President Joe Biden

[Desert Hound]

"Start working"? You don't think that they aren't already doing that.

You hit on a key metric there -- population growth. Try solving that first; it would be more effective than building empty reservoirs.

"California has not built a major new reservoir since 1979. Since then, multiple droughts have strained the state's water supply and renewed calls for more ways to capture and store water from the state's major rivers and streams."

Poor leadership on the part of CA regarding the actual important things that a growing population needs.

Amid drought, California regulators advance major new reservoir project

The Sites Reservoir, which would be California's first major new reservoir since 1979, has cleared a key regulatory hurdle allowing it to stay eligible for $800 million in taxpayer money.

www.latimes.com

.

 

[Multi Sport]

"Let me remind you again: I reduced the federal deficit," Biden said in a speech on Wednesday. "All the talk about the deficit from my Republican friends, I love it. I've reduced it $350 billion in my first year in office. And we're on track to reduce it, by the end of September, by another 1 trillion, 500 billion dollars -- the largest drop ever."

The deficit has been smaller under the Biden administration than it was at the end of President Donald Trump's tenure. But the deficit has been bigger under the Biden administration than the nonpartisan federal Congressional Budget Office had projected it would be if the Biden-era federal government stuck with the laws that were in effect when Trump left office in early 2021.


"The actions of the administration and Congress have undoubtedly resulted in higher deficits, not smaller ones," Dan White, senior director at Moody's Analytics -- an economic research firm whose analysis Biden has repeatedly touted in his speeches -- said in an email. "It is encouraging that the administration has proposed some initiatives to bring down the deficit, but so far none of those initiatives has been seriously considered."

 

[espola]

"California has not built a major new reservoir since 1979. Since then, multiple droughts have strained the state's water supply and renewed calls for more ways to capture and store water from the state's major rivers and streams."

Poor leadership on the part of CA regarding the actual important things that a growing population needs.

Amid drought, California regulators advance major new reservoir project

The Sites Reservoir, which would be California's first major new reservoir since 1979, has cleared a key regulatory hurdle allowing it to stay eligible for $800 million in taxpayer money.

www.latimes.com

.

As I already posted, more empty reservoirs do not solve the problem.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

As I already posted, more empty reservoirs do not solve the problem.

I always marvel at the floods in the Midwest and the blizzards everywhere but here . . . I guess a pipeline for water is out of the question?

 

[Grace T.]

While I'm not proposing it, population control is the only "Green New Deal" that will have a substantial impact on our "carbon footprint". Most other proposed strategies are simply virtue signaling. We can be successful at improving water and air quality, but not much else with the environment if the population continues to grow.

Not to impose on the conversation but this canard is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. If immigration were to be reduced to near zero the us population would actually fall like it’s doing in much of the western and Asian worlds. scary things occur when populations fall as we can see now in China and are starting to see in japan

I agree population control is the main thing you would do if you really wanted to control climate change. There are others but they are equally painful and unrealistic:
-use European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)
-ban all but the most essential airtravel
-force everyone to become vegetarian
-switch to locally grown, heavily on gmo, non synthetic fertilizer based agriculture
-shoot the dogs and cats
-substantially outlaw automobiles
-massive nuclear power builds
-hard limits on the size of homes
-communism which crashes the consumer economy.

back to lurking

 

[espola]

Not to impose on the conversation but this canard is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. If immigration were to be reduced to near zero the us population would actually fall like it’s doing in much of the western and Asian worlds. scary things occur when populations fall as we can see now in China and are starting to see in japan

I agree population control is the main thing you would do if you really wanted to control climate change. There are others but they are equally painful and unrealistic:
-use European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)
-ban all but the most essential airtravel
-force everyone to become vegetarian
-switch to locally grown, heavily on gmo, non synthetic fertilizer based agriculture
-shoot the dogs and cats
-substantially outlaw automobiles
-massive nuclear power builds
-hard limits on the size of homes
-communism which crashes the consumer economy.

back to lurking

Good riddance.

 

[espola]

I always marvel at the floods in the Midwest and the blizzards everywhere but here . . . I guess a pipeline for water is out of the question?

Pipeline from where?

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Pipeline from where?

Good question. Boston?

 

[espola]

Not to impose on the conversation but this canard is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. If immigration were to be reduced to near zero the us population would actually fall like it’s doing in much of the western and Asian worlds. scary things occur when populations fall as we can see now in China and are starting to see in japan

I agree population control is the main thing you would do if you really wanted to control climate change. There are others but they are equally painful and unrealistic:
-use European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)
-ban all but the most essential airtravel
-force everyone to become vegetarian
-switch to locally grown, heavily on gmo, non synthetic fertilizer based agriculture
-shoot the dogs and cats
-substantially outlaw automobiles
-massive nuclear power builds
-hard limits on the size of homes
-communism which crashes the consumer economy.

back to lurking

I have been trying to figure out what grace meant by "European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)". If that is a reference to tankless heaters, then the "not hot water on demand" characterization is just plain incorrect. The delay to get hot water from a tankless heater is no longer than that from an old-fashioned garage bomb heater -- it depends only on the length of pipe from the heater to the tap.

 

[Multi Sport]

Good question. Boston?

Yea..
Let's pay 30 billion plus or build ten reservoirs that would also create jobs and recreation in So Cal.

As for "empty" reservoirs? It's called El Nino. Mother nature's way of dealing with the overcrowding of California. How much water have we already lost by not having enough storage? Even smaller localized reservoirs would help.

