It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

California's Water ( finally? ) Going MSM ...

page: 4
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Enochstask



It's not Obama and the Illegals you Right Wing nut job.


Well actually I am sure they have a huge impact

estimated illegal immigrant population in the United States (11.5 million in 2011).
This estimate puts the percentage of California's population that are illegal immigrants to be about 7.5 percent,

www.laalmanac.com...
edit on 2-4-2015 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sunwolf
a reply to: mOjOm


You didn`t read the link ,did you?



Ok, so I checked out the link. Not sure what was supposed to be seen there that implicates illegal immigrants as the ones responsible for Cali. not having water. It talked mostly about infrastructure not being updated for the population among other things. Which seemed to blame bad planning and politics more than simply illegals though.

I did go a step more and research Victor Davis Hanson himself though. He's a Neoconservative Intellectual who does have quite a large collection of material dedicated to him and does seem very well educated. Although I'm not so sure how well balanced all that education was. He is a major supporter of Bush Jr. and a big supporter of our War in Iraq too. He's also a huge fan of Rumsfeld and the whole Conservative Imperialist idea of Western Superiority through Military Conquest.

With that extra context in mind I find it difficult to take anything he said as being truly rational. I don't doubt he's educated and all, but I doubt his ability to honestly see or report on anything happening in the world without injecting his own Radically Conservative Ideology at the same time.
edit on 2-4-2015 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tucket
Meanwhile, at the Nestle Water factory in Sacramento, it's business as usual.



“The coalition is protesting Nestlé’s virtually unlimited use of water – up to 80 million gallons a year drawn from local aquifers – while Sacramentans (like other Californians) who use a mere 7 to 10 percent of total water used in the State of California, have had severe restrictions and limitations forced upon them,”

according to the coalition.


“Nestlé pays only 65 cents for each 470 gallons it pumps out of the ground – the same rate as an average residential water user. But the company can turn the area’s water around, and sell it back to Sacramento at mammoth profits,”

the coalition said.


www.globalresearch.ca...



Thank you for posting this, I was going to address Nestle North America Water Corporation as well, but you beat me to it. How they are being allowed to rape just the rivers of California alone is an absolute tragedy, and during an epic drought at that. It's insanity with no end in sight.

Well we can thank the lunatic Democrats out here for allowing this to continue. For all their environmental blabbering, it's just that, nothing but blabbering. It reminds me of how Diane Feinstein stopped the push to restore Hetch Hetchy just outside Yosemite National Park.

Yes it was Governor Ahnold who pushed for Hetch Hetchy to be restored, and if you can believe it the so called environmental liberals and the mindless leftist legislator put all their power towards killing it. I guess they didn't want their pockets to stop being filled by Nestle and various others who continue to steal California's water, and all for the profit of a few greedy carpet baggers. ~$heopleNation



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Bad planning and radical environmentalism and illegals all hallmarks of leftist ideology.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Sunwolf

Like I said. Neoconservative Imperialism and Exceptional-ism to the rescue right???

Because that's been working so well hasn't it.

I'm not saying Liberalism is doing a bang up job either. But I honestly find it difficult to blame Illegal's for all the trouble when they are in charge of absolutely nothing. But they do make an easy target so have at it if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Maybe another war against some other 3rd world nation will make things better. Or maybe we should just bomb the hell out of Mexico and take their resources next. As long as we keep that old Western War Machine going I'm sure it will all be apple pie and freedom fries eventually.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Sunwolf

Like I said. Neoconservative Imperialism and Exceptional-ism to the rescue right???

Because that's been working so well hasn't it.

I'm not saying Liberalism is doing a bang up job either. But I honestly find it difficult to blame Illegal's for all the trouble when they are in charge of absolutely nothing. But they do make an easy target so have at it if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Maybe another war against some other 3rd world nation will make things better. Or maybe we should just bomb the hell out of Mexico and take their resources next. As long as we keep that old Western War Machine going I'm sure it will all be apple pie and freedom fries eventually.




No,how about pragmatic common sense solutions like increasing water storage?Limiting building permits in the big population centers?How about anything other than saving a bait fish?



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sunwolf

No,how about pragmatic common sense solutions like increasing water storage?Limiting building permits in the big population centers?How about anything other than saving a bait fish?


Ok, now you're talking some sense!!

I'm all for that kind of thinking and planning. But we're talking about a state who's decided to build a high speed train for 65 billion dollars. Up from the original 8 billion estimate.

I don't think these people have any sense, common or otherwise.
edit on 2-4-2015 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Exactly. Although mass transit is a smart idea (and used to be commonly used in cities before the oil companies killed the projects back in the 60s), they should have been thinking about how to protect themselves against their greatest weakness, which is water. To waste $65 million on a flipping train is just soooo Californian.

The Achilles Heel of California's massive water infrastructure, besides waiting on the winter snows and rain, is that you have billions of gallons of water sitting out in the open dry air, evaporating at the rate one would expect of water sitting out in 110 degrees of dry heat. Mulholland himself knew that was a problem, and was imagining lots of underground storage and underground pipelines when he died in the early part of the last century.

William Mulholland is a central figure in the state's water history. The shame of him signing off on the St. Francis dam hours before it failed and drowned a whole town is only a small part of this man's sad history that set the state up for where it is today. Most people today in Cali have no idea who he is, and only recognize the name from the famous roadway, Mulholland Drive.

