Comment by vee-kay
5 hours ago
Isn't this the same state where the rich people water their plush lawns even in the peak of summer during drought?
And where 90% of the water for its huge capital city-district (Los Angeles) is not even sourced locally (say, by desalination of seawater, as it is a coastal city), but it's instead piped from hundreds of miles away, while banning the villages at the source locations from using the local rivers/lakes as all that precious water gets piped away to feed the thirsty city-district (Los Angeles)?
Desalination uses a lot more energy and is higher cost
In the era of solar power saturating the grid in daytime, the energy cost is far less of an issue - At least, I assume California has similar characteristics to Australia in this regard.
There's still cost involved, and solar seems to be around 30% of the total
"villages"? You're not from here are you? Makes me wonder if internationally you're getting general anti-American propaganda or if Republican anti-California propaganda is leaking worldwide.
If the richest state in the USA cannot do effective seawater desalination project to feed itself, but would rather drain out lakes and rivers from 400+ miles away (thus rendering those places unfit for farming, and forcing the locals there to get water from somewhere else long distance off), and the locals of that richest state happily waste that expensively sourced water during drought years, then it is plain and simple mismanagement of precious water resources.
If you aren't yet terrified of climate change, and if you think such mismanagement of natural resources is sustainable in the long-run, you need a rethink, my friend.
The droughts are going to get worse. Case in point: Madagascar.
The point raised is valid however. Los Angeles in particular notoriously bad track record when it comes to managing water resources and depriving upstream communities of them.[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_water_wars