 

[espola]

Yea..
Let's pay 30 billion plus or build ten reservoirs that would also create jobs and recreation in So Cal.

As for "empty" reservoirs? It's called El Nino. Mother nature's way of dealing with the overcrowding of California. How much water have we already lost by not having enough storage? Even smaller localized reservoirs would help.

Good point, as long as you realize it is totally backward. During El Nino years, rainfall (and snowfall) in most of California is above average, and the reservoirs we have now are more than adequate to supply our needs, even wasteful consumption such as watering of green lawns. During dry years, any new reservoirs will sit empty.

This season started out looking promising, with near-record snowfalls in December. The n -- nothing (although it did snow around Lake Tahoe this week).

 

[whatithink]

I have been trying to figure out what grace meant by "European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)". If that is a reference to tankless heaters, then the "not hot water on demand" characterization is just plain incorrect. The delay to get hot water from a tankless heater is no longer than that from an old-fashioned garage bomb heater -- it depends only on the length of pipe from the heater to the tap.

Probably something like this, which I remember from visiting the old sod ... no hot water on demand, and never leave it on.

Des Bishop Immersion Routine - YouTube

 

[dad4]

Good point, as long as you realize it is totally backward. During El Nino years, rainfall (and snowfall) in most of California is above average, and the reservoirs we have now are more than adequate to supply our needs, even wasteful consumption such as watering of green lawns. During dry years, any new reservoirs will sit empty.

This season started out looking promising, with near-record snowfalls in December. The n -- nothing (although it did snow around Lake Tahoe this week).

I think his point is that added reservoir capacity would make it possible to store more el Nino water for use in dry years.

No reason we can’t rip out the thirsty landscaping and build storage capacity. They are both good ideas.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

I think his point is that added reservoir capacity would make it possible to store more el Nino water for use in dry years.

No reason we can’t rip out the thirsty landscaping and build storage capacity. They are both good ideas.

He just HAS to phrase his response in the form of an argument, has to.

 

[Multi Sport]

Good point, as long as you realize it is totally backward. During El Nino years, rainfall (and snowfall) in most of California is above average, and the reservoirs we have now are more than adequate to supply our needs, even wasteful consumption such as watering of green lawns. During dry years, any new reservoirs will sit empty.

This season started out looking promising, with near-record snowfalls in December. The n -- nothing (although it did snow around Lake Tahoe this week).

The amount of water lost because our current reservoirs are not capable of holding it is how much again?

Simple Math. Twenty reservoirs half full v ten reservoirs half full. What would do better supplying So Cal water?

 

[espola]

The amount of water lost because our current reservoirs are not capable of holding it is how much again?

Simple Math. Twenty reservoirs half full v ten reservoirs half full. What would do better supplying So Cal water?

Where are you getting all this water from?

 

[Grace T.]

I have been trying to figure out what grace meant by "European style water heaters (no hot water on demand)". If that is a reference to tankless heaters, then the "not hot water on demand" characterization is just plain incorrect. The delay to get hot water from a tankless heater is no longer than that from an old-fashioned garage bomb heater -- it depends only on the length of pipe from the heater to the tap.

No. In much of the poorer parts of Europe which haven't yet been converted to tankless, the way you get your shower water is it's dumped into a small tank which is heated prior to showering by gas. You have to wait until the tank is heated to get a warm shower and once you are through with the tank you are done with the warm water. It's actually a plot point in the film "The Kung Fu Kid".

Tankless water heaters are an improvement over the traditional western always hot tanks, and while an improvement in energy consumption, have several drawbacks over the older method from a climate change perspective: 1) there's no time limit on the shower, and therefore the energy consumption, 2) particularly if the temperature is set high, it takes a larger burst of power to keep the water warm (conceivably you can limit water temperatures and shower lengths thereby achieving the same results), and 3) it's generally electric which means the efficiencies are tied to where the electricity comes from (say for example nuclear power...if your grid is largely renewable based, it would be inconvenient for you to shower after work at the gym from 5-8)

 

[Lion Eyes]

Where are you getting all this water from?

According to the LA Times....
35 million gallons of runoff and treated water from Glendale, Burbank and Los Angeles are dumped each day into the LA River and then runs into the Pacific...

 

[espola]

No. In much of the poorer parts of Europe which haven't yet been converted to tankless, the way you get your shower water is it's dumped into a small tank which is heated prior to showering by gas. You have to wait until the tank is heated to get a warm shower and once you are through with the tank you are done with the warm water. It's actually a plot point in the film "The Kung Fu Kid".

Tankless water heaters are an improvement over the traditional western always hot tanks, and while an improvement in energy consumption, have several drawbacks over the older method from a climate change perspective: 1) there's no time limit on the shower, and therefore the energy consumption, 2) particularly if the temperature is set high, it takes a larger burst of power to keep the water warm (conceivably you can limit water temperatures and shower lengths thereby achieving the same results), and 3) it's generally electric which means the efficiencies are tied to where the electricity comes from (say for example nuclear power...if your grid is largely renewable based, it would be inconvenient for you to shower after work at the gym from 5-8)

Would you like to try again with coherent thoughts next time?

 

[espola]

According to the LA Times....
35 million gallons of runoff and treated water from Glendale, Burbank and Los Angeles are dumped each day into the LA River and then runs into the Pacific...

That sounds like a lot except when compared to the total consumption. 35 million gallons a day is about 7% of normal LA county consumption. If that amount were fully reclaimed, no reservoirs would be needed since it would just be used as fast as it was supplied.