California's new water rules WTH?

a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: FyreByrd

Look at one locacation in the state nestled was found to be taking water on a permit that expired in 1988 at said location they bottled 64 million gallons if that water is. Bottled up as individual 20 ounce bottles and sold for 1.50 that's like 500 million bucks off that one location where they pay a fee of 675 dollars a year if your in such a bad drought bottling by corporations for profit should be illegal.

Great Idea - requires legislation and enforcement.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

Do a little research - desalination is a bad idea.

As a use less water expert I will offer my opinion. California needs to start building their desalinization plants today. It is the only practical long term solution. In 1995 Hurricane Fran rolled in over Richmond Virginia and rained so hard our well fell in on the well pump. We had to wait in line and hire a new well dug. For two months I drove my truck with two new trash cans and empty water jugs to the neighbors to fill up each week. We would put a water pump and garden hose in the trash can and pump it into our house system. We could use the down stairs toliet and wash dishes once a day at the sink. I started using paper plates and plastic cutlery. Baths were at the kitchen sink with a wash cloth. Laundry was done at a laundry mat. We drank from the water containers. It was miserable for two months. I went over one morning to the neighbors in my swim suit and used their garden hose for a cold shower. They were at work. We didn't want to bother any one. My cousin in California puts a bucket in the showers to collect water to water her shrubs. The Chatsworth house in UK uses pond water for their restrooms at the car park. It is possible to use less but it is very stressful. Best of luck California. Fix your pipes, use birth control, and desalinate and reuse rain water. Our end result was we moved, we still live on the east coast and still have a well though. So we always are conscious of water usage. Water sprinklers come on in the middle of the night for only ten minutes. I have a timer in the bathroom for teenage showers. It's a pig timer. We store water in bleach bottles for power outages which could last three days from Hurricanes.

There are water shortages in much of the world, and since we insist on insane population growth it's inevitable to have water restrictions. With a low flow shower head this should be doable, though 50 gallons seems a bit small.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

Do a little research - desalination is a bad idea.

I haven't done any research but I remember reading something about using atmospheric water generation in the Sahara, I wonder if that's viable yet. A company called Zero Mass Water is selling solar water generation panels right now.

originally posted by: CB328
though 50 gallons seems a bit small.

It would be 55 gals of water PER person per day that’s actually a lot of water. I wonder if you only use 25 gals if the 30 gals is credited to the next day? that way I can wash my monster redneck gas sucking pick up truck.

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

Do a little research - desalination is a bad idea.

I haven't done any research but I remember reading something about using atmospheric water generation in the Sahara, I wonder if that's viable yet. A company called Zero Mass Water is selling solar water generation panels right now.

That technology is only viable where the humidity is high and the population density is low (the denser the population, the more humidity you need). It would be insufficient for California's water crisis.

There are however things California can do. By far their biggest usage of water is not what people are using to live on each day, but rather farming. Among other wasteful practices, California still practices flood farming. Shifting to hydroponic gardening and vertical growing are both much more space and resource efficient, and they would cut California's agriculture water usage by about 99%. If you want some numbers, agriculture uses 80% of the water used in California. Being able to cut that by even 50% is huge, but the technology would allow for nearly 99%.

With such a payoff you be wondering why it hasn't happened. The answer to that is money. Building these systems is very expensive, it's also space efficient. This means that farmers not just have to come up with multi millions to build them in every farm, but it leaves them with a lot of now worthless land they can't even use as equity in the exchange. And to be fair, most of the farms cannot afford it.

Money is the whole problem. Something like desalinization is expensive too, no one can afford that either.

originally posted by: 38181

originally posted by: CB328
though 50 gallons seems a bit small.

It would be 55 gals of water PER person per day that’s actually a lot of water. I wonder if you only use 25 gals if the 30 gals is credited to the next day? that way I can wash my monster redneck gas sucking pick up truck.

Unless you wash your truck inside the house, this wouldn’t apply. The limit is for indoor water use.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: FyreByrd

So instead of improving water management infrastructure like reservoirs and desalination and the like, mad Cali cuts straight to rationing.

Read the f..ing quote "... as part of a broader "water budget" strategy."

I live here - and everyone, is working this problem, - rather then ignoring REALTIY and MAKING THINGS UP. Somethings are better then others - but California isn't denying there is a serious problem.

WTF are you doing about anything?

Triggered.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Well letting bottling companies at just one location harvest 64 million gallons a year for only $675.00 to resell for half a billion dollars and that is just one bottling plant. Why is desalination bad?

...... I will bet Nestles has a couple of bottled water plants there that can take all the water they want.... can't have those pesky residents getting water without the paying markup

a reply to: Zimnydran

Nestle bottles approximately 88 million gallons annually from California. At a ration of 55 gallons per person, per day the Nestle bottling is equal to the draw from about 4384 people. Considering their population is just under 40 million people that business is responsible for roughly 1/10000 of the states residential water usage. And residential usage is just 1/5 of the states total water usage.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

Get out while you can.

