Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know of a large body of water located to the west of Lakes Powell and Mead that is in absolutely no danger of running dry anytime soon. It's called the Pacific Ocean. Is it time to start talking about desalination? Or do we have to wait until the Colorado River is as dry as the Salt "River" in Phoenix before we start doing something about it?
When the river gets too low to provide water or electricity to hardly anyone, people will abandon the SW in droves. But where will they go? To the increasingly fire-prone west coast? To the Upper Midwest and hurricane-prone east?
There's going to be massive displacement of people. The US is characterized right now by a tremendous lack of forward planning. Example: California claims to have a budget surplus in the billions. So instead of putting some of that away for future disaster relief, and some of it for moving coastal and bayside freeways inland (Humboldt County already is seeking funding for that along Humboldt Bay, where the highway floods during storm surges), the legislature is discussing creating a universal health care scheme with the money.
Desal, by the way, consumes a tremendous amount of fuel. Someone will have to figure out how to power the desal plants in an era of shrinking fossil fuel supplies. They'll have to figure out what to do with all the salt sludge that's a byproduct of the process, too.
When the river gets too low to provide water or electricity to hardly anyone, people will abandon the SW in droves. But where will they go? To the increasingly fire-prone west coast? To the Upper Midwest and hurricane-prone east?
There's going to be massive displacement of people. The US is characterized right now by a tremendous lack of forward planning. Example: California claims to have a budget surplus in the billions. So instead of putting some of that away for future disaster relief, and some of it for moving coastal and bayside freeways inland (Humboldt County already is seeking funding for that along Humboldt Bay, where the highway floods during storm surges), the legislature is discussing creating a universal health care scheme with the money.
Desal, by the way, consumes a tremendous amount of fuel. Someone will have to figure out how to power the desal plants in an era of shrinking fossil fuel supplies. They'll have to figure out what to do with all the salt sludge that's a byproduct of the process, too.
It just doesn't work like that. Water won't be there one day and then without notice be unavailable the next day. And good luck getting freeways moved inland. That's insanity. You know how much it costs to build new highways? No budget surplus is going to move more than a small portion of highways and for no real benefit for anyone.
These hysterical thoughts are commonly spoken from people living far from the impacted areas. Can't tell you how many New Yorkers have told me about how Las Vegas is doomed. Is that so? And you know better because of what incredible insider information?
These hysterical thoughts are commonly spoken from people living far from the impacted areas. Can't tell you how many New Yorkers have told me about how Las Vegas is doomed. Is that so? And you know better because of what incredible insider information?
Because it's in the literal desert, and there's a drought all around it? Because water supplies are running low already? Because Vegas will be allowed to fail before California agriculture?
I started a thread some months ago about the water crisis Arizona is facing in the not too distant future. Another poster who's a resident of Phoenix insisted it was all overblown hype and that Arizona had plenty of water available from other sources. What's the truth I wonder.
I have recently moved to ARizona, not exactly by my choice but I am here. I looked heavily into the water issues and have chosen not to buy a house because where I am at I believe is going to have significant water issues in the not to distant future.
the Phoenix metro area gets 30% of their water from the Colorado river, the rest comes from smaller rivers, underground rivers, and aquifers. To build homes in Arizona now the developers have to prove they own the water rights or acquire the water rights to support their build for the next 100 years, which is driving up the cost of the water that is not tied directly to the land. Currently there is a huge development being planned of 12000 homes on the east end of the metro area, they only have permits to build a couple of hundred homes right now because that is all the water they can get.
There are a lot of farms especially in the southwest area of the state that use a lot of water to grow alfalfa that does get shipped overseas, these farms have old grandfathered rights, but after what happened in Northern Colorado a few years ago I doubt they hold those rights long term.
South eastern Arizona actually has a lot of water, water that ends up going into mexico, that is where I think we see the eventual growth head in Arizona.
The truth is as I posted earlier; the AZ state government is investing heavily in propaganda to convince its residents there's no water shortage, and that, like a loving mommy, it has seen to residents' water needs into the foreseeable future. I may have been on that thread with you. I've had the same experience on the AZ threads.
Maybe AZ is doing this to attract more transplants to add to their tax base? I can't imagine why they would be deliberately misinforming their taxpayers.
Just the other day I had a conversation with a guy who teaches real estate classes and has sold ranches in Arizona for 40 years. People in Arizona have no idea how bad the water issues are for other states. He tried to argue with me that Colorado had no water issues, neither does Utah, New Mexico, or the midwestern states like Nebraska and Kansas.
He tried to argue that Colorado could just build a pipeline from the front range to the Colorado River and easily get Arizona more water if they wanted to. I literally laughed in his face as he was describing how Colorado could easily supply Arizona more water and the other states didn't need it.
When I told this guy that Colorado has talked about building his pipeline, but that the water was going to go the other way as Colorado needed their water they are legally entitled too from the Colorado river basin he didn't believe me. When I told him that last I checked Colorado is being sued right now by Nebraska and Kansas for water he was shocked, and when I explained that thousands of acres of farm land were stripped of their water in 2008 including my families land he was speechless.
People in Colorado that pay attention to water have a very different perspective because it seems like there are constant news reports on different states suing Colorado for more water. It is common problem throughout the midwest and the western US where they all think that Colorado has an endless supply water and we just aren't sharing with their state. After all whenever these states have needed more water they just sue Colorado, I asked what happens when that doesn't work and the guy had nothing to say.