Worth a read: en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: snowspirit

officials to impose mandatory water restrictions for the first time in history


First time in history?
I lived in Vancouver, BC for years, where it rains and rains and rains.......

They've done watering restrictions in the summer for decades now...

One would think a southern area like California would have put in conservation methods years ago


Actually California has been working on water conservation and reclaimation for 30 to 40 years. We've done all the easy things - now those are not enough.

It's never been considered 'sexy' enough to make the news in other parts of the world - so please don't denigrate those that have worked hard to get California's worries resolved.

The only reason you are hearing about it now is because big business (not Agra exclusively) is whining in public about having to do their part.


Who hasn't be keeping up is industrial Agra in the state who waste a huge percentage of the water and they will have to do their part as well. Small farms are largely ahead of the curve - but not, as a previous poster noted, the monied interests (taking money out of the state).



Most of the water usage is for food production, not individual use. Things like capping home water meters really do very little. Like the article points out, that's only 10% of usage. You could cut off all residential water service and the problem would still be 90% as bad. The only real solution is to move the meat industry out of California. It is very inefficient water wise. Make a $5 per pound tax on meat produced in California. Use the money to offset some other taxes. Moving the cattle industry to a state with better water access, and replacing it with a low water requirement crop like hemp instead would fix 33% of the problem, which is atleast enough to avert crisis.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: FissionSurplus
You like salad? Look where your lettuce, broccoli, strawberries, celery, etc., come from. Read the labels. Start your own garden NOW....these crops are going to explode in price, where a head of lettuce from the Salinas valley (T&A Farms, Fox Farms, etc) will go from $2 a head to maybe $8. You like rice? Those geniuses in the north grow a large portion of it, which requires extensive watering per acre foot. You like almonds and walnuts? Expect the price to be out of range of most working families.


Actually, salad crops are one thing California does right. Most fruits and vegetables are extremely water efficient. It takes 1800 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of beef which will get you 4 meals. It takes just 220 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of rice which will get you about 16 meals. Rice takes 1/8 the water while providing 4x the food or 32x as efficient or in other words for the water investment that creates a days worth of beef you can make a months worth of rice.

This chart is in liters and kilograms (sorry, I don't want to convert it) but you can still get an idea of the difference
www.theguardian.com...

That salad stuff California makes? That's some of the best water use choices they can possibly be making.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Here is another reason why I don't think there is a water emergency in California (see link below). What has basically happened is the Liberals out here discovered we have a one billion dollar emergency water fund and they want to get their hands on it, but first they had to declare a water emergency.

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

but if we are measuring caloric density meat is about 30x as dense as most vegetables, rice being an exception in that regard.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Enochstask
Here is another reason why I don't think there is a water emergency in California (see link below). What has basically happened is the Liberals out here discovered we have a one billion dollar emergency water fund and they want to get their hands on it, but first they had to declare a water emergency.

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com...


Are you referring to how they can build the park but are not allowed to fill it?


I don't see how that link refutes the emergency maybe you can explain a little more.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: BoxFulder
a reply to: Aazadan

but if we are measuring caloric density meat is about 30x as dense as most vegetables, rice being an exception in that regard.


Caloric density of our food isn't too big a concern these days. In the case of salads for example you can look at salad dressing which is loaded with sugar and high in calories. As it turns out, beets are another low water usage crop.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi
Really? I guess you understand Liberal logic or mental disorder better than me.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: Grimpachi
Really? I guess you understand Liberal logic or mental disorder better than me.



Given that you take the stance that being a liberal is a mental disorder, I don't think it takes much to have a better understanding than you.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I wonder could this be happening intentionally with the purpose of getting all the illegal immigrants living in California to migrate back south of the border.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: Grimpachi
Really? I guess you understand Liberal logic or mental disorder better than me.



I am simply trying to understand your logic hence why I asked you to explain better why you believe an empty swimming pool refutes drought.

I guess you don't really know yourself given your temperament.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: FarleyWayne

You know, it wouldn't hurt to cap everyone's water meter. My neighbor upstairs cranks the water tap for 5 minutes straight every time she washes the dishes. Drives me nuts. Estimates are, we use about 80-100 gallons per day per person. That's nuts and should be criminal. It can take weeks to months to replenish reservoirs but can take a thousand years to replenish ground water supplies. Then there's stupid hive minds whom partake in ice bucket challenges because it's neat 'o.

Wasteful wasteful human beings. And anyone who says "don't worry" should be shot.


Does that estimate include the proportion of water used per person to produce the food and consumer goods they consume too? Or just literally each person's direct water usage? I sure hope so.

We use about 100-120 gallons per day for 4 people, including one child who wastes a lot in his potty training/hand washing/teeth brushing process and 12 muddy paws causing extra usage daily. If anyone is using water at home at a clip of 80-100 gal per day, they'd have to be purposefully wasting it.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: BoxFulder
a reply to: Aazadan

but if we are measuring caloric density meat is about 30x as dense as most vegetables, rice being an exception in that regard.


Caloric density of our food isn't too big a concern these days. In the case of salads for example you can look at salad dressing which is loaded with sugar and high in calories. As it turns out, beets are another low water usage crop.


Not sure which salad dressings are loaded with sugar... Not the kind our family buys, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't the point. Meat does have a much greater caloric density than vegetables (salad dressing generally not considered a vegetable, and this irrelevant to his point.)



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join