Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 443

Thread: Water.....

  1. #176
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,790
    Interesting project that is moving forward for funding

    https://www.fema.gov/case-study/kern-county-california

  2. #177
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15,936
    Quote Originally Posted by dan_pdx View Post
    Only a Sith deals in absolutes. We can start by eating less meat and transitioning away from beef - beef uses about 3x as much water as chicken. Let's not make it so hard to make any improvements that we don't make any at all.
    Then there's grasshoppers and other bugs too.
    "timberridge is terminally vapid" -- a fortune cookie in Yueyang

  3. #178
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    valley of the heart's delight
    Posts
    1,891
    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    Whenever the hard cuts to water come to SLC, or if they ever raise our water rates a ton, I'll be ready I guess. We are ripping out some lawn this fall as yeah I'm part of the problem, but I'm a tiny consumer compared to all the massive corps and their campuses of green lawns around here. They need to step up, and some locally are.
    Paradoxically, using less water likely makes your water rates rise. Water itself is free, it falls from the sky. Your water bill pays for the infrastructure to deliver it, most of which is fixed costs independent of usage. Paying the fixed costs finances the system. If you use less, the rate charged must rise to balance the books.

    All those dams and pipelines cost the same. The same bond payments are due every year. About the same maintenance is required. If everyone uses less, the system needs the same money. The obvious fix is your bill must rise.

    Don't get me started on our politics of auctioning public goods to private interests. We've lost sight of providing common goods shared by everyone. The Enlightenment grows darker every day.

  4. #179
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Timberridge View Post
    Then there's grasshoppers and other bugs too.
    Nah, I'll leave the bugs and jellyfish for our kids and grandkids. Would way rather go veg than eat crickets

  5. #180
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    valley of the heart's delight
    Posts
    1,891
    Quote Originally Posted by bodywhomper View Post
    Interesting project that is moving forward for funding

    https://www.fema.gov/case-study/kern-county-california
    "restore an over-drafted aquifer." I wonder how that works in a state with no groundwater pumping regulations. Did they get a special carve-out to stop the over-drafters from over-drafting? Seems that is a requirement to make this work. First step should be removing the freeloaders.

  6. #181
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,163
    I ran a focus group with some farmers in the Pendleton area about water rights years ago. They didn't quite bring the pitchforks into the room, but some of them really wanted to. At one point, someone in the room with some hydrology background said "why aren't there any programs to pay us to run our sprinklers in the winter, flood the fields, and recharge the aquifer?" I was like "Good question!" Any dentists around here know the answer?

  7. #182
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,749
    Quote Originally Posted by LongShortLong View Post
    Paradoxically, using less water likely makes your water rates rise. Water itself is free, it falls from the sky. Your water bill pays for the infrastructure to deliver it, most of which is fixed costs independent of usage. Paying the fixed costs finances the system. If you use less, the rate charged must rise to balance the books.

    All those dams and pipelines cost the same. The same bond payments are due every year. About the same maintenance is required. If everyone uses less, the system needs the same money. The obvious fix is your bill must rise.

    Don't get me started on our politics of auctioning public goods to private interests. We've lost sight of providing common goods shared by everyone. The Enlightenment grows darker every day.

    If everyone uses less here, we all won't die from the toxic wind storms blowing across the soon-to-be dried up Great Salt Lake. But yes, good point on infrastructure costs vs water costs for sure.

  8. #183
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    10,785
    How is it that killing cows and bulls and eating them uses more water than keeping them alive and cycling water through them to drink milk? It would seem to me that the milk industry uses a lot of water too, if not more than the beef industry..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  9. #184
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    12,333
    Quote Originally Posted by hatchgreenchile View Post
    Lake Mead or Lake Powell. One's gotta go.
    Both, the Colorado river isn’t suited for a long term dam and reservoir, too much turbidity.

  10. #185
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    17,605
    Quote Originally Posted by Timberridge View Post
    Not if you were to ask Harlan Pepper. That guy knows his nuts.

    I had the same thought. Lol


  11. #186
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    valley of the heart's delight
    Posts
    1,891
    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    If everyone uses less here, we all won't die from the toxic wind storms blowing across the soon-to-be dried up Great Salt Lake. But yes, good point on infrastructure costs vs water costs for sure.
    Ah, toxic windstorms. Good reason to conserve. I remember reading about too much water in Great Salt Lake, and a project that pumped it into a desert basin to make it evaporate faster.

