by their farmers who easily use most of it.
Right now, the Great Lakes are several feet above their typical level.
But that water will NEVER get transported to the West because (1) it's not economically feasible; and (2) it's not allowed per the Great Lakes compact.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)WarGamer
(12,436 posts)JoanofArgh
(14,971 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Stay safe.
JoanofArgh
(14,971 posts)Buckeyeblue
(5,499 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)marie999
(3,334 posts)hunter
(38,310 posts)... especially in the winter.
Urban users downstream of Lake Mead can probably afford expensive recycled and desalinated water. Farmers can't.
Desalinated water is currently advertised at a "half cent a gallon." That's far too expensive for farmers but not too expensive for flushing toilets, taking showers, or washing clothes.
I think the greater danger to cities from global warming is not drought, but flooding and high wet-bulb temperatures that are not survivable without air conditioning.
Phoenix and Las Vegas are not going to dry up and blow away.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)Thanks for the thread JoanofArgh