pierfishing.com :: FAQ :: search :: memberlist :: album
  Sign-up as new user :: log in



Sign-up as new user | I forgot my password

PFIC Message Boards >> Off-Topic Reply to this topic
>> One of solutions for South California drought [topic: previous/next]
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:33 pm
ING


Posts: 513

May be it is time to adopt a contemporary irrigation technology?
Irrigation by archaic aqueduct (aryk) systems losses a lot of water for evaporation, but Californian farmers still using that archaic system and asking for additional water more and more...

http://www.israel21c.org/the-top-12-ways-israel-feeds-the-world/
http://www.grounds-mag.com/mag/grounds_maintenance_innovations_irrigation/
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:26 am
Tifoso


Posts: 106
Location: norCal (central valley)

Drain all the swimming pools in SoCal; meter the water (more metered water in NorCal than SoCal, which is ridiculous);build dams down there, then come after the farmers.
_________________
Fungaiolo/Cacciatore/Pescatore

-Lou (Louis)
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 1:56 pm
makairaa


Posts: 613

Tifoso wrote:
Drain all the swimming pools in SoCal; meter the water (more metered water in NorCal than SoCal, which is ridiculous);build dams down there, then come after the farmers.

What are you classifying as metered water? Every single house in socal, except for maybe a few on the outskirts that still use well water has a water meter? Unlike many farms. Not disagreeing swimming pools are pretty wasteful though.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 3:20 pm
EgoNonBaptizo


Posts: 47
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow

Let's not bring up the water issues again, considering what happened in the last thread concerning this topic.
_________________
Ego non baptizo te in nomine patris, sed in nomine diaboli!
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:20 pm
Trumbo


Posts: 850
Location: East bay

http://alexanderhiggins.com/obama-allows-great-lakes-water-to-be-sold-to-china-as-half-the-u-s-faces-extreme-water-crisis/
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:57 pm
ING


Posts: 513

Tifoso wrote:
Drain all the swimming pools in SoCal; meter the water (more metered water in NorCal than SoCal, which is ridiculous);build dams down there, then come after the farmers.

And they will evaporate this water and asking more...
No swimming pools and no water again in result.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:56 pm
makairaa


Posts: 613

For those who actually care to research water usage it is not a north/south thing, but a rich/poor thing. Yes, socal needs to get more resevoirs built and better collection measures. But, until the rich in BOTH Socal and Norcal stop using 5 to 10 times as much water as normal people nothing will change.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:11 am
pierhead


Posts: 464

Trumbo wrote:
http://alexanderhiggins.com/obama-allows-great-lakes-water-to-be-sold-to-china-as-half-the-u-s-faces-extreme-water-crisis/


Fact Check:

"Lie #1 – Obama Allows Great Lakes Water to Be Sold To China as Half the U.S. Faces Extreme Water Crisis

This common inflammPort Cresent State Park Beach South IIatory headline refers to the ability for companies to bottle water within the Great Lakes watershed. Quotes such as, “Why are we allowing foreign corporations such as Nestle to make millions upon millions of dollars pumping water out of the Great Lakes and selling it overseas?” This is not new news. Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Avita and Nestle have been operating in Michigan and surrounding states for over 15 years. At least now, Nestle and other companies are operating under the Great Lakes St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact enacted by the 110th United States Congress effective December 8, 2008 before Obama took office. This Public Law 110-342 was introduced in the Senate by Carl Levin (D – Michigan) on July 23, 2008 passed the Senate on August 1, 2008 by unanimous consent, passed the House of Representatives on September 23, 2008 and finally signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008."


https://thumbwind.com/2016/07/18/lies-and-half-truths-about-great-lakes-water-use/
Top of page
Send private message Visit poster's website Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:20 pm
Trumbo


Posts: 850
Location: East bay

Yeah these things have to be taken with a grain of salt. But sometimes there's a shred of truth that shouldn't be disregarded.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:21 pm
ING


Posts: 513

makairaa wrote:
For those who actually care to research water usage it is not a north/south thing, but a rich/poor thing. Yes, socal needs to get more resevoirs built and better collection measures. But, until the rich in BOTH Socal and Norcal stop using 5 to 10 times as much water as normal people nothing will change.