  12. #187
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,749
    Quote Originally Posted by LongShortLong View Post
    Ah, toxic windstorms. Good reason to conserve. I remember reading about too much water in Great Salt Lake, and a project that pumped it into a desert basin to make it evaporate faster.
    Ha, sounds crazy now.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/11/u...salt-lake.html

  13. #188
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    16,190
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    I don't care what Hubert says, Macadamia nuts are disgusting.
    NFW, macs are at the best nut bar none. Unrivaled buttery deliciousness. If they were less expensive they'd be the only nut I eat.

    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    If everyone uses less here, we all won't die from the toxic wind storms blowing across the soon-to-be dried up Great Salt Lake.
    Only consumptive/irrigation uses, though. Water that goes down your drain just ends up in the GSL. If you live anywhere in the GSL watershed I'd go so far as to argue that long showers, leaving faucets running, and other forms of "wasting" water down your drain is actually a form of environmental activism.

  14. #189
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,790
    Quote Originally Posted by LongShortLong View Post
    Paradoxically, using less water likely makes your water rates rise. Water itself is free, it falls from the sky. Your water bill pays for the infrastructure to deliver it, most of which is fixed costs independent of usage. Paying the fixed costs finances the system. If you use less, the rate charged must rise to balance the books.

    All those dams and pipelines cost the same. The same bond payments are due every year. About the same maintenance is required. If everyone uses less, the system needs the same money. The obvious fix is your bill must rise.

    Don't get me started on our politics of auctioning public goods to private interests. We've lost sight of providing common goods shared by everyone. The Enlightenment grows darker every day.
    The conversation also needs to include “natural infrastructure” such as the soil, geology, and vegetation. Wildfires, vegetation management, and soil health are all important factors that affect water quality and water availability.

  15. #190
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ogden
    Posts
    7,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post


    Only consumptive/irrigation uses, though. Water that goes down your drain just ends up in the GSL. I'd go so far as to argue that long showers, leaving faucets running, and other forms of "wasting" water down your drain is actually a form of environmental activism.
    Hmmm, I have unmetered secondary water. If I run a hose directly into the storm drain, wide-open, how long till we are out of the danger zone on toxic dust?

    And also, almonds are way down the list for me. Not even sure they’re top ten.

  16. #191
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    16,190
    Quote Originally Posted by zion zig zag View Post
    Hmmm, I have unmetered secondary water. If I run a hose directly into the storm drain, wide-open, how long till we are out of the danger zone on toxic dust?
    GSL volume at the 1963 low, which is basically where we are right now (https://geology.utah.gov/popular/gen...e/#toggle-id-7): 8,585,000 ac-ft
    GSL historical avg. volume: 15,390,000 ac-ft
    Difference: 6,805,000 ac-ft

    Flow rate of an avg. 3/4-inch garden hose: 23 gal/min
    Gallons per ac-ft: 325,851

    6,805,000 ac-ft x 325,851 gal/ac-ft / 23 gal/min / 60 min/hr / 24 hr/day / 365 days/yr = 183,427 years, without accounting for evaporative losses

  17. #192
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    50 miles E of Paradise
    Posts
    13,695
    Quote Originally Posted by dan_pdx View Post
    I ran a focus group with some farmers in the Pendleton area about water rights years ago. They didn't quite bring the pitchforks into the room, but some of them really wanted to. At one point, someone in the room with some hydrology background said "why aren't there any programs to pay us to run our sprinklers in the winter, flood the fields, and recharge the aquifer?" I was like "Good question!" Any dentists around here know the answer?
    Question - what is the source of their sprinkler water?
    If the Columbia River, that plan might work(*).
    But if coming from groundwater (I.e. the aquifer), well…

    (*) not sure how pivots work when temps below freezing, which happens occasionally in Pendleton.

  18. #193
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ogden
    Posts
    7,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    GSL volume at the 1963 low, which is basically where we are right now (https://geology.utah.gov/popular/gen...e/#toggle-id-7): 8,585,000 ac-ft
    GSL historical avg. volume: 15,390,000 ac-ft
    Difference: 6,805,000 ac-ft

    Flow rate of an avg. 3/4-inch garden hose: 23 gal/min
    Gallons per ac-ft: 325,851

    6,805,000 ac-ft x 325,851 gal/ac-ft / 23 gal/min / 60 min/hr / 24 hr/day / 365 days/yr = 183,427 years, without accounting for evaporative losses
    I’m on it, If I can get a few neighbors in different zones to help, we should be good in 18-36,000 years.

  19. #194
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Shuswap Highlands
    Posts
    3,816

    Water.....

    It’s even more complicated depending on the type of geological formations that the valley is composed of. The porosity of the natural recharge area’s of the aquifer may be very different than the area being irrigated. If there is more impermeable rock or hard pan layers in the lower valley, infiltration may be more lateral than vertical, meaning most of that winter irrigation will just find its way back to the river before first entering the aquifer.
    Much easier to deplete an aquifer than it is to recharge one. It’s a huge consideration when planning resource extraction in our mountain here as denuding the forest cover above the early spring melt line has huge implications to snowpack accumulation and rate of melt, impacting both surface and groundwater flows for many kilometres downslope. Some synchronization with the lower elevation snowpacks is OK, but too much and look out!
    https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/d...57/WP57-02.pdf

  20. #195
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ogden
    Posts
    7,904

    Water.....

    Quote Originally Posted by TBS View Post
    Question - what is the source of their sprinkler water?
    If the Columbia River, that plan might work(*).
    But if coming from groundwater (I.e. the aquifer), well…

    (*) not sure how pivots work when temps below freezing, which happens occasionally in Pendleton.
    I know in the Teton Valley of Idaho they have had a plan to recharge aquifers the past two years. I’ve read details, but I still have a limited understanding. From what I gather, they have opened all of the gates and canals earlier than the normal watering season, at the start of the spring runoff, and they flood every field that they can and let that soak in. The article was pretty fascinating as it told how much water seeps into the ground from a typical stream bed or unlined canal along each square foot. It’s way more than I would’ve guessed.

    Edit: Some details, but not the in depth article I remember: https://www.tetonwater.org/wp-conten...harge-FAQs.pdf

  21. #196
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,163
    Yeah, that particular suggestion was to use river water, not ground water. Plenty of river water in the winter, of course, but they don't irrigate anything at that time of year.

  22. #197
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Where the sheets have no stains
    Posts
    19,353
    Quote Originally Posted by dan_pdx View Post
    Only a Sith deals in absolutes. We can start by eating less meat and transitioning away from beef - beef uses about 3x as much water as chicken. Let's not make it so hard to make any improvements that we don't make any at all.
    Very good.

    I love beef and used to be able to sit down to a 16 oz ribeye and eat the entire thing. Now I eat beef maybe 2 times a week and buy the small 5-6 oz steaks and one of those is plenty.
    I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.

    "Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"

  23. #198
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Basalt
    Posts
    4,852
    Quote Originally Posted by dunfree View Post
    California is the sole producer (>90% of the market) in the us of a number of crops, protectionism ain’t gonna fix the problem. Those almonds Austin was bitching about? California is the sole state commercially producing almonds. If you bitches want to do without - stop eating beef, fresh vegetables & fruit except when in season (which means a couple months a year for you mountain dream towns), sushi (most of the rice in the us comes from ca), step up.

    oh, and expect a lot of food price inflation during this inflation as you switch.
    Just running things through my head here, so do forgive me….how would not allowing California to export Ag products outside of North America force Americans to endure higher food prices? Are you connecting that things we get from non-NA foreign countries would go up in price when we shutoff the food pipeline from California?

    I never said to stop them from growing stuff…just to stop the exports outside of North America, control high water items going to Canada and Mexico…then generally reduce water use/irrigated land proportionately. If anything, food grown in CA would become cheaper for Americans as we would only be bidding against ourselves, Canada and Mexico for the almonds.

    Not saying this will actually work…but what is the argument for exporting crops grown in the CO River Basin to foreign countries?

    As for beef…might be time to shift where the majority of beef comes from as well as reduce. Put some damn cows in Mississippi or Louisiana.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    "We had nice 3 days in your autonomous mountain realm last weekend." - Tom from Austria (the Rax ski guy)

  24. #199
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Basalt
    Posts
    4,852

    Water.....

    Also…I do love sushi and avocados and almonds in the granola, but we need a big shift in eating habits in this country. Half the people are fat as fuck and frankly, I can survive without strawberries in the winter.

    As for lettuce…we have an indoor hydroponic thingy that we can grow our own lettuce in the winter…just need home solar to be more affordable/available. Push that instead of electric vehicles filled with toxic batteries.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    "We had nice 3 days in your autonomous mountain realm last weekend." - Tom from Austria (the Rax ski guy)

  25. #200
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    59715
    Posts
    5,261
    who puts sushi and avocados in granola?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •