U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2018, 08:56 AM
 
2,875 posts, read 4,129,224 times
Reputation: 2377

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimérique View Post
Hey tstieber,
Thank you for apologizing. I re-read some of your posts and you sound more sensible than I first thought so I apologize as well for not communicating in a more collaborative fashion.

However, we disagree very much. Expat and Mr. Hypocrisy has misrepresented and distorted the facts of water usage in NorCal. For example, every other yard in my neighborhood is drought tolerant and I see Northern Californians replacing water thirsty landscapes all over the place, and NorCal really doesn't have to because we get enough water to sustain ourselves, but we still diligently conserve.

NorCal meters water the same way SoCal does. NorCal has hefty water prices as well. Should SoCal pay more? Absolutely they should because the infrastructure and transportation of that water exists mostly so you all can water because you all do not live where the water exists naturally.

This nonsense that Expat says about NorCal having equal the rainfall as SoCal is completely false. If you drew a line from Monterey to Yosemite and measured every single valley, mountain, urban area, river, lake and stream North of that line you would find that NorCal has at least 4 times the rainfall of SoCal if not more. All the major natural rivers and streams and natural lakes lie north of that line.

There is no hypocrisy going on here with NorCalers we are less ignorant of where are water comes from and how we use it because it is ours to lose. Without the water that lies in the North you have next to none. You can simply look at native plants and trees and see where they live naturally and you will find that NorCal is by far naturally greener than SoCal. You can make the comparison that NorCal is as much naturally greener than the PNW is greener than NorCal.

NorCal may have a lot more water than SoCal but we still have a lot less than the PNW. Why not take water from the PNW? As you all said before its all ours to own and we should share it equally. The PNW has 1/4 the population of SoCal, yet they have 10 times the water than SoCal. When you take the water from NorCal it has bigger and damaging affect on it than if you took it from the PNW.
So I haven't been to Sacramento in a good six years I would say, and if people are in fact replacing their landscape with drought tolerant Landscaping, then I will trust your reports on that, and I would be pleased to see that. I know when I visit the East Bay, and in particularly When I visit family in Walnut Creek, which is very hot and dry in the Summers, I'm actually seeing people buying homes with existing drought tolerant Landscaping, ripping it out, and putting lawn and redwood trees back in, which is the exact opposite of what they should be doing. I would be pleased to hear that Sacramento may be doing a better job. As far as San Francisco having few lawns, obviously that's true, but it's always been like that. That is not part of a specific conservation movement but pure necessity because the city was built so densely that hardly anyone even has a yard. They're lucky to plant a few flowers for the most part. So I think of San Francisco as being naturally water-saving in the same way that other dense cities like New York or Boston are as well. Lots more people per square mile means that most of the grass will be found in shared parks. A much more sensible model for sustainable water use than Suburbia, although in New York, it wouldn't matter because they get plenty of rain year round.

I do know that my parents spend half as much per cubic foot of water in Walnut Creek as we spend here in San Diego, so I actually looked into water rates around the state. It's difficult to find information, and apparently, it can vary widely even within Geographic areas depending on the size of the district, the infrastructure, and many more factors. That means for example, within the Sacramento Metro Area, Water might be expensive in Elk Grove but cheap in Galt. What I found was that water rates in San Jose were the lowest of the major Metro areas, followed by LA, then San Francisco, and San Diego was by far the most expensive in the state. So I do stand corrected that Southern California on the whole pays a lot more for its water, but in San Diego specifically, we do pay nearly double what San Jose pays, and about 80% more than San Francisco. Apparently, the reasons for this are complicated, including the high cost of water from the desalinization plant as well as the cost of paying the Southern California Water Authority for Access of its pipelines to bring in Colorado River water, but either way, I don't see that pricing as unfair given the dry climate. Nevertheless, the levels of conservation I see down here are so substantial that found it important to dispel the popular propaganda of Southern Californians sitting around with a margarita in hand, laughing and frolicking in the massive amounts of water they dump down the drain. That just doesn't happen anymore, because people simply can't afford it. On a related note, I've been pleased to see that the city of Los Angeles is no longer replacing dead palm trees with new ones but now with Native species like Valley Oaks that are both drought tolerant and produce both shade and oxygen.

I'm surprised that the groundwater tables in Sacramento are so low that construction sites need to pump it out. When my parents once looked into getting a well, they were told they had to dig about 170 feet down. Of course, you have rivers nearby, and Walnut Creek doesn't, so it may vary by location and elevation. Sacramento is nearly at sea level, whereas many of the Bay Area suburbs may be a hundred or two hundred feet in elevation. And certainly places like Roseville are higher in elevation as well and would not benefit from those groundwater levels. With Sacramento being so low, it's entirely possible that established trees can survive off of tap roots, but most people's landscape in the top few feet of topsoil would absolutely need supplemental summer water to make it through the dry season. If people didn't have sprinkler systems, you would see most front yards wither away except for the large trees. My point is simply that even outside of Southern California's semi-arid climate, Northern California's Mediterranean climate also requires supplemental Reservoir water to support non-native residential landscape. As long as everyone recognizes our shared Duty to conserve, and doesn't take for granted that their water also comes from reservoirs regardless of where they live, that's all we can hope for, because we are in this together.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2018, 10:03 AM
 
2,875 posts, read 4,129,224 times
Reputation: 2377
So this discussion thread inspired me to find out a bit more about our underground water tables in California. The Central Valley aquifer is the largest underground reservoir in all of California, and it makes sense because pretty much everything from the mountains surrounding it drains down into the valley and see pit downwards. That's what started the agricultural movement in that area in the first place. Apparently, water has been taken out of the soil at a greater rate than it's being replenished, so that in the past 15 years, groundwater levels have dropped by as much as a hundred fifty feet! And as groundwater levels sink, the soil compacts, making it less porous and less able to absorb new run off, which permanently reduces capacity. There are 100,000 wells in the Central Valley competing for this groundwater.

The article describes that the Central Valley has relatively low rainfall because of the rain shadow effect from the coast ranges, which makes average annual rainfall totals run from about 23 in in the north to 6 in in the southern San Joaquin Valley. There is more evapotranspiration from the soil than the rainfall itself would replenish on its own, but because all the water drains from the mountains, that is what replenishes the groundwater enough to make up the difference.

Now given this information, I'm pretty sure that most established non-native trees, such as many of the kinds found in downtown Sacramento, would not survive without supplemental summer irrigation, because water levels would be far below the surface during the hot, dry growing season. And of course, we know that all those fruit tree Orchards rely on irrigation. So I think it's safe to say that nobody should rest on their Laurels and understand that wherever you live in the state, we do need to conserve all the time because of the cyclical nature of our rainy seasons and dry seasons. Interesting stuff!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2018, 10:21 PM
 
5,365 posts, read 5,710,436 times
Reputation: 2629
So you can see why the City grid of Sacramento was built in the location that it stands today. It was laid out where the two largest natural rivers in California converge; in addition, Sacramento sits in the largest natural acquifer(ground water) in the state and its mountains to the east have the largest snow accumulation of all the mountain locations in the state both north and south, minus Mt. Shasta. And Mt. Shasta is what feeds the largest river in the State, the Sacramento River.

None of these sources of water go anywhere near SoCal, so doesn't it make sense for SoCal to use the water they already have, THE OCEAN. Israel does it, you can too. Focus on desalinization and make a REAL contribution to Californias water needs.

Regarding the Central Valley acquifer, notice the difference between the Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley, not only is the Sacramento Valley in a wetter climate zone its acquifer is naturally more abundant. The Sacramento River is by far larger than the San Joaquin because not only do the cascades supply the Sacramento with water but so do the Sierras. The San Joaquin river has only the Sierras suppling it.

Also, giant agri-business has sucked the ground water dry in the San Joaquin Valley and they destroyed their greatest natural river, the San Joaquin, just so they can feed the world and make like LA and SF look like they have great produce when the really don't because it comes from San Joaquin Valley counties. Don't you see the price the people of the San Joaquin Valley have paid to their natural habitat, there is a reason why it looks like a desert now, it didn't always look that way. The San Joaquin Valley used to be naturally quite beautiful.

The mountains surrounding San Jose especially to the south and west get hell of a lot more water naturally than the immediate mountains near San Diego. Have you ever traveled the mountain pass between San Jose and Santa Cruz --- they get 40-50 inches of rain and Redwoods are native to those mountains.

San Diego pays more for their water because they TAKE it from Oroville 600-700 miles away(the Feather River Water Shed) and they take it from other states along the Colorado River some thousand of miles away. I'm sure you know Lake Oroville topped the dam last winter and flooded the communities along the Feather River, those residents, their properties, and the natural habitat paid a big price so San Diego can live beyond their means. So when you get excited that San Deigans are becoming "drought conscious" think about how much the people under the Oroville Dam and in the Feather River watershed risk their lives and property so you can take the their water and live beyond your means while destroying one of Californias beautiful rivers (The Feather River).

Use your own water. The water closest to you, THE OCEAN. The City of Carlsbad has built the template for the rest of San Diego County.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 09:26 AM
 
2,875 posts, read 4,129,224 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimérique View Post
So you can see why the City grid of Sacramento was built in the location that it stands today. It was laid out where the two largest natural rivers in California converge; in addition, Sacramento sits in the largest natural acquifer(ground water) in the state and its mountains to the east have the largest snow accumulation of all the mountain locations in the state both north and south, minus Mt. Shasta. And Mt. Shasta is what feeds the largest river in the State, the Sacramento River.

None of these sources of water go anywhere near SoCal, so doesn't it make sense for SoCal to use the water they already have, THE OCEAN. Israel does it, you can too. Focus on desalinization and make a REAL contribution to Californias water needs.

Regarding the Central Valley acquifer, notice the difference between the Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley, not only is the Sacramento Valley in a wetter climate zone its acquifer is naturally more abundant. The Sacramento River is by far larger than the San Joaquin because not only do the cascades supply the Sacramento with water but so do the Sierras. The San Joaquin river has only the Sierras suppling it.

Also, giant agri-business has sucked the ground water dry in the San Joaquin Valley and they destroyed their greatest natural river, the San Joaquin, just so they can feed the world and make like LA and SF look like they have great produce when the really don't because it comes from San Joaquin Valley counties. Don't you see the price the people of the San Joaquin Valley have paid to their natural habitat, there is a reason why it looks like a desert now, it didn't always look that way. The San Joaquin Valley used to be naturally quite beautiful.

The mountains surrounding San Jose especially to the south and west get hell of a lot more water naturally than the immediate mountains near San Diego. Have you ever traveled the mountain pass between San Jose and Santa Cruz --- they get 40-50 inches of rain and Redwoods are native to those mountains.

San Diego pays more for their water because they TAKE it from Oroville 600-700 miles away(the Feather River Water Shed) and they take it from other states along the Colorado River some thousand of miles away. I'm sure you know Lake Oroville topped the dam last winter and flooded the communities along the Feather River, those residents, their properties, and the natural habitat paid a big price so San Diego can live beyond their means. So when you get excited that San Deigans are becoming "drought conscious" think about how much the people under the Oroville Dam and in the Feather River watershed risk their lives and property so you can take the their water and live beyond your means while destroying one of Californias beautiful rivers (The Feather River).

Use your own water. The water closest to you, THE OCEAN. The City of Carlsbad has built the template for the rest of San Diego County.
I still have to disagree with you on water Imports. Desalination water is extremely expensive to produce and is not economically sustainable except as part of a larger group of Diversified water sources. It's much cheaper to import water 600 miles from Lake Oroville than it is to produce it locally. Of course there is some price to pay locally in the area near the reservoirs, but in my opinion, the benefits of allowing us to plant lots of trees as the population grows in our state, along with some natural benefits to the local ecology where reservoirs create new watersheds for mammals and birds, outweighs the detriments. So we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

But the other thing you haven't yet answered, and maybe I haven't asked clearly, is why single out Southern California? I understand that Sacramento has the geographical benefits of a river, but with today's population size, that alone is not enough without reservoirs either. And what about the Bay Area? How could a dry place like Silicon Valley survive without water Imports? I think to be fair and consistent, your argument has to apply to reservoirs and water importation as a matter of principle and across the board. Either you oppose those things for everyone, or you don't. It doesn't make sense to say it's okay for Northern Californians to import water from reservoirs 200 miles away, but it's not okay for Southern Californians to import it from 600 miles away. Do you understand why I'm challenging that? Let's say that San Diego did stop importing a single drop of water and build tons more expensive desalination plants to provide all of its own water supply. Meanwhile, the Bay Area still Imports all its water from distant sources. Is that not hypocrisy? You don't want to fall into the trap of telling people to do as you say, not as you do. That's been my point the entire time. It's totally valid to have different ideological perspectives, but ideology doesn't apply to some people and not to others. What are your thoughts on that?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 09:32 AM
 
2,875 posts, read 4,129,224 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimérique View Post
So you can see why the City grid of Sacramento was built in the location that it stands today. It was laid out where the two largest natural rivers in California converge; in addition, Sacramento sits in the largest natural acquifer(ground water) in the state and its mountains to the east have the largest snow accumulation of all the mountain locations in the state both north and south, minus Mt. Shasta. And Mt. Shasta is what feeds the largest river in the State, the Sacramento River.

None of these sources of water go anywhere near SoCal, so doesn't it make sense for SoCal to use the water they already have, THE OCEAN. Israel does it, you can too. Focus on desalinization and make a REAL contribution to Californias water needs.

Regarding the Central Valley acquifer, notice the difference between the Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley, not only is the Sacramento Valley in a wetter climate zone its acquifer is naturally more abundant. The Sacramento River is by far larger than the San Joaquin because not only do the cascades supply the Sacramento with water but so do the Sierras. The San Joaquin river has only the Sierras suppling it.

Also, giant agri-business has sucked the ground water dry in the San Joaquin Valley and they destroyed their greatest natural river, the San Joaquin, just so they can feed the world and make like LA and SF look like they have great produce when the really don't because it comes from San Joaquin Valley counties. Don't you see the price the people of the San Joaquin Valley have paid to their natural habitat, there is a reason why it looks like a desert now, it didn't always look that way. The San Joaquin Valley used to be naturally quite beautiful.

The mountains surrounding San Jose especially to the south and west get hell of a lot more water naturally than the immediate mountains near San Diego. Have you ever traveled the mountain pass between San Jose and Santa Cruz --- they get 40-50 inches of rain and Redwoods are native to those mountains.

San Diego pays more for their water because they TAKE it from Oroville 600-700 miles away(the Feather River Water Shed) and they take it from other states along the Colorado River some thousand of miles away. I'm sure you know Lake Oroville topped the dam last winter and flooded the communities along the Feather River, those residents, their properties, and the natural habitat paid a big price so San Diego can live beyond their means. So when you get excited that San Deigans are becoming "drought conscious" think about how much the people under the Oroville Dam and in the Feather River watershed risk their lives and property so you can take the their water and live beyond your means while destroying one of Californias beautiful rivers (The Feather River).

Use your own water. The water closest to you, THE OCEAN. The City of Carlsbad has built the template for the rest of San Diego County.
One more quick Point regarding the Santa Cruz mountains. I know they receive 50 inch of rain and support beautiful Redwood forest, but so what? That's not where the millions of people in Silicon Valley live. Silicon Valley only gets 15 inch of rain, so any grass or tree needs to be irrigated outside of the rainy season. Palomar Mountain in San Diego receives 36 inches of rain a year, plus a foot of snow, and there are beautiful forests on the slopes, and again, so what? We get some bottled water from there, but when it rains in the mountains, that doesn't help us down below. That's one of the problems with California's population. Even in Northern California, the millions of people in urban areas don't live in cases that could sustain on rainfall, even while we are surrounded by what mountains. This is why I still think reservoirs are the only way to sustain are giant population, because we are catching more runoff, which means we don't have to tap deeper and deeper into the groundwater. It's either that, or we switch everyone to desalination and, of course, recycling water!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 01:12 PM
 
18,177 posts, read 12,228,812 times
Reputation: 9214
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstieber View Post
One more quick Point regarding the Santa Cruz mountains. I know they receive 50 inch of rain and support beautiful Redwood forest, but so what? That's not where the millions of people in Silicon Valley live. Silicon Valley only gets 15 inch of rain, so any grass or tree needs to be irrigated outside of the rainy season. Palomar Mountain in San Diego receives 36 inches of rain a year, plus a foot of snow, and there are beautiful forests on the slopes, and again, so what? We get some bottled water from there, but when it rains in the mountains, that doesn't help us down below. That's one of the problems with California's population. Even in Northern California, the millions of people in urban areas don't live in cases that could sustain on rainfall, even while we are surrounded by what mountains. This is why I still think reservoirs are the only way to sustain are giant population, because we are catching more runoff, which means we don't have to tap deeper and deeper into the groundwater. It's either that, or we switch everyone to desalination and, of course, recycling water!
Or establish a maximum amount of water the State can supply and limit the population to that amount of water use. No new building except when a desalination plant is built and water from it can be used for X number of homes and that is it. No more people coming in at all from anywhere, legal or illegal due to the water issue. Births alone will stretch the supply. Nothing else will stop the water problem from getting worse.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2018, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Cali
3,905 posts, read 6,454,422 times
Reputation: 2234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimérique View Post

Use your own water. The water closest to you, THE OCEAN. The City of Carlsbad has built the template for the rest of San Diego County.
We need to SCRAP the bullet train and use a bit of that 100 billion towards desalination plants!!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2018, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Laguna Niguel, Orange County CA
9,809 posts, read 8,654,056 times
Reputation: 7928
Quote:
Originally Posted by CamaroGuy View Post
We need to SCRAP the bullet train and use a bit of that 100 billion towards desalination plants!!
This!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2018, 03:22 PM
 
1,158 posts, read 1,046,115 times
Reputation: 3367
Here's some actual science to level out all the speculation:

Increasing precipitation whiplash in twenty-first century California : California Weather Blog

Bottom line: CA is likely to get the trifecta: hotter, wetter, and drier, all in a tighter cycle. The effect will be worst in SoCal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2018, 04:03 PM
 
18,177 posts, read 12,228,812 times
Reputation: 9214
Quote:
Originally Posted by semispherical View Post
Here's some actual science to level out all the speculation:

Increasing precipitation whiplash in twenty-first century California : California Weather Blog

Bottom line: CA is likely to get the trifecta: hotter, wetter, and drier, all in a tighter cycle. The effect will be worst in SoCal.
Interesting, but the article just briefly touched on the most critical element in drought issues. Snow. Rain does not solve the problem, the mountains need Lots of snow to drain slowly into the aquifer and ... not much snow, just rain. CA will have worse problems if the snow pack does not regenerate and ...it isn't likely.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top