California weather extremes and climate

[Jester Fish]

Good short take on the atmospheric set up and shifting location of the "RRR" from Dr. Bob Henson on Jeff Masters Blog.... http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=2925

[LRC1962]

The EPA published this projection in 2009


Link here:  http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/southwest.html

The gross underestimation of regional extreme shifts in precipitation mirrors the extreme underestimation of arctic sea ice loss and (I believe) the secondary and long-term effects of aerosols on decadal oscillations in the pacific and atlantic.

As has been the case all along this grand experiment that we have created, the only issue scientist are having a debate about is how bad and how fast. Seems that it has been time  and time again the the more 'alarmist' scenario that has been close to right. They sometimes granted have been too alarmist based upon it not happening as soon as projected, but still ending up with the closest mark. Scary when you contemplate what some are stating in regards to other impacts. If they end up being the closest to being right, we are all in very big trouble. And I am talking about possibly in my life time and I am not that young.

[jai mitchell]

The image I posted and LRC replied to was not showing properly so I decided to upload it here.

[JER]

Jai and everyone,

Is there a more recent graphic than this one (from 2009) showing the projections? There's been a lot of scientific work on the pertinent issues since then, and the CA drought has exceeded everyone's expectations (in a bad way), so I'm wondering whether more recent projections might be more pessimistic.

Cheers,
Jenny

[Sigmetnow]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The federal government said Friday it won't send any of its reservoir water to the Central Valley for the second straight year, forcing farmers in California's agricultural heartland to scramble for other sources or leave fields unplanted once more.

Farmers had been bracing for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's announcement as California's drought enters its fourth year. Some farms are exempt from complete cuts under California's antiquated water rights system, dating to Gold Rush-era days. But many farmers are running out of short-term options to deal with water shortages, such as uprooting orchards and tapping groundwater wells.

"They were able to Band-Aid things together last year just to keep their trees alive," said Ryan Jacobsen, executive director of the Fresno County Farm Bureau. "The first aid kit we had last year is really not available this year."

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/california-farmers-facing-another-scramble-water-n314626

[Sigmetnow]

Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute: “The drought forecast calls for pain.”
http://www.sfchronicle.com/green/article/The-drought-forecast-calls-for-pain-6106156.php

[Sigmetnow]

Editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle: "Californians must treat drought as a way of life."

http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Californians-must-treat-drought-as-a-way-of-life-6109107.php

[Sigmetnow]

@PaulRogersSJMN: Just in: Sierra Nevada snow pack a dismal 19% of normal, down from 25% in January and 50% in December. #cadrought http://t.co/rYn2rPtDRK

[Sigmetnow]

Californians now backsliding on water-saving efforts.

Critics say the state's efforts have been too timid.

"The responses have to be far more comprehensive and aggressive," said Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute, an Oakland water research organization. "The issue is not telling people not to water their lawns after it rains; the issue is telling people to get rid of their lawns. The issue is not about restaurants and glasses of water; it's about getting rid of millions of inefficient appliances."
...
Gleick said the Brown administration should be distributing money from the water bond voters passed in November to fund programs that pay people to replace old washers, dishwashers and other appliances with more efficient models. The funds, he said, should also be used to pay people to remove lawns, which use 50 percent of all the water in many California communities.

"The policy we adopted last year of hoping for rain has turned out to be a failure," Gleick said. "We better look for more effective new ones -- and soon."

http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_27632870/california-drought-water-conservation-weakening-drought-worsens

[Sigmetnow]

Action taken -- at a tiny number of waste injection sites.

California Orders Oil Companies To Stop Drilling Near Drinking Water Supplies
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/04/3629578/california-halts-oil-drilling-at-12-wells/

[jai mitchell]

Jai and everyone,

Is there a more recent graphic than this one (from 2009) showing the projections? There's been a lot of scientific work on the pertinent issues since then, and the CA drought has exceeded everyone's expectations (in a bad way), so I'm wondering whether more recent projections might be more pessimistic.

