[WRM20]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

I wonder if anyone was thinking clearly when we decided to farm the desert, without planning for adequate water for both the crops and people who would be attracted to the area. In Israel, at least, they built in waste water recycling and desalination as well as water pipelines and canals. See Let There Be Water: Israel’s Solution for a Water-Starved World by Seth M. Siegel.

Historically, the US has never been very good at looking at the possible future impacts as opposed to "wow, we can do this awesome project and capture all this water". I suspect that the possibility for future water shortages never entered the minds of the people doing the projects. Nor did the potential for decades long droughts. There was also no concept of how aridification works, along with the possibility that the water from the mountains would stop flowing into the rivers. The water always came, and would never stop.

[moguldreamer]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior

I think your guesses are wildly too high. The All American Canal is typically about 60 meters wide and 6 meters deep. The California Aqueduct is typically about 12 meters wide and 9 meters deep,

Yeah, you're right. I exaggerated. My point was that it isn't a pipeline that fits nicely in a railroad right-of-way; it is a canal that is far bigger.

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by WRM20

Historically, the US has never been very good at looking at the possible future impacts as opposed to "wow, we can do this awesome project and capture all this water". I suspect that the possibility for future water shortages never entered the minds of the people doing the projects. Nor did the potential for decades long droughts. There was also no concept of how aridification works, along with the possibility that the water from the mountains would stop flowing into the rivers. The water always came, and would never stop.

Good point. Only trouble is that during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s drought conditions were well known. As much as I once admired FDR, he had a knack for boondoggles. Frankly, the senators and congressmen from the well populated Northeast did not do the jobs in stopping these projects. They were funded by “wealthy“ taxpayers is areas. Only trouble is that they really taxed the middle class. There aren’t very many wealthy people and the ones that there are good at avoiding taxes.

[Cold Warrior]

Originally Posted by moguldreamer

Yeah, you're right. I exaggerated. My point was that it isn't a pipeline that fits nicely in a railroad right-of-way; it is a canal that is far bigger.

TITLE 43 > CHAPTER 22 > § 934

Right of way through public lands granted to railroads.

The right of way through the public lands of the United States is granted to any railroad company duly organized under the laws of any State or Territory, except the District of Columbia, or by the Congress of the United States, which shall have filed with the Secretary of the Interior a copy of its articles of incorporation, and due proofs of its organization under the same, to the extent of one hundred feet on each side of the central line of said road; also the right to take, from the public lands adjacent to the line of said road, material, earth, stone, and timber necessary for the construction of said railroad; also ground adjacent to such right of way for station buildings, depots, machine shops, side tracks, turnouts, and water stations, not to exceed in amount twenty acres for each station, to the extent of one station for each ten miles of its road.

An abandoned railroad line might work.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior

An abandoned railroad line might work.

Indeed, only one "landlord" to deal with, two if you go coast to coast, both ready to deal for dollars.

[BBMW]

There was plenty of water. Then it stopped snowing as much in the Rockies.

Originally Posted by WRM20

Historically, the US has never been very good at looking at the possible future impacts as opposed to "wow, we can do this awesome project and capture all this water". I suspect that the possibility for future water shortages never entered the minds of the people doing the projects. Nor did the potential for decades long droughts. There was also no concept of how aridification works, along with the possibility that the water from the mountains would stop flowing into the rivers. The water always came, and would never stop.

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by nuggznsauce

Right! All this talk of just tapping into other major waterways is going to do nothing except place two regions in trouble. The issue is a lack of rain/snowfall leading to depressed water levels downstream as various regions use up the water for a wide variety of reasons.

In fact a big problem is that currently the state of Colorado removes water from the Colorado River and places it into the South Platte which eventually takes it to the overflowing Mississippi (). In the past many states wrote up protections against this sort of thing and won't allow water to be directed outside water treaty areas or regional bounds. Plus we have the ability to thrive with the water we have we just need to use less not more.

Like others said (and the author of the source I provided) the problem will eventually work itself out and Nevada will be the one to do the least amount of shifting and changing to meet needs. We already conserve and recycle a large amount of water working well within our already limited share of the water allowance. The lake will only lower until the CA/AZ pipes can't reach the water line anymore and they are set higher so the cut off date will be sooner than the lake drying up.

Desalination isn't as easy as people assume and it's costs (build and operational) would be astronomical for the amount of water needed in just Southern California. You have to deal with the waste product which takes innovation to make it practical otherwise it's just going to sit and pollute the area. You also have an issue with how much energy it takes to power a desalination plant; the amount of greenhouse gases plus cost to keep the plant running would be unsustainable right now.

Right now California/Arizona can copy the folks in Vegas and Orange County (I know they hate doing that) and recycle their wastewater. It's cost and energy efficient and you produce cleaner water sooner which means it takes less to make it better for production/consumption. People act all scandalized by it; but what do you have to lose and is it any better than the pollution in the ocean which has to be cleaned 4x as much as it is wastewater itself in a way.

Article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...n-era-is-here/





"Desalination used to be an expensive energy hog, but the kind of advanced technologies being employed at Sorek have been a game changer. Water produced by desalination costs just a third of what it did in the 1990s. Sorek can produce a thousand liters of drinking water for 58 cents. Israeli households pay about US$30 a month for their water — similar to households in most U.S. cities, and far less than Las Vegas (US$47) or Los Angeles (US$58)."

[SusVelo]

Originally Posted by Tek_Freek

Article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...n-era-is-here/





"Desalination used to be an expensive energy hog, but the kind of advanced technologies being employed at Sorek have been a game changer. Water produced by desalination costs just a third of what it did in the 1990s. Sorek can produce a thousand liters of drinking water for 58 cents. Israeli households pay about US$30 a month for their water — similar to households in most U.S. cities, and far less than Las Vegas (US$47) or Los Angeles (US$58)."

A little more recent with specific examples in California.
https://www.wired.com/story/desalina...-out-of-water/

[moguldreamer]

Originally Posted by SusVelo

A little more recent with specific examples in California.
https://www.wired.com/story/desalina...-out-of-water/

I think some of the information in the article is a bit dated (the article is from 2019). The California Coastal Commission earlier this year (2022) turned down the application for the desal plant in SoCal that had been proposed by the same company that operates the Carlsbad plant. The California Coastal Commission's listed several reasons, including:

1) Their overriding objective is to protect the coast from development.
2) The applicant is a for-profit company, and the Commission says no for-profit company can be involved because they might, you know, make a profit.
3) They will decline all future desalination applications, period.

[BBMW]

They actually have their own well water supply. Steve Wynn got the water right when he bought the old Dunes Hotel. The fountains aren't shooting Lake Mead water. I don't know if the hotel itself is using well water or city water.

Originally Posted by Rogue29

Shut down the Bellagio fountains.