In preparation for climate change?

And people call us names for not towing that line.

Go die. I will enjoy Gods creation. Get out of our way California and co.

Create your social and class experiments in your state. Here where the wheel and humanity already exist, we will be carrying on.

My working adult ass is going to go take a long civilized shower that I am paying for anyways.

Its like a crackhead telling people not to smoke cigarettes because they are bad for us.

Get bent. Half a tub of WATER. Go build a laser for the DOD or go climb a mountain. Whatever. Leave us alone.

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

Do a little research - desalination is a bad idea.

I haven't done any research but I remember reading something about using atmospheric water generation in the Sahara, I wonder if that's viable yet. A company called Zero Mass Water is selling solar water generation panels right now.

Thank you - water is one of my things. They both sound interesting. And neither appears to be desalination.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: nataylor

But there is no shortage of water in California it sits beside the Pacific Ocean the gov is just to stupid to invest in state wide desalination plants.

Do a little research - desalination is a bad idea.

I haven't done any research but I remember reading something about using atmospheric water generation in the Sahara, I wonder if that's viable yet. A company called Zero Mass Water is selling solar water generation panels right now.

That technology is only viable where the humidity is high and the population density is low (the denser the population, the more humidity you need). It would be insufficient for California's water crisis.

There are however things California can do. By far their biggest usage of water is not what people are using to live on each day, but rather farming. Among other wasteful practices, California still practices flood farming. Shifting to hydroponic gardening and vertical growing are both much more space and resource efficient, and they would cut California's agriculture water usage by about 99%. If you want some numbers, agriculture uses 80% of the water used in California. Being able to cut that by even 50% is huge, but the technology would allow for nearly 99%.

With such a payoff you be wondering why it hasn't happened. The answer to that is money. Building these systems is very expensive, it's also space efficient. This means that farmers not just have to come up with multi millions to build them in every farm, but it leaves them with a lot of now worthless land they can't even use as equity in the exchange. And to be fair, most of the farms cannot afford it.

Money is the whole problem. Something like desalinization is expensive too, no one can afford that either.

i'll give you that those things are expensive. but the real question has to be is monetary cost worth the end human cost of being without enough water? but then again we are talking about socialists running the place. the same ones who seem to think everyone should be given everything. i expect that they actually feel that the rest of the US should be shipping their water in to them. after all they "need" it. instead of dealing with their own created problems themselves. which fits perfectly into their political ideology.

so much they could do to reduce their water needs, as well as things they could do to relieve at least some of their water shortage. things that they don't seem to even think about doing. so in my honest opinion, they should be cut off from water or other help from outside of their state, at least until they actually do things other than to ration water for actual people, to solve their own created problems. it honestly does feel like they are relying on everyone else to solve their problems for them.


and to think they want to separate from the US. so what is their plan to deal with this self made crises if they cut themselves off from the country? especially if parts of California (actually most), then choose to cut themselves off from those that want to separate (mainly the cities only), to stay in the US, which would make their problems far worse. seriously California wanting to separate from the US is just not quite as insane as when a few years back the financial district of Manila wanted to separate from the rest of the Philippines to form their own country. not only forgetting the fact that if they did that, they would actually loose most of that high income from being the finical capital, which would obviously move to somewhere else, taking that wealth with them. but also the fact that that part of the city has no things like ports, access to the ocean, or even an airport, and would in fact be completely landlocked within the country they wanted to leave, with no outside access at all. not to mention no real food production like farms or anything like that. they were happily going on about how anyone who wanted to travel into their new country would need to buy visas. and charging tariffs for exports and imports (it's the banking area, not an industrial area). completely seeming to forget that they would have to import everything they need like food. and that if they ever wanted to leave that small section of the city, they would need visas, as they would have to go through the Philippines, just to get on a boat or aircraft to travel elsewhere.

a reply to: generik

This proposed water rationing in California is punishing the people in the cities for the wasteful practices in the northern half of the state. Among other things the way the proposed CA breakup is written, they would create one state that has all the water, and then a couple states downstream in the cities that would be dependent on that water. It's essentially a power grab, because right now the state government can step in and demand they find an equitable way to share it which one way or another involves placing a financial burden on farmers. If they were to split the state up that financial burden would be gone.

California! Fix the damn pipes!!! In some areas underground leaks cause the loss of 40 percent of the water that flows through them.

My belief about the things that California is doing is to drive as many people out of the state as possible, I believe their hope it's too dump their homeless on to the rest of the country

originally posted by: DonVoigt
My belief about the things that California is doing is to drive as many people out of the state as possible, I believe their hope it's too dump their homeless on to the rest of the country

What they want to do is to destroy the Conservatives in the Northern part of the state. Then they think they can get their Socialist Utopia.