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.
I honestly believe people are incapable of understanding anything beyond a soundbite. They are one (maybe two) levels deep in their problem-solving ability. Take this example (respun article about the same topic you posted): title: "Phoenix area can’t meet groundwater demands over next century." from https://www.washingtonpost.com/clima...lation-growth/
The article goes on to highlight the subtitle with this B.S. line: "A new report amounts to a chilling warning for a region that has been a development hot spot for new residents and high-tech businesses"
lol "chilling". And here is the catch (which makes it a FACT): "There is not enough groundwater underneath the Phoenix metropolitan area to meet projected demands over the next century, a finding that could threaten the current home-building boom in outer suburbs that are among the fastest growing parts of the United States, according to an analysis of the groundwater supply released Thursday."
Well, yea!!! How "chilling". But we have 100 years of groundwater North of PHX in AZ. And that's without using a drop of water from the THREE rivers coming into the metro. See some actual facts here https://new.azwater.gov/news/articles/2018-12-01 So, I guess the Washington Post was factually "right". We do NOT have "100 years of water UNDERNEATH in the metro area. But we have 200 years of round water in AZ without taking a drop of water from a river. Will it be more expensive (PHX has some of the cheapest water in the entire USA), yep! It sure will. i think water should cost more money (and that will make people conserve). And that's not including the water in the wells UNDERNEATH. To be clear, someone should be challenging reckless growth. And that Buckeye example is a fine one to put the breaks on.
Do you see why I am sleeping like a baby? I've done my homework, and you post manipulated facts from an article aiming to garner clicks over being balanced. Because it was written by CBS or the Washington Post, people are not smart enough to realize these links write to make money. they crank out small changes to whatever they are fed every day. I can link to literally 30 articles from every paper that regurgitated this headline. This is all about being responsible. Putting a break on stupid growth. Rest assured, we will have another 1M more people coming and they all will have water. Albiet, more expensive.
Meanwhile, you can puff your chest touting how right you were all along!
Personally, I think you believe what you believe, but I do not for a minute believe there is no water issue in Phoenix. That many people living in a desert is not sustainable. And, I hear about the Colorado River in the news, it seems lately, almost weekly.
Personally, I think you believe what you believe, but I do not for a minute believe there is no water issue in Phoenix. That many people living in a desert is not sustainable. And, I hear about the Colorado River in the news, it seems lately, almost weekly.
I believe in facts. It's you who "believe what you believe". I have a lot of $$'s on the line. I did my due diligence. If we recklessly build and waste our water, after I am dead, there will be problems. You have absolutely no clue about this topic. You don't. Sorry.....
Personally, I think you believe what you believe, but I do not for a minute believe there is no water issue in Phoenix. That many people living in a desert is not sustainable. And, I hear about the Colorado River in the news, it seems lately, almost weekly.
It appears that you live in the Midwest from your posting history. If so, what would you know about Phoenix water? Or are you a hydrology expert?
You can have your opinion but if you are forming it from news stories, that doesn't work very well. The Colorado River is in the news because it sells and draws clicks. And people love a good doomsday scenario. People read a few news stories and think they are "in the know".
Last edited by KO Stradivarius; 06-05-2023 at 10:37 PM..
It appears that you live in the Midwest from your posting history. If so, what would you know about Phoenix water? Or are you a hydrology expert?
You can have your opinion but if you are forming it from news stories, that doesn't work very well. The Colorado River is in the news because it sells and draws clicks. And people love a good doomsday scenario. People read a few news stories and think they are "in the know".
Let's expand on your question. What does a reporter know about the complex topic of Arizona water?
There are too many to talk about, but let's discuss this uneducated statement: "Water concerns are so rampant in Arizona that the city of Scottsdale cut off water delivery to Rio Verde Hills, an affluent neighborhood on the outskirts of the city." Well, she got the name wrong... It's Rio Verde Foothills that fill up tanks in front of their home by truck. Forgetting that name faux pas, the city is approving another 1000 homes a mile up the road from the idiots who built with hauled water. That new development has a 100-year proven water supply from the Rio Verde river. The actual situation is that the Scottsdale mayor wants to teach those idiots a lesson as he has to conserve water and the truck haulers never had their water guaranteed for 100 years. But the author, Julia Jacobo is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too busy to understand what is actually happening. See how busy she claims to be here https://www.linkedin.com/in/julia-jacobo-48a8692a
Next, she types: "Without water from the Colorado River, Arizona's gross state product would drop by more than $185 billion in a year and the state would lose more than 2 million jobs, the 2015 report found." Here's her "unbiased source" that gave this incredibly busy person (look at her claimed expertise) the courage to type such a thing: Home - Transition - Protect The Flows (Written by Bonneville Environmental Foundation to protect the Colorado River).
Listen, cuts are going to be made so that the river doesn't drop. That's a fact and it should happen! And if I was a farmer, especially in Pinal County, I'd be shaking in my boots. But IF and when rivers A, B, and C dry up, we have options B, C, D, E, and F for water. It's as if people are too GD stupid to understand options. Analogy: if I lose my job, after three years of burning through my savings, I will have to sell my home. And then, I will cut into my standard of living and not be able to take as many vacations. Next, I will have to redesign my entire life in order because I lost a lot of income. OR...... I find another career! That's how not-so-smart people are. They simply cannot think outside the box. They present a fixed problem and assume everyone is a sitting duck. Sure, we may have to drink the water we flushed down the toilet a month earlier. Or, some people may need to change from regular grass to artificial, etc. But to assume we lose "2 million jobs" is how sheep think. Expect 1M more people to come.
I APPLAUD the careful debate about how we should be allocating our resources. I LOVE the idea of making our tax-subsidized cheap water cost a lot more money. I want farmers to be smarter about what crops they plant and how they water like installing drip systems. There is sooooooooooooo many more options to conserve. That's not to be confused with a doomsday situation. People with a working brain understand to get your way, sometimes the politics of exaggeration happens. If people believe everything they read without digging deep into BOTH sides of the debate, it is easy to not be balanced. But unfortunately, most people lack critical thinking skills. Sorry, I'll jump off my soap box. It's not because I think I'm bright. Rather, I get easily frustrated by not-so-smart people. And there are a lot of them roaming the planet.
Last edited by MN-Born-n-Raised; 06-06-2023 at 05:33 AM..
Like this uneducated statement: "Water concerns are so rampant in Arizona that the city of Scottsdale cut off water delivery to Rio Verde Hills, an affluent neighborhood on the outskirts of the city." Well, she got the name wrong... It's Rio Verde Foothills. Forgetting that faux pas, they are building another 1000 homes a mile up the road from the idiots who built with hauled water. The Scottsdale mayor wants to teach those idiots a lesson. But the author, Julia Jacobo is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to busy to understand what is actually happening. See the 1000's of this she claims to be here https://www.linkedin.com/in/julia-jacobo-48a8692a
Next, she types: "Without water from the Colorado River, Arizona's gross state product would drop by more than $185 billion in a year and the state would lose more than 2 million jobs, the 2015 report found." Here's her "unbiased source" that gave this incredibly busy person (look at her claimed expertise) the courage to type such a thing: Home - Transition - Protect The Flows (Written by Bonneville Environmental Foundation to protect the Colorado River).
Listen, cuts are going to be made so that the river doesn't drop. That's a fact and it should happen. And if I was a farmer, especially in Pinal County, I'd be shaking in my boots. But IF and when rivers A, B, and C happen, we have options B, C, D, E, and F for water. It's as if people are too GD stupid to understand options. Analogy: if I lose my job, after three years of burning through my savings, I will have to sell my home. And then, I will cut into my standard of living and not be able to take as many vacations. Next, I will have to redesign my entire life in order because I lost a lot of income. OR...... I find another career!? That's how not-so-smart people are. They simply cannot think outside the box. We may have to drink the water we flushed down the toilet a month earlier and some people may need to change from regular grass to artificial. But to assume we lose "2 million jobs" is how sheep think.
I would not question the loss of billions and a couple million jobs if the Colorado dried up. But that is not going to happen. Feast and famine is just the way it is with western water. We've had a lot of famine these past 10 years.
Things can and do change. The Colorado watershed will yield twice the normal volume of water this year alone raising Lake Powell by 80 feet or more. Salt River Project released the entire annual water needs of the metro area down the river this year due to excess flows and lack of storage to hold them.
Oh, and I am (was) a hydrology expert - degreed hydrologist and civil engineer. I have 40 years of experience working with water supply issues. When I see things from posters stating that Phoenix is a desert and, ergo, has to have water problems, I kind of roll my eyes because they do not understand that when it comes to water, Phoenix is hardly a desert - well maybe a very blessed desert. Thousands of square miles of mountainous terrain drain right through the middle of Phoenix. Three of those rivers converge just west of downtown. They are dammed and dry now, it was not always that way. Over the millennia, vast aquifers developed beneath the area. We actually have an abundance of water that belies our desert climate. Are we overtaxing it, wasting it on low value uses? Yes. But we can address that without losing billions of dollars of economic activity or millions of jobs.
I am not an expert...I only know what I read and what I hear, from friends who live in Phoenix. I've been following this a long, long time, and tend to believe the truth might be somewhere in the middle. The friends I have in Phoenix aren't quite as optimistic as some sound on this site, and when I've visited Phoenix, I hear talk that isn't quite as optimistic, as well. Time will tell. Clearly, though, if there was no issue, I don't understand why it's in the media so often.
I am not an expert...I only know what I read and what I hear, from friends who live in Phoenix. I've been following this a long, long time, and tend to believe the truth might be somewhere in the middle. The friends I have in Phoenix aren't quite as optimistic as some sound on this site, and when I've visited Phoenix, I hear talk that isn't quite as optimistic, as well. Time will tell. Clearly, though, if there was no issue, I don't understand why it's in the media so often.
But it is a concern, a serious one, but not a crisis. You hear and read about the Phoenix area but on a scale of severity, the depletion of the Ogallala aquifer that is critical to US agricultural production and cities in Texas is much more acute. The Ogallala is being depleted at a rate 18 times the flow of the Colorado River. Estimates are that the Ogallala will not be able to support irrigated agriculture within the next 50 years. It will affect people in the east too as this area accounts for as much as a third of America's grain, vegetable and beef production. And if you think Arizona has some bad practices and weak water laws, look at what goes on from the Dakotas down to Texas.
If push comes to shove, Phoenix is only a couple hundred miles from the Pacific. The cost of pumping and desalination, though pricey, is within the area of affordability for urban consumers. Mid-America has no option like that
Last edited by Ponderosa; 06-06-2023 at 07:07 AM..
I would not question the loss of billions and a couple million jobs if the Colorado dried up. But that is not going to happen. Feast and famine is just the way it is with western water. We've had a lot of famine these past 10 years.
Things can and do change. The Colorado watershed will yield twice the normal volume of water this year alone raising Lake Powell by 80 feet or more. Salt River Project released the entire annual water needs of the metro area down the river this year due to excess flows and lack of storage to hold them.
Oh, and I am (was) a hydrology expert - degreed hydrologist and civil engineer. I have 40 years of experience working with water supply issues. When I see things from posters stating that Phoenix is a desert and, ergo, has to have water problems, I kind of roll my eyes because they do not understand that when it comes to water, Phoenix is hardly a desert - well maybe a very blessed desert. Thousands of square miles of mountainous terrain drain right through the middle of Phoenix. Three of those rivers converge just west of downtown. They are dammed and dry now, it was not always that way. Over the millennia, vast aquifers developed beneath the area. We actually have an abundance of water that belies our desert climate. Are we overtaxing it, wasting it on low value uses? Yes. But we can address that without losing billions of dollars of economic activity or millions of jobs.