The amount of water really needed to sustain humans is really small. There is nothing sacred about a toilet that flushes with water. You can recycle grey water from bathing. I’ve spent a week with four people on a boat with a 100 gallon water tank many times without running out. That’s less than 4 gallons per day per person.
The amount of water really needed to sustain humans is really small. There is nothing sacred about a toilet that flushes with water. You can recycle grey water from bathing. I’ve spent a week with four people on a boat with a 100 gallon water tank many times without running out. That’s less than 4 gallons per day per person.
Do you really think most people would LIVE like that permanently, as opposed to going for a boat trip or other temporary living situation?
It just doesn't work like that. Water won't be there one day and then without notice be unavailable the next day. And good luck getting freeways moved inland. That's insanity. You know how much it costs to build new highways? No budget surplus is going to move more than a small portion of highways and for no real benefit for anyone.
These hysterical thoughts are commonly spoken from people living far from the impacted areas. Can't tell you how many New Yorkers have told me about how Las Vegas is doomed. Is that so? And you know better because of what incredible insider information?
I'm from the Bay Area myself, and am a part-time resident of CA, so naturally I'm concerned about these things. Humboldt County is currently seeking federal funding for help moving a section of Hwy 101 uphill a bit, away from the immediate bayshore. Sea level rise maps show some Bay Area freeways will be underwater before end of century, at least during storm surges if not permanently. The Bay Area counties with bayshore have already taken steps to restore wetlands as buffers, to forestall flooding of freeways and other Bayshore developments. That was a process begun about 15 years ago, as part of a regional plan. Living in a landlocked state, perhaps you can't relate to these issues, but coastal communities are already having to face them.
In Louisiana a few years ago, a community in the Mississippi delta got the first federal relocation grant relating to climate change/sea level rise. The highway to the community was flooding so often, residents were often cut off from the kids' schools and other services and amenities, and homes already up on stilts were flooding during storms. North Carolina island communities last weekend saw shorefront homes tumble into the ocean and float away. The highway running the length of the islands and connecting them with the mainland became impassible.
Having to move highways or entire communities isn't "insanity" if it's your community or region that's affected. Cities and towns are caught by surprise by extreme water shortage or its sudden absence only if they don't plan in advance, and complacently take water supplies for granted.
Of course water supplies won't disappear overnight in most cases. (Although this has happened in some communities in AZ, due to excessive groundwater pumping by new housing developments able to sink deeper wells than neighboring communities, and it happened during the drought in CA in several desert communities and two coastal ones north of the Bay Area, that had to have water trucked in before buying desal plants or developing access to an alternative river source. It also happened to a town in northern NM a couple of years ago.) But as water availability declines, the writing will be on the wall. It already is, for people willing to read the writing. At what point people start moving out of the region, and how many will choose to stay until extreme conditions, and whether the influx of transplants to the area will change, all remains to be seen. It's a matter of time.
A few California coastal communities at the height of the drought, developed brackish water sources, which they treated via new desalination plants. In this way, they were able to avoid running out of water, but they were already in a water supply state of emergency at the time. Some of these communities are still at high risk of running out of water. Lack of forward planning combined with steadily worsening drought can (and in some cases--does) result in towns suddenly finding themselves out of water, or instituting extreme restrictions on water use. This is especially trying for communities dependent on tourism for jobs and part of the tax base.
More on communities suddenly running out of water:
Multiple towns in California, stricken by relentless drought conditions and government mismanagement of scarce resources, are just about out of water as they scramble for solutions.
City leaders in Fort Bragg, located on the Mendocino Coast, are rushing to install a new emergency desalination plant. In Healdsburg, government officials have banned lawn watering. In Hornbrook, the faucets have already run dry and people are having to drive 15 minutes away just to wash their clothes or take a shower.
Things are dire, in other words – with no end in sight. [...]
According to reports, it is not just small towns and rural hamlets that are struggling to find precious moisture. Larger towns with their own reservoirs and water departments are also in trouble as water systems run dry.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 05-17-2022 at 10:55 AM..
Just the other day I had a conversation with a guy who teaches real estate classes and has sold ranches in Arizona for 40 years. People in Arizona have no idea how bad the water issues are for other states. He tried to argue with me that Colorado had no water issues, neither does Utah, New Mexico, or the midwestern states like Nebraska and Kansas.
He tried to argue that Colorado could just build a pipeline from the front range to the Colorado River and easily get Arizona more water if they wanted to. I literally laughed in his face as he was describing how Colorado could easily supply Arizona more water and the other states didn't need it.
When I told this guy that Colorado has talked about building his pipeline, but that the water was going to go the other way as Colorado needed their water they are legally entitled too from the Colorado river basin he didn't believe me. When I told him that last I checked Colorado is being sued right now by Nebraska and Kansas for water he was shocked, and when I explained that thousands of acres of farm land were stripped of their water in 2008 including my families land he was speechless.
As an RE agent, the guy you talked to is heavily invested in denial. His career depends on it. Thanks for posting.
I know of a large body of water located to the west of Lakes Powell and Mead that is in absolutely no danger of running dry anytime soon. It's called the Pacific Ocean. Is it time to start talking about desalination?
Desalination is a desperation maneuver. We've got a long way to go in terms of water use reduction before this becomes economically viable. A huge water savings could be achieved by just changing residential landscaping. Get rid of turf areas and replace with with less water-intensive landscapes.
Similar comment goes to agriculture. There are much better places to grow corn and cotton, instead of growing them in the dry Southwest.
Change will happen if the price of water goes up enough. For example, the economics of spending money to rip out turf in order to save on the water bill will eventually tip.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
