Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drought Wars: Where did the farm water go?
CalWatchDog ^ | February 6, 2014 | Wayne Lusvardi

Posted on 02/08/2014 8:22:52 AM PST by artichokegrower

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: C210N
These are recent mountain ranges, made up of igneous leftists and other sorts of miscreation.

They sure do make a formidable obstruction. Nothing that good old American ingenuity can't overcome.

41 posted on 02/08/2014 8:13:01 PM PST by logitech (It is time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: publius911

Only 20,000??? I favor the number 20 quinzillion.


42 posted on 02/08/2014 8:18:52 PM PST by ogen hal (First amendment or reeducation camp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey
Ive been stymied in finding local rainfall totals since thursday.
perhaps its move by the local papers to SELL papers

Where in California are you?
There are tons of statistics, current and historic, from the National Weather service.
My local source of data (hourly) is at the following web site. There are dozens of data sites in California.

Rainfall and Other Data

43 posted on 02/08/2014 8:19:38 PM PST by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

BS - you don’t seem to have a grasp of the free enterprise/free market concept. Hang around FR, you’ll catch on.


44 posted on 02/08/2014 9:57:46 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: publius911
This link itemizes 100 operating reactors in North America. 32 of those are GE Mark I BWR units like Fukushima.
45 posted on 02/09/2014 12:12:21 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

No. The 300+ tons of contaminated water dumped into the ocean daily for the last 3 hears is staying in the top 200 ft. It is following the currents with little horizontal dispersion. Foam and spray off the ocean drives the contaminants up to 300 miles inland from the coast.


46 posted on 02/09/2014 12:18:08 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

I agree the bullet train is stupid. Before the earthquake damaged Fukushima, I would have strongly supported desalinization with nuke power. San Onofre nearly joined Fukushima as the next big accident. It is “shutdown” for purposes of power generation. Still loaded with fuel and sitting on an active earthquake fault and on the coast. There is no money to properly decommission it. It is 20 miles from my current location.


47 posted on 02/09/2014 12:26:42 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Well, there was no reason to have shut down Rancho Seco in Sacramento. It was working just fine, but fell victim to those who view a nuclear plant as a bomb. San Onofre is an old plant, and was probably due for decommissioning. The idea that “there’s no money to properly decommission it,” is just SoCal Edison trying to escape their responsibility. Ratepayers got low-cost energy, they need to pony up now to close the facility. And we can thank Jimmah Cahta for squelching the fast breeder reactor way back when. That technology, as I came to understand it, was the way to “dispose of” the nuclear waste from the current generation fission plants. But we all know that Jimmah was a nuclear Navy guy, so he “must have been smarter” than the scientists of the time.


48 posted on 02/09/2014 1:07:21 AM PST by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: vette6387
San Onofre attempted to refurbish the steam tubes. What they got was a steaming pile of crap. The new tubes were failing at a very high rate. See the NRC notice. If you consider the total cost of operation to include the shutdown costs, then the rate payers didn't get low rates. They got a balloon payment when the loan was called. So Cal Edison doesn't want the investors to bear any impacts for the closures. It's so much easier to nail the rate payers. It was a bad investment.

Carter is a jackass. His ill gotten "Peace Prize" will put a nail in the coffin of South Korea.

49 posted on 02/09/2014 2:05:49 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: publius911
Valleys visited her in Washington to plead for a way to save what was once the vegetable garden of the entire U.S., from turning to desert

The Central Valley, technically, is a desert. It was through the hard working hands of farmers and engineers that tamed the water and turned the Valley into rich farm land. The farmers were promised that water. It is not Feinstein's to take away.

50 posted on 02/09/2014 2:16:12 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: GilesB

I understand it completely. I’m wracking my brain trying to figure out how it comes into play when dealing with taxpayer-funded infrastructure.