Cheers,
Jenny

Jenny,

We are currently at the limits of the models.  They cannot include the fine detail associated with changing Aerosol emissions and natural variability.  The models use multi-model arrays meaning 12-16 models are run with multiple changes in parameters to determine the "average"  the variance between these models is huge.  maybe one or two actually gets it right but the others wash out the results.

So we look to the paleoclimate records and find that there is a propensity for intense drought regimes in the west to take hold under current warming levels (re: the medieval climate anomaly droughts in the U.S. southwest and the sand dunes of Nebraska).

Nasa just published a b.s. study where they asserted that the current drought is not anthropogenic in nature, simply because their models did not show the current offshore sea surface temperature anomaly - and associated Ridiculously Resilient Ridge as a function of a homogenous radiative forcing increase from greenhouse gas emissions.  However, in the GEOMip runs, where they increased the CO2 levels to 4X pre industrial (about 1120ppmv) and then modeled sulfur injections into the stratosphere for geoengineering, the blocking patterns and sea surface temperature increases appeared in the runs.

so, we are dramatically understating the effects of aerosols and this drought is caused primarily by human activity.  The indication is that compounding factors from Chinese pollution, arctic amplification warming, expansion of the Hadley cell and Amazonian deforestation all appear to be contributors.  The end result is that this is the new normal and we haven't seen anything yet. 

We will lose every major city in the southwest from Abilene to Vegas in the next 30 years and a majority of the San Diego and Los Angeles basin in 50.

[LRC1962]

@JM Initial drops will occur but I do see a come back. Where this will come from will be massive investments in desalination both from the side of infrastructure and R&D. o nano filters may be the answer. A side to that is that the pipes sending water from inland to places like LA will then start pumping water in the opposite direction. The Central Valley is of too much importance to the US for food that it can not from a national level let it go dry. You're losing Lake Mead, the aquifers ar drying up that leaves you with only one option. The ocean. The US up to this point in time has spent very little R&D on desalination. I see that about to change. Too many votes are depended upon from the west and if any party is found to have let the west die, they will not get back into power for a very long time.
Opposite of that occurring is the fact the Democrats won a lot of elections based on what FDR did for the west.

[ritter]

@JM Initial drops will occur but I do see a come back. Where this will come from will be massive investments in desalination both from the side of infrastructure and R&D. o nano filters may be the answer. A side to that is that the pipes sending water from inland to places like LA will then start pumping water in the opposite direction. The Central Valley is of too much importance to the US for food that it can not from a national level let it go dry. You're losing Lake Mead, the aquifers ar drying up that leaves you with only one option. The ocean. The US up to this point in time has spent very little R&D on desalination. I see that about to change. Too many votes are depended upon from the west and if any party is found to have let the west die, they will not get back into power for a very long time.
Opposite of that occurring is the fact the Democrats won a lot of elections based on what FDR did for the west.

Do do we get the power to run desal on that scale from liberating more carbon? I don't think solar will cut it and we won't have hydropower because all the reservoirs will be empty. Desal will work almost as well as geoengineering to get us out of this mess. In other words, I very much fear the consequences of its implementation.

[jbatteen]

ritter, I think it will be one of those things we can run on days when the wind is blowing so hard there's extra energy on the grid.  The energy required is definitely a concern though.

[Sigmetnow]

ritter, I think it will be one of those things we can run on days when the wind is blowing so hard there's extra energy on the grid.  The energy required is definitely a concern though.

Can't some forms of desalinization work from hydropressure (like pumped storage), rather than electricity?  It might not be as chemically efficient, but perhaps an energy-efficient supplement?

[Sigmetnow]

California snowpack around 15% of normal (January).

@arapaho415: @afreedma @nycjim @nytimes From yesterday's @latimes, Jan 2014 on left, Jan 2015 on right:
http://t.co/Y0YeHCBt95 http://t.co/rvE3UCdvwC

[ritter]

ritter, I think it will be one of those things we can run on days when the wind is blowing so hard there's extra energy on the grid.  The energy required is definitely a concern though.

Can't some forms of desalinization work from hydropressure (like pumped storage), rather than electricity?  It might not be as chemically efficient, but perhaps an energy-efficient supplement?

One way or another you've got to lift (pump) the sea water from sea level to treatment level. Then you need to lift it (pump) to where ever you intend to use it. Pumping water requires a lot of energy. It's heavy stuff. All that said, I only work with engineers, I am not one myself!

You might be able to make it work for domestic uses at high energy costs. I don't see if working at all for agricultural use. I'd love to be proven wrong.

[Laurent]

What is jaw dropping is that there is nearly nothing left in the northern part...
They did received some water in January and I guess it wasn't snow !

[Sigmetnow]

Fake Snow, Real Money: The High-Tech Fight to Save California Skiing

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-03-06/fake-snow-real-money-the-high-tech-fight-to-save-california-skiing

[Sigmetnow]

What is jaw dropping is that there is nearly nothing left in the northern part...
They did received some water in January and I guess it wasn't snow !

Yes, much of the recent storms was snow only at very high elevations, because the air was so warm.

[jbatteen]

ritter, I think it will be one of those things we can run on days when the wind is blowing so hard there's extra energy on the grid.  The energy required is definitely a concern though.

Can't some forms of desalinization work from hydropressure (like pumped storage), rather than electricity?  It might not be as chemically efficient, but perhaps an energy-efficient supplement?

Reverse Osmosis actually works with mechanical energy in the form of pressure, so that could work.  High pressure water is run by a membrane that pushes the water molecules through holes in the membrane just big enough for them to pass through.  So if you can pressurize water without electricity, it can run an RO machine.  I've got a unit at my house that requires no electrical input, just high pressure water from the well pump.

That said, probably the only way water would get way up high to gravitationally power an RO machine is with electrical pumping, so might as well cut out the middle man and efficiency loss, and pump the water straight into the RO machine.

[Laurent]

California Drought Just Broke A 120-Year Record
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/06/california-drought-february-record_n_6820704.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green

[LRC1962]

ritter, I think it will be one of those things we can run on days when the wind is blowing so hard there's extra energy on the grid.  The energy required is definitely a concern though.

Can't some forms of desalinization work from hydropressure (like pumped storage), rather than electricity?  It might not be as chemically efficient, but perhaps an energy-efficient supplement?

IMO I believe as more R&D is done more energy efficient ways will be found. Also, When there is no other source of water, amount of energy used comes in last place.
In the Middle East Solar is one of the primary energy sources. Expanding water has a lot of power in it.

[Yuha]

While some reservoirs are in a bit better shape than last year at this time, the New Melones Reservoir is much worse. It is the fourth largest reservoir in California (fifth if you count Lake Tahoe).
http://www.mantecabulletin.com/section/1/article/121322/

Numbers released by the Bureau on Monday shows that New Melones Reservoir will for all practical purposes become a dead lake sometime in August when it reaches the dead storage point of 80,000 acre feet or just over 3.5 percent of its design capacity of 2.4 million acre feet of water.

Dead storage refers to water that cannot be drained  by gravity through the dam’s outlet, spillway or power plant intake and can only be pumped out. The projection calls for the reservoir to dip to 49,000 acre feet or 2 percent of capacity by Oct. 1. It is projected to stay below dead storage through at least Jan. 1 when 63,000 acre feet of water is expected to be in the reservoir.

[Shared Humanity]

With regards to agriculture  in the Central Valley...........

While I have found that there are some minor differences in estimates for water usage in California, it is generally agreed that agriculture accounts for about 75% of the water currently consumed. (See pie chart below and following link.)

http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article4870.html

While we must absolutely focus on the reduction of urban water use, the effect of dramatic reductions in non-agriculture uses is limited in that only 25% of current water use is non-agriculture. If, for example, we completely eliminated water use for landscaping, over all water demand would be reduced by 7%. Dramatic reductions in interior residential use (water efficient  faucets, toilets, washing machines etc.) may buy us another 4%. This is assuming that a complete  conversion of all residences could cut internal usage by 50%. Every available approach should be aggressively pursued to accomplish this.

Will these actions be sufficient, allowing the region to adjust to the drier climate that seems to be establishing itself? Even more importantly, are we actually sure that this drier climate is more or less a reality? Could we actually have a return to the wetter conditions that existed in the prior century? I do not know the answer to the 2nd question but there does seem to be a growing consensus by the scientific community that a warming world will result in a much drier climate in the western U.S.  I hope they are wrong.

