Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kolanos 1521 days ago
> Climatologist Bill Patzert estimates that more than 80% of the region's rainfall ends up diverted from urban areas in Southern California into the Pacific . “All those trillions of gallons of rain, which sound so sweet, really end up in the ocean,” he said. [0]

> Statewide, average water use is roughly 50% environmental, 40% agricultural, and 10% urban, although the percentage of water use by sector varies dramatically across regions and between wet and dry years. Some of the water used by each of these sectors returns to rivers and groundwater basins where it can be used again. [1]

[0]: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-rainwater-lost-wet... [1]: https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/jtf-water-use.pdf

2 comments

"50% environmental" - This term is very deceptive. It's basically water that can't be used anyway, and clouds the fact that really agriculture uses 80-90% of the actually available water. It artificially grows the denominator.
That's untrue. It's freshwater that is purposely diverted to streams and rivers to sustain the local ecology. This is what farmers are complaining about in the Central Valley.
> > Climatologist Bill Patzert estimates that more than 80% of the region's rainfall ends up diverted from urban areas in Southern California into the Pacific . “All those trillions of gallons of rain, which sound so sweet, really end up in the ocean,” he said. [0]

You don't need to be a climatologist to figure this one out, just being a resident there you figure out very soon how flash flood areas are possible (specifically in SoCal) since every square inch is paved the rain water, when it actually falls, is destined to cause damage and/or make it's way to the gutter system: often overwhelming the drains depending on the area. It doesn't seep into the Earth to replenish the aquifers because everything is paved relative to just undeveloped land.

This is an entirely absurd missed opportunity to build the infrastructure for water reclamation, and while we're at it the Australian model to extract the waste water and reclaim it and create fertilizer for plants from human waste should be explored as well. The money is there, and a need for jobs is, too.

Even if CA were only to spend 50% of the ~$90 Billion it would still be able to do a great deal to ensure it's longterm future by investing in this critical infrastructure.

* There used to be a running bet of what celebrities mansion in Malibu would end up sinking into the Pacific when i was a kid in the 90s as it was so common back then. It was a Schadenfreude based bet with more amusement than just playing the lotto apparently. Incidentally enough, those homes were soon replaced with another the following year(s) anyway more often anyway.

> missed opportunity to build the infrastructure for water reclamation

Unfortunately, Gavin Newsom would rather direct funds to an imagined "surplus" so he can buy Democrat votes. If we had intelligent leadership we'd be building reclamation infrastructure and at least thinking about the unfunded public pension liability.