51 posted on 02/09/2014 4:34:03 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: publius911

Thank you for the link it should prove invaluable

Im in San Anslemo in central Marin County


52 posted on 02/09/2014 6:11:39 AM PST by MeshugeMikey ("When you meet the unbelievers, strike at their necks..." -- Qur'an 47:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
The Central Valley, technically, is a desert.

That pretty much makes my point. Turning a desert into farmland is fraught with all of the risks and uncertainties of anything that is done to mess with Mother Nature.

53 posted on 02/09/2014 12:51:40 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

The task of turning a desert into rich farmland has taken place over a period of 150 years. The main element is a string of retention reservoirs/recreational lakes from the high Sierra down to the foothills where water is held during the wet times (avoiding wastefuland destructive flooding) and released during the dry times for use by the farmers. The system has worked well, and has fed this nation, until the last 10-15 years when government has interfered and has allowed those reservoirs to drain down, diverting the water to the ocean where it does no good.

Think of those lakes as a pearl necklace which is now broken, allowing the water to spill and be lost. Where government has gone wrong is failing to save water during the wet times for use in the dry times. I don’t think that any of them have read the Bible recently. Remember Pharaoh and his 7 fat years followed by 7 lean years?


54 posted on 02/09/2014 5:26:59 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
Understood. But water doesn't just sit in a reservoir for seven "wet" years waiting until a bunch of dry years when it's needed. A reservoir is designed to hold water for periods of weeks and months, not years. It's not a storage tank, but a facility to hold water, for a relatively brief period of time, that would otherwise flow naturally out of a watershed. Turning a flowing river into a standing body of water adds a much higher degree of evaporation to the process. Again -- this is Mother Nature winning out over human intervention.

I saw an article in a scientific journal a few years ago suggesting that the "drought" in much of the western U.S. wasn't really a drought at all. It may very well be that we're simply emerging from 50-60 years of unusually wet weather in the West, and that the "normal" condition out there is semi-arid to desert. If that's the case, then all of the water infrastructure designed in that period may be obsolete.

55 posted on 02/10/2014 4:39:37 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

These “reservoirs” are recreational lakes that the State has deliberately drained to about 50% of their normal capacities. That water has been forced out to sea, instead of being diverted into the farm fields as intended and promised. The State has complete control over the use of the water. They just don’t control how much falls from the sky. They let go 800,000 acre feet last year, unfettered, supposedly to allow salmon to spawn upstream. Unfortunately, there is not enough water in the rivers to allow the salmon to travel upstream. An acre foot of water is enough water to cover one acre one foot deep. WASTE.


56 posted on 02/10/2014 6:29:29 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

And THAT is the camel’s nose under the tent:
We provide roads, therefor WE can tell you what you can do on your property.


57 posted on 02/10/2014 8:53:21 AM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Also - you should research who came crying to whom. When the city demands water, creates a big water project to provide it, takes water from one region to give to another, and the farmers from where the water is being taken suffer in later droughts, or because someone discovered some snail or fish - that is the hand of YOUR Leviathan. But, of course, you and your central planners are so smart that nothing like that would ever happen - because you would plan much better than anyone has ever planned before...


58 posted on 02/10/2014 8:59:39 AM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Sorry for being confused. Are these natural bodies of water?


59 posted on 02/10/2014 4:32:13 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: GilesB
Well, yeah. Isn't that the whole point of keeping government out of as many things as possible?

There are entire "towns" in Florida that have no real government at all. They're run by private companies that function just like a municipal government, charging residents fees for things like street maintenance, security services and fire protection, parks, garbage collection, etc. I'm guessing there's something unique about Florida state law that makes it an attractive place for this sort of thing, but I would think that you can do this in a lot of places if you're willing to start from scratch.

We provide roads, therefor WE can tell you what you can do on your property.

Alternatively, you can ask your government to provide the roads and then don't give it any authority over anything else. That's the way it works in most parts of the country, and you can see the impacts of it with chronic, recurring congestion in every major U.S. city.

60 posted on 02/10/2014 4:38:00 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson