Western States Megadrought intensifies - predictions for bad Fire Season and severe water shortages for Colorado (Mead: litigation, legal)

[COcheesehead]

Originally Posted by Pahn

The west have had decades to handle their water use issues, and haven't done a thing. Why should some other states give up some of their water to serve people that couldn't help themselves?

I wouldn’t say nothing has been done. There have been many new reservoirs built.

[waltcolorado]

We recently attended a talk on the Colorado river by Andy Mueller, Colorado River District General Manager.

One interesting thing I heard at the talk. I have lived in Colorado for almost 40 years now and its never clear if snowfall is increasing or decreasing. There are La Nina's, El Nino's, Pacific Decadal oscillations etc all affecting snow fall in the area. Its been all over the map the whole time I have been here.

However, average temperatures in the watershed region are clearly showing a measured increase and our region especially SW Colorado has experienced more warming than many areas of the US (likely due to the lower humidity of higher elevations so more impact from atmospheric green house gases).

The higher temperature creates dryer soil so more of melting snow is absorbed instead of ending up in a river. Higher temps (and more wind) cause more direct sublimation of snow. And higher temperatures cause more evaporation. To some extent, our snow pack is part of the water storage system and that storage becomes more leaky as temperatures increase.

Scientists have quantified how much of the watershed is lost as temperature increases https://blogs.edf.org/growingreturns...gical%20Survey.

Colorado River flows are highly sensitive to warming, and aridification caused by climate change is already reducing the water flowing in the river. With each additional 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming, the Colorado River’s average flow drops by 9.3%, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

This web page shows local warming in the US. Scroll down a ways for specific counties. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...hange-america/

The county I live in now (Ouray county) has actually seen a 2.3 C increase in average temperature between 1895 and 2018.

So even with normal ups and downs of snowfall, the river output is going to drop as temperature increases. The talk had so much info (mostly gloomy).. but I was at least happy this guy is involved in trying to make things somehow work out.

One thing that I guess will make some sort of dent in the problem is more water storage at higher elevations. Im guessing because of less evaporation.

[Colorado Rambler]

Originally Posted by Pahn

The west have had decades to handle their water use issues, and haven't done a thing. Why should some other states give up some of their water to serve people that couldn't help themselves?

*As a native Coloradan, I couldn't agree more. The Colorado River has its headwaters in the Colorado mountains. Colorado needs that water to sustain growth in Colorado cities and towns, and lets not forget about supporting Colorado agriculture, as well.

Too bad for any place that's located below Lake Powell. Bye Phoenix. See you later Las Vegas. Quit bleeding us dry southern California. These are all places I personally want nothing to do with anyhow. It's our mountains, our state and our river (which was named after us for heaven's sake).

*BTW, for those of you who lack a sense of humor, my reply is intended to be sarcastic.

[beachmouse]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

I wouldn't mind living in some of those states, but if the Colorado River Compact of 1922 can be re-negotiated then I see it equally possible for the Great Lakes Compact to be renegotiated. Just like science itself, the arrival of new info and new facts often requires revisiting the underlying science.

Canada has an effective veto on any attempts to divert water from the Great Lakes basin and veto they would.

[COcheesehead]

Originally Posted by beachmouse

Canada has an effective veto on any attempts to divert water from the Great Lakes basin and veto they would.

Canada doesn’t have guns, they’re screwed.

[Vision67]

The impacts of urban sprawl on Colorado's water supply

Rebecca Mitchell, Director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, said even with a stable or reduced population, there still may not be enough water.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...f-1df03612a7d8

"Citing increased traffic, the loss of open space, and a strain on the water supply, 75% of Coloradans surveyed said urban sprawl, which is the encroachment of cities into natural space and agricultural space, is making Colorado a worse place to live. "

"Of those surveyed, 70% said water should not be diverted away from agriculture in favor of supporting further urban development.

And 76% said water should be kept in streams to support wildlife.

Rebecca Mitchell, Director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, said even with a stable or reduced population, there still may not be enough water because of a 20-plus-year mega-drought in the West."

That shows why this is such a difficult problem. Nobody wants to change anything.

[Phil P]

Originally Posted by Vision67

The impacts of urban sprawl on Colorado's water supply

Rebecca Mitchell, Director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, said even with a stable or reduced population, there still may not be enough water.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...f-1df03612a7d8

"Citing increased traffic, the loss of open space, and a strain on the water supply, 75% of Coloradans surveyed said urban sprawl, which is the encroachment of cities into natural space and agricultural space, is making Colorado a worse place to live. "

"Of those surveyed, 70% said water should not be diverted away from agriculture in favor of supporting further urban development.

And 76% said water should be kept in streams to support wildlife.

Rebecca Mitchell, Director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, said even with a stable or reduced population, there still may not be enough water because of a 20-plus-year mega-drought in the West."

That shows why this is such a difficult problem. Nobody wants to change anything.

Yeah yeah yeah yeah.... People love to whine. Fact is most of the state is pretty darn empty except for the Front Range and I-70 corridor.

Development will continue, the money will pull it from agriculture to urban development. Though I firmly believe it's places like Salida moreso than Parker that are going to be the newer growth engines if you look at rates of acceleration / deceleration. You have to put current trends in respect to the even more explosive growth of the 70s-90s along the Front Range. It's slowed down.

[pikabike]

Originally Posted by Phil P

Yeah yeah yeah yeah.... People love to whine. Fact is most of the state is pretty darn empty except for the Front Range and I-70 corridor.

Development will continue, the money will pull it from agriculture to urban development. Though I firmly believe it's places like Salida moreso than Parker that are going to be the newer growth engines if you look at rates of acceleration / deceleration. You have to put current trends in respect to the even more explosive growth of the 70s-90s along the Front Range. It's slowed down.

You have a bizarre definition of “pretty darn empty.”

[Arktikos]

There was an article of interest on this subject recently that came to my attention. Originally published Dec. 1 in the Washington Post, this link might be better for avoiding a paywall.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...-possible-2023

"...That would force turbines which supply 4.5 million people with electricity to shut down, likely triggering financial struggles for people across southwestern states. The standard rate for low-cost power generated by Glen Canyon Dam is $30 per megawatt hour, but with the dam already producing 40% less power than it originally did, customers this past summer faced prices as high as $1,000 per megawatt hour as they sought electricity on the open market.

The latest projections of the Bureau of Reclamation show that minimum power pool status could be reached as early as next July.

Tom Buschatzke, director of Arizona's Department of Water Resources, told the Post that dead pool status would amount to "an ecological disaster," with the region's agricultural sector cut off from a crucial irrigation source.."

[Pahn]

Originally Posted by Arktikos

Tom Buschatzke, director of Arizona's Department of Water Resources, told the Post that dead pool status would amount to "an ecological disaster," with the region's agricultural sector cut off from a crucial irrigation source.."

I would hardly call the death of cultivated crops an ecological disaster. It would be an economic disaster.