Dear makairaa! That marksists approach was already tested long time ago in the Russia. All valuables were taken from rich and given to poor. Poors lost them very fast because had no ideas how to use it. Problem in the minding. If farmers (you call them "poor") get water from the pools without understanding how to use it by right way, they will evaporate this water and asking more...
No swimming pools and no water again in result. Before taking off from rich and spread between poor, teach poor how use water right.
I am not rich, living in rent apartment without swimming pool but I am understand that problems NOT in the swimming pools and rich people who creating working places and paying taxes. From that money living a lot of people which condemning rich.
You probably hear tail: "If you want feed somebody, don't give him a fish... Give to him fishing tackle and teach how to fish".
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:31 am
makairaa


Posts: 613

ING wrote:
makairaa wrote:
For those who actually care to research water usage it is not a north/south thing, but a rich/poor thing. Yes, socal needs to get more resevoirs built and better collection measures. But, until the rich in BOTH Socal and Norcal stop using 5 to 10 times as much water as normal people nothing will change.

Dear makairaa! That marksists approach was already tested long time ago in the Russia. All valuables were taken from rich and given to poor. Poors lost them very fast because had no ideas how to use it. Problem in the minding. If farmers (you call them "poor") get water from the pools without understanding how to use it by right way, they will evaporate this water and asking more...
No swimming pools and no water again in result. Before taking off from rich and spread between poor, teach poor how use water right.
I am not rich, living in rent apartment without swimming pool but I am understand that problems NOT in the swimming pools and rich people who creating working places and paying taxes. From that money living a lot of people which condemning rich.
You probably hear tail: "If you want feed somebody, don't give him a fish... Give to him fishing tackle and teach how to fish".

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/07/28/is-southern-california-sucking-northern-water-supply-dry-during-drought/
Some food for thought. You also misunderstood what I was getting at. Not interested in socialism/marxism. My point was if people actually researched the problem and dropped the bs rhetoric they would figure out the problems. You could drain every swimming pool in the state and that would only help for a few weeks. They do not keep draining and filling swimming pools. They fill them once and then top off for evaporation. Its really not that much water. Every water district in the state is required by law to report water usage. My point to rich/poor is if you look at the statistics you will see cities like East LA and Compton are among the lowest usage rates in the state at 46 to 48 gallons per day per household. You would also see cities like like la jolla and beverly hills range from 250 to 580 gallons per day per household. Statistics in non farming areas of northern california follow along the same lines. The problem is not pools it is landscaping that needs large volumes of water and rich people who do not care because they can afford it. The problem is water is a limited resource that everybody needs to share, it is not a tv or car. Good for rich people that they can afford all their toys, thats what keeps the rest of us employed. Unfortunately we cannot just build more water or a cheaper version of water for the masses.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:32 pm
ING


Posts: 513

[quote="makairaa"][quote="ING"]
makairaa wrote:
....cities like East LA and Compton are among the lowest usage rates in the state at 46 to 48 gallons per day per household. You would also see cities like like la jolla and beverly hills range from 250 to 580 gallons per day per household.....

I think that this statistic not too precise. I'll try to explain: If big household in beverly hills using more water it could mean that they are cooking at home, washing dishes and making laundry inside. Tenants of households in the East LA could mainly eating, washing and making laundry outside and it is not mean that they are using less water. They just transfer using of water to outside services.
So, it could be more complicated. Also has a matter how many people living or working in particular households that probably bigger in the Beverly Hills.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:19 am
makairaa


Posts: 613

[quote="ING"][quote="makairaa"]
ING wrote:
makairaa wrote:
....cities like East LA and Compton are among the lowest usage rates in the state at 46 to 48 gallons per day per household. You would also see cities like like la jolla and beverly hills range from 250 to 580 gallons per day per household.....

I think that this statistic not too precise. I'll try to explain: If big household in beverly hills using more water it could mean that they are cooking at home, washing dishes and making laundry inside. Tenants of households in the East LA could mainly eating, washing and making laundry outside and it is not mean that they are using less water. They just transfer using of water to outside services.
So, it could be more complicated. Also has a matter how many people living or working in particular households that probably bigger in the Beverly Hills.

Living no, working probably yes. The water districts do not measure indoor and outdoor use. They have water meters that measure all water usage of a property. So the numbers are accurate. With my job I work in Laguna beach, newport beach, beverly hills and many other affluent neighborhoods. Most of my clients are great people, but I know where the water usage goes.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PFIC Message Boards >> Off-Topic Reply to this topic
Page 1 of 1  
Display posts from previous:   
Jump to: