Drought? Now? Gimmie a break.

[NoleFanHSV]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

Who cares where the problem is at? I read the article. Its obvious that they don't have the infrastructure to keep up.

The article does not state that, and your response has also flopped back and forth from it being a water shortage issue to infrastructure issue.

So just letting consumers consume at will until the reserves are gone is a solution? The solution is to increase infrastructure, no doubt. That still doesn't help anything right now. The only immediate solution is to decrease usage.

And as I stated, whinging about slow drips and household conservation isn't going to decrease usage by any meaningful amount when you have broiler houses consuming thousands of times that per day.

The idea of "the ONLY solution is..." is extremely limited thinking. I've been in businesses that had that attitude and watched as they went bankrupt rather than innovate or change to meet needs.

The issue has a number of component parts.
1. Low water pressure
2. Low reserves
3. Low pumping capacity

The standpipe is at 70%, and because of the nature of such a structure, water pressure is reduced. Putting a second small standpipe beside it, one where the tank is on a frame and sits high in the air, would allow a pump to retain full pressure by lifting the water in the lower part of the existing standpipe at night to the new standpipe. Low reserves can be compensated for by purchasing water, drilling new wells, or creating impoundments and a filtering system. The existing standpipe is the most cost effective way of storing water and doubling as a pressure vessel in times when water is flush. It is NOT a reliable pressure solution if the land it is built on is so low that pressure relates to the height of water in the tank, rather than having it high enough in elevation that pressure is regulated by a valve downstream of the tank to prevent overpressure in the system piping. In other words, the district cheaped out on construction and is reaping what it sowed.

All the rest of what you posted is mostly irrelevant. It IS UP to the consumers or users to put pressure on the officials to improve infrastructure. If anyone expects infrastructure to magically fix itself left up to the officials, they are delusional. So yes, it is up to the consumers to take action if they want change. Its not magically going to change.

And the customers are not going to be guided into demanding improvements when the news is pushing for conservation and being a good little peon while the large water users carry on as usual.

I'd also point out that why would anyone expect a small regional water system, servicing 6000 residents, would be able to keep up periods of low precipitation. Its been two weeks since any significant rain in that area. Can Huntsville Utilities keep up? Sure, its a huge system, and they get their water from the river. Would I expect a small rural area to keep up? No. Should the people living in that county? I hope not, they are the one's living there. If they want something different out of their utility company its up to them to improve their own situation.


I get my own water. My water system has a service area of exactly two people. I think that qualifies as "small." Somehow I am not affected at all by low precipitation. Could it be because I took into account that I wanted a RELIABLE source of water on the property? (Hint, I did - including a back-up well.) You are suggesting that someone designing a system for 6000 people in an area that gets an inch to two more inches of rain per month more than the national average can't do as well as I can - someone with no degree in water management or outside funding? That is a pretty sorry expectation.

I also went back and read the article. There is no mention of "drought" by them or the media, only stating they haven't gotten rain in a few weeks, which I've already said. It doesn't take a rocket scientist after reading the article that their infrastructure is antiquated and cannot keep up with summer demand if there aren't periods of rain. There isn't enough in that article to blame the media for anything on.

Put "define drought" into google. The result: a prolonged period of abnormally low rainfall; a shortage of water resulting from this.

Claiming a water shortage supposedly created by a period of abnormally low rainfall IS claiming that a drought exists and is a culprit. Claiming that water "resources" are low IS claiming drought related problems.

We agree that the system is not meeting demands. We agree that a solution that will last involves upgrades. We do NOT agree that the media and district handled the exposition of the problem properly. I'm not sure whether or not that we agree that there is a significant reduction below norms of rainfall
in the area. I'm saying that any shortfall is WELL within normal variations and the reserve capability of a properly engineered water system. You seem to want to suggest that such expectations are unreasonable. I cannot agree with that.

Again, the issue is BOTH infrastructure and lack of rain for a short period. It CAN be both. I'm not flip flopping. I'm stating quite frankly the obvious.

If consumers are guided by the media, that is their problem. You want to hold the media accountable. Fine, but the same goes for consumers. Consumers, in this day and age of technology and information, can educate themselves beyond the media.

In regards to expectations, just because you can do something effectively for two people, doesn't mean a government body or even engineers can effectively do it for 6000. In contrast, time and time again we've seen how inept officials and infrastructure can be.

In regards to the term drought, you are simply putting words into the article and implications that don't exist. I'm not surprised that a small regional water board can't keep up with only an inch of water in the last few weeks. That isn't a "drought".

United States Drought Monitor > Home


As far as the media goes, why are we putting them on a high pedestal? Government officials? At the end of the day, individuals are accountable for themselves, and if they don't like the utilities they get, don't like how they are being blamed for the water shortage, are too naive and believe the media, it all boils down to their choices or lack of education on the issue.

[BMW Dave]

Ok,

Well just let me know when I need to start pissing into my Mr. Coffee.

Thanks

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by Dirt Grinder

The issue in California is due to the fact they let most of the water drain into the sea instead of storing it for later needs. That's not a problem in the "south."

It isn't a problem in the south because the south usually gets plenty of rain. You don't ordinarily need massive storage.

You can't store rain that isn't falling. California's existing reservoirs are drying up. That's not a matter of letting too much water drain. The No. 1 cause is reduced rainfall for the last 4 years. A second large reason is that there's been less snow pack and more rapid snow melt in the Sierra Nevada. The Sierra Nevada snow pack is actually California's largest water reservoir. Ordinarily, that snow melts gradually and drains into basins and man-made reservoirs over time. In recent years, not only has there been less snow pack to melt, but the snow melt has also occurred very quickly - reducing it's effectiveness as a reservoir making California more reliant on recent rain.

Pretty much every climate projection (NASA released on recently) shows the southwest becoming increasingly dry and snow packs increasingly unreliable. So much so that places like San Diego are investing heavily in desalinization in spite of its water currently costing twice as much. They're betting on the trend continuing and the eventual convergence of costs.

[Dirt Grinder]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

It isn't a problem in the south because the south usually gets plenty of rain. You don't ordinarily need massive storage.

You can't store rain that isn't falling. California's existing reservoirs are drying up. That's not a matter of letting too much water drain. The No. 1 cause is reduced rainfall for the last 4 years. A second large reason is that there's been less snow pack and more rapid snow melt in the Sierra Nevada. The Sierra Nevada snow pack is actually California's largest water reservoir. Ordinarily, that snow melts gradually and drains into basins and man-made reservoirs over time. In recent years, not only has there been less snow pack to melt, but the snow melt has also occurred very quickly - reducing it's effectiveness as a reservoir making California more reliant on recent rain.

Pretty much every climate projection (NASA released on recently) shows the southwest becoming increasingly dry and snow packs increasingly unreliable. So much so that places like San Diego are investing heavily in desalinization in spite of its water currently costing twice as much. They're betting on the trend continuing and the eventual convergence of costs.

LOL - talk about divergent discourse. My post was directed at the statement "...Just give it 30 years, the south will end up with the same issues California..." We don't handle water flow the same way California handles water flow. Now, or in thirty years.

[NoleFanHSV]

Originally Posted by Dirt Grinder

LOL - talk about divergent discourse. My post was directed at the statement "...Just give it 30 years, the south will end up with the same issues California..." We don't handle water flow the same way California handles water flow. Now, or in thirty years.

Our water sources are different, but all it takes is corrupt officials or a blunder by the TVA for water to go sideways.