I tried to rep you but had to spread the wealth. The "billions of dollars and a couple of million jobs" statement exclusively addressed Arizona's economy. In other words, we would lose close to 30% of our population. That quoted source was from an environmentalist group that has "save the colorado river" in their tagline. It would be like me reading a report from the NRA that claims guns save lives.
I am not an expert...I only know what I read and what I hear, from friends who live in Phoenix. I've been following this a long, long time, and tend to believe the truth might be somewhere in the middle. The friends I have in Phoenix aren't quite as optimistic as some sound on this site, and when I've visited Phoenix, I hear talk that isn't quite as optimistic, as well. Time will tell. Clearly, though, if there was no issue, I don't understand why it's in the media so often.
We agree on what is typed in bold.
Re: the media. The information and the truth are there. It can be found with due diligence. Never forget the obvious: 'Lying sells!' So clicks bring in the cash and it also brings prominence to the people who write the 1/2 (or 3/4) truths... On both sides of a debate.
I'm surprised people don't understand this. When I read just about any headline, I Google the counterargument to understand more. How many articles would you like me to post about how the election was stolen? After all, 40% of the people think the election was 'factually' stolen. Because 'I hear my friends talking about the election being stolen... there must be SOMETHING to those claims!' Don't you agree? I mean, the truth must be in the middle. It must be partially true, or else, why would they print so many articles? lol
Psst. Pick an obscure article and you will literally see a hundred or more papers regurgitate the same info... BECAUSE, they need to fill their website or newspaper.
Re: the media. The information and the truth are there. It can be found with due diligence. Never forget the obvious: 'Lying sells!' So clicks bring in the cash and it also brings prominence to the people who write the 1/2 (or 3/4) truths... On both sides of a debate.
I'm surprised people don't understand this. When I read just about any headline, I Google the counterargument to understand more. How many articles would you like me to post about how the election was stolen? After all, 40% of the people think the election was 'factually' stolen. Because 'I hear my friends talking about the election being stolen... there must be SOMETHING to those claims!' Don't you agree? I mean, the truth must be in the middle. It must be partially true, or else, why would they print so many articles? lol
Psst. Pick an obscure article and you will literally see a hundred or more papers regurgitate the same info... BECAUSE, they need to fill their website or newspaper.
Mostly because those new papers and outlets are all owned by the same people. This has been going on for years since the proliferation of the Internet. People only read a headline or parts of an article and think they know the whole story. The corroborate with "friends in Phoenix" who also only read the headline or part of the article and think they know the whole story.
Probably just reading about that community in N Scottsdale that built without access to public utilities and are now complaining that they can't get their water the way they used to. Think I read that a judge is forcing Scottsdale to service the community even though they are outside of Scottsdale public utilities footprint.
Bicala...Please believe that AZ is going to dry up and blow away!!!! Maybe that will stop the influx of people moving here
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.
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.
OR...... I find another career! 
That's how not-so-smart people are. They simply cannot think outside the box. They present a fixed problem and assume everyone is a sitting duck. Sure, we may have to drink the water we flushed down the toilet a month earlier. Or, some people may need to change from regular grass to artificial, etc. But to assume we lose "2 million jobs" is how sheep think. Expect 1M more people to come. 
Sorry, I'll jump off my soap box. It's not because I think I'm bright. Rather, I get easily frustrated by not-so-smart people. And there are a lot of them roaming the planet. 
The "billions of dollars and a couple of million jobs" statement exclusively addressed Arizona's economy. In other words, we would lose close to 30% of our population. That quoted source was from an environmentalist group that has "save the colorado river" in their tagline. It would be like me reading a report from the NRA that claims guns save lives.
