Ongoing drought induced uplift: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/ea...cience.1260279
heard about that.
Trippy, ain't it?
quit derailing my thread
Zoinks.
Poor Shazbot.
I would be willing to bet prices will fall globally, once the LNG terminals get rolling, and LNG prices will come down as well.
Russia gets its nuts in a clamp either way.
Agreed. LNG is the US's most potent weapon against Putin and Obama won't release the permits.
There is nothing really the average citizen can do here in CA. As a whole, citizens of CA use 20% of the water. The other 80% is used by agriculture. Even if every CA citizen reduced their use by 25% the amount saved is literally a drop in the bucket. Yet the citizens are the one's being fined for watering their lawn on the wrong day. It's bull .
Consider it a perk living in California.
You can water your lawn with bottled water!
I read where if farmers spent a few $100Ms to replace wasteful flood irrigation with efficient drip irrigation, there'd be enough water for everyone.
Exact link please.
I can't find it..
I also read if CA farmers reduced their EXTRAVAGANT wastage of water by 6%, then plenty of water for everybody.
The switch to drip has been going on and on going:
Flood irrigation still common, but drip method is gaining ground
http://www.mullerranch.com/making_news/sacbee_drip_2_2014.html
Another CA water conservation would be replace the canals (heavy evaporation losses, esp in the NV/CA deserts) with pipelines.
along with cheap transport fuel as peak oil has passed, cheap/free water era in the desert/semi-desert West should be considered over.
Why should I be shocked that WC is trying to argue with facts that aren't even up for debate? He would literally have the ego to try to talk down to people with PhDs in their respective fields because he thinks he can "outlogik" them.
Where are you getting your info at?
It's at 386,291 AF.
http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/res...aterYears=2013
My error, I thought it was 40% of 386k.
It's still 40% of capacity. Which is incredibly low. Which means it could go a lot lower without any rain.
Folsom Lake 8/24/14:
But we don't need to worry, because our reservoirs are at 40% of capacity.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 08-26-2014 at 10:15 AM.
It's only going to get worse as the population increases.
You said it's not unusual. Do you retract that statement now?
Why should I? There were three or four periods of time the level was lower, and with a smaller population. Now should it have become as low as it did in January with a smaller population, I would be more concerned. The low periods will likely get worse and worse as the population increases, because rain is not going to increase with population.
Why are you basing your entire argument around reservoir levels? Do you realize that they are not the only factors of importance in this situation?
I can agree with that, but the OP focused on Folsom.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
