southwest drought

[ERICOPOLY]

Super-rich make last stand against California drought

In one of America's richest towns residents are paying more than ten times the going rate for water in a desperate attempt to stave off California's "epochal" drought

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11094232/Super-rich-make-last-stand-against-California-drought.html

 

Ha ha ha.  That's pretty funny...  (and I live in Montecito -- I can send pics of the water trucks)

 

Conservation is going to save our water...  for how many days?  The real problem is that 100% of our chips are betting on rainfall -- we have no backup desalinization option.  We take our sewer water, treat it, and then dump it into the ocean!  You've got to be kidding me people -- stop dumping treated water into the ocean.

 

20% of California's water goes to residential.  Cut back by 50%, and you've only saved 10% of the state's water.

 

80% goes to watering the food for the nation and the world.  Cut back there, and that's where you make real headway. 

 

10% of the state's water goes to growing almonds.  Yes, we can still survive without eating almonds.

15% of the state's water goes to growing alfalfa.  Are you fu**** kidding me?  That's 75% of all the residential water usage combined.  For alfalfa!  Go vegetarian, it would be good for you to diet for a couple of years.

 

I'm not letting my yard die so the rest of you can eat steak and almonds.

[Guest ajc]

 

Some photo's from Yosemite

 

http://www.fluidr.com/photos/liquidmoonlightcom

 

 

 

[fareastwarriors]

oh those Germans.

 

Dry Humor: Too Much Water Doesn't Damp Germans' Thrifty Habits

 

Nation's Love of Conservation Criticized By Some as Overkill

 

 

 

 

http://online.wsj.com/articles/theres-too-much-water-in-germany-but-that-wont-stop-people-from-sharing-bath-water-1411957801?mod=WSJ_hp_EditorsPicks

 

 

[Tim Eriksen]

Where I live, there are no water meters for residential customers. Everybody pays the same, so basically those who save are subsidizing those who waste. It's a terrible system.

 

But I still conserve water as much as possible because I find waste inelegant, and I get some psychological benefits from conserving.

 

But most people aren't like that, so I really hope we'll get water meters soon... Even if there's plenty of fresh water around here, running treatment plants is still expensive, and the more efficiently you use water, the longer you can go between building expensive new treatment plants.

 

I really wish gray water systems and small-scale rainwater collection were more widespread. It's crazy to flush your toilet and water your lawn with potable water treated to the same standard as the water you drink...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greywater

So isn't the problem all in the pricing.  Historically, how much of the farming costs was water?  I'll bet not much.  The consumer who takes long or more frequent showers isn't wasting water.  Water comes to the house and then back to the treatment plant.  If, for example, a 1,000 gallons came in and 1,000 went out, there is no waste.  Maybe pricing needs to reflect the differential (water actually "used" that doesn't go back to the treatment plant).

And I agree that it is foolish to flush treated water to the ocean, although not as dumb as flushing tens or thousands of acre feet of water to protect the Delta smelt.  Is it a shortage, or just stupidity? 

[ERICOPOLY]

Click on the "field crops" pdf:

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/

 

California field crops statistics:

Rice 561,000 acres planted.

Wheat 750,000 acres planted

Hay 1,550,000 acres planted

etc...

 

These are not crops that must be grown in California. 

 

We don't have a shortage of water for residential usage -- we have a shortage of common sense.

 

 

[intothebreach]

15% of the state's water goes to growing alfalfa.  Are you fu**** kidding me?

 

That one was just glorious! I actually laughed out loud at the Harvey's...  I wrote what follows in the "What are you buying today" thread and it has absolutely nothing to do with the current thread, but thanks a lot for all the inputs on options & leverage, it's been appreciated and useful.

[Ham Hockers]

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/10/californias-water-shortage.html

 

[Ham Hockers]

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/10/californias-water-shortage.html

 

This is the underlying article referenced

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/business/economy/the-price-of-water-is-too-low.html?_r=0

 

[ERICOPOLY]

The farmers certainly get their water cheaper than I do.

 

Last month, I paid a fine of over $1,000 to water my acre.

This month, it will be higher (already at $1,200 according to the water meter reader and we're only 50% through the month).

 

That's more than $1,000 per month.  This is because I'm paying penalties of $30 per hundred cubic feet.

 

Okay... let that settle in.  Now, the kicker:

 

California rice farmer revenue was $1,370 per acre per year in 2012.

 

I nearly spend in water per month what these guys sell their entire year's crop for.

 

Look at the "fieldcrops.pdf" link here:

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/

 

Total revenue was $770,697,000 from the 2012 rice harvest.  There were 556,000 acres harvested.  That's $1,386 per acre.

 

So imagine a rice paddie in the central valley of California where it's regularly 100F outside. 

 

Now, currently farmers are screaming because water (at their rates) has "soared" to $2 per hundred cubic feet in 2014.  It was just 20 cents two years ago.

 

So they are screaming that they currently pay $2 per HCF, and I'm getting fined penalties of $30 per HCF.  Huh?  Why does my water cost 15x as much as that of a rice farmer?

 

 

 

[rkbabang]

In a free market farming would be done where it can be done profitably and water would be put to its best use by those willing to pay its market rate.  When government penalizes the water use of one group to subsidize its use by another,  this is what you get.  But why are you complaining?  Doesn't government always know best?  After all these great sages which take our money and control our lives and businesses were selected by a popularity contest.  They look the best in suits, have excellent speaking voices and great hair.  And you must remember back in high school how the popular kids were always the wises, smartest, most moral, and turned out the most successful in business later in life.  It is the same with democracy (i.e. rule by popularity contest). How could anything go wrong?

 

[fareastwarriors]

The Risks of Cheap Water

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/business/economy/the-price-of-water-is-too-low.html?src=me&_r=0

[yadayada]

In a free market farming would be done where it can be done profitably and water would be put to its best use by those willing to pay its market rate.  When government penalizes the water use of one group to subsidize its use by another,  this is what you get.  But why are you complaining?  Doesn't government always know best?  After all these great sages which take our money and control our lives and businesses were selected by a popularity contest.  They look the best in suits, have excellent speaking voices and great hair.  And you must remember back in high school how the popular kids were always the wises, smartest, most moral, and turned out the most successful in business later in life.  It is the same with democracy (i.e. rule by popularity contest). How could anything go wrong?

 

But.. but those evil banks, capitalism is bad!! Just look at the banks! And comcast, look at comcast, omg how can you not see capitalism is bad?????? We can't let anything be done by the evil free market. LOOK AT THE BANKS MAN

 

If you want to have a laugh on how these decisions are made, read from end of page 11 to page 13.

http://sas2.elte.hu/tg/ptorv/Parkinson-s-Law.pdf

 

Too long to copy. But hilarious and sad at the same time.

[rkbabang]

 

But.. but those evil banks, capitalism is bad!! Just look at the banks! And comcast, look at comcast, omg how can you not see capitalism is bad?????? We can't let anything be done by the evil free market. LOOK AT THE BANKS MAN

 

If you want to have a laugh on how these decisions are made, read from end of page 11 to page 13.

http://sas2.elte.hu/tg/ptorv/Parkinson-s-Law.pdf

 

Too long to copy. But hilarious and sad at the same time.

 

LOL, It's like watching C-SPAN.  Thanks for that, I'm going to have to read the whole thing when I have time.  The science fiction writer L. Neil Smith has a theory that the effective intelligence of any group of people (Ieff) is equal to the intelligence of the smartest person in the group (Imax) divided by the number of people in the group (n).

 

Ieff = Imax / n

 

 

EDIT:

 

I found the article I was talking about, it was from a speech given in 1989 "The Tyranny of Democracy - Majoritarianism Versus Unanimous Consent" By L. Neil Smith.  Here's the relevant quote, but the entire speech is excellent and worth the read.

 

"Majoritarianism, as I argued in Tom Paine Maru, rests on two false assumptions and a cynical threat. It first assumes that two people are smarter than one person. Strength is additive, two people are stronger than one person, and this has been the primary source of tragedy throughout human history. Even stupidity seems additive somehow, possibly it's a phenomenon of interference which would explain a lot of that history. People, in fact, do possess certain attributes which are additive, and many which are not at all. Decency, kindness, integrity are all individual characteristics. Time is additive only in a limited sense: two women can't have a baby in four and a half months. If you've ever observed a committee, you know that the highest intelligence in a room isn't the sum of its occupants' IQs, but simply that of the brightest individual -- divided by the number of other people in the room. Just as gravity arises from the nature of space and mass, rights arise from our inherent nature as individual human beings. Rights aren't additive. Systems which assume that they are labor under the false and dangerous assumption that two people have more rights than one.

        Some claim that majoritarianism, despite its faults, is an alternative preferable to physical conflict. They're wrong: majoritarianism is physical conflict. Elections are a process of counting fists, rather than noses, and saying, "We outnumber you -- we could beat you up and kill you -- you might as well give in and save everyone a lot of trouble." Majoritarianism, to put it straightforwardly, possesses the full measure of nobility manifested by any other form of extortion. "

 

 

[yadayada]

thanks for the link. I think that is because it is easier to explain a smart argument in favor of something. But it is far more time consuming to argue against a inferior argument or way of doing something.

 

Kind of like explaining evolution in 5 minutes. But if you want to explain why the bible is likely a myth you have to spend far more time to build that argument effectively. Just look at that bill nye argument vs the religious dude. He is really struggling to quickly explain in a simple way why a lot of bible stories are likely myths. You suddenly need to have a bigger understanding of science to see that.

 

I guess that is why inverting so important to better understand something, to explain why a certain way of doing things in a certain system would very likely not work, you would have to truly understand the system.

 

 

So i guess if you have one smart person, and a bunch of idiots. The smart person has to spend a lot of time explaining things he probably spent years to understand. So a lot of time and energy is wasted if the idiots in the group are not willing to take his word for it. In scandinavia you have a form of democracy where complicated decisions are made by small groups of experts and the politicians just take their word for it. I think this is the best way of doing things, you have a democratic system, but as soon as there is too much divide they outsource to experts and just take their word for it.

[tengen]

I think Eric needs to post something about drugs and prostitutes to bring this discussion back on topic.

[ERICOPOLY]

I had a mortgage approval, but now a fresh wrinkle.

 

State Farm is now backing away from the insurance policy they quoted to the lender.  They won't write any new policies in the 93108 zip code due to our water rationing, dry landscaping, and consequent fire risk.

 

Now, if all insurers follow them out the door, it would freeze the local real estate market.

[ERICOPOLY]

From what I've read, this drought is caused by a high pressure ridge off the west coast that is pushing incoming moist storms to the north (Arctic Circle), that displaces frigid air that then gets pushed southward into the rest of the US.

 

So this makes other regions in the US frigid and buried in snow, and we're 70 degrees and bone dry.

 

I suppose I'd rather be warm and dry.

 

http://coyot.es/slowwatermovement/2014/09/29/ridiculously-resilient-ridge-possibly-dismal-climate-scenario-for-california-and-beyond/