Right now, 80% of California water is used for agriculture. If you reduce the ag water usage that is shipping most of that produce to the rest of the country, CA has water for residential and ag. for its 39 million.
> If you reduce the ag water usage that is shipping most of that produce to the rest of the country,
Those aren’t gifts to the rest of the country (and, actually, much of it is exported directly internationally), they are cash crops, and the lifeblood of rural California.
This whole thread I responded to was about CA self-sufficiency and I was specifically arguing that CA can be quite self-sufficient.
> California would immediately become a failed state on its own, unable to meet even the most basic needs of its residents
Of course CA independence would be economically harmful and disruptive. Doesn't mean CA won't be able to provide its own water by taking an ag trade economic hit.
I don't understand how that's possible. I don't know of any lakes or rivers or aquifers larger enough to provide water to almost 40 million people in California.
Californian agriculture is 80% of water usage. That agriculture is largely shipped out of state, internationally, and supplying the rest of the US half of its produce outside staple grains: fruits, nuts, vegetables, berries, etc.
Those aren’t gifts to the rest of the country (and, actually, much of it is exported directly internationally), they are cash crops, and the lifeblood of rural California.