We are focusing on this terrible drought of the last 4 years but the problem is actually more grave than this. The last 15 years have been abnormally dry in California.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/03/150304-snow-snowpack-california-drought-groundwater-crisis/

The snowpack in the Sierra Nevadas is currently 19% of normal which does suggest this year will be the fourth consecutive year for severe drought. This, however, is not a single year phenomena nor is it restricted to California. Below, you will find an image that shows the changes in snowpack that have been occurring across the western U.S. since 1955. This reduction in snowpack can be seen everywhere. In some regions, the reduction has been more than 50%!!!!!!!!

It would seem that climate scientists are on to something and a drier west is in the cards. California will continue to see ongoing reductions in available water and, as already shown, the only real meaningful, long term reductions in water consumption will be in agriculture.

The fate of Central Valley agriculture is sealed.

[Shared Humanity]

As for desalinization, while technically feasible no one has bothered to think about whether it is economically viable with regards to agriculture.

The average farm worker in California makes far less than any other occupation. There is a reason for this. Agriculture operates on razor thin margins. The industry simply cannot survive on a source of water that is significantly more expensive and desalinization cannot possibly be as cheap as melting snowpack sources.

But how will America feed itself?? America will feed itself just as it did prior to the explosion in Central Valley agriculture that occurred post WWII. Produce will be increasingly local and seasonal, just as it was in my childhood.

[Sigmetnow]

@billmckibben: CA winter is hottest on record, smashing the record that dates back all the way to last year
http://t.co/WqwrRLoSvm

From December through January, California recorded an average temperature a solid 1.5°F above last year’s mark. For just the first two months of this year, temperatures are 1°F hotter than last year, which ended as the hottest year on record by nearly 2 degrees.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/record-hot-winter-for-california-18737

[Shared Humanity]

Article stands without  comment....

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/07/california-drought-farmers-drilling-groundwater-environment

[icefest]

Jbatten,
Depends on costs I guess. If pumped saline hydro with a high load factor on your reverse osmosis plant is cheaper than battery storage  or just overbuilding the RO plant and dealing with a lower load factor.

The choice will be largely dependent on location and wind variability. Wit with short variations favouring batteries and long variations favouring pumped hydro.

[Sigmetnow]

Snowpack (or lack thereof): Mineral King, in Sequoia National Park.  March 7 -- 2014 and 2015.

@Sustainable2050: California MT @NWSHanford: Drought takes toll on Sierra snow pack. Mineral King at (2400 m) on March 7th 2014 & 2015
http://t.co/Uz79qfvblb

@stevebloom55: @Sustainable2050 @NWSHanford Note 2014 was already very bad.

[LRC1962]

But how will America feed itself?? America will feed itself just as it did prior to the explosion in Central Valley agriculture that occurred post WWII. Produce will be increasingly local and seasonal, just as it was in my childhood.

Unless things are very different from where I live, you are dreaming. a) the drought is affecting almost everything west of the Mississippi. b) almost everyone now lives in housing with little to no growing area. c) any garden still needs water for it to grow and even where you have 'lots' of water available locally you will find that available water is not much more then currently used. add too much more stress to it to grow local produce and that will end up with you having water shortages.
Granted we need to learn how to eat healthy with low water hungry food. we do need to eat far more locally and stop paving all farmable land over, but water shortages are becoming a world wide crisis and we need to start looking at the oceans to fix it on continental levels because folks that is ending up with all the water we have left for us to drink and grow our food from as a long term dependable source.

[Anne]

Stupid question alert: Supposing that you can develop an effective solar/wind/renewable power type of desalination. How do you deal with the effluent? Can you sell the salt? Or do you just let it pollute the sea?

[wili]

LRC, as long as people are still hosing down their sidewalks, watering unproductive lawns, constantly washing their cars, filling their swimming pools, and mostly using massive amounts of water for non-essential forms of agriculture like almonds and cattle (directly and indirectly), there is not rational excuse for denying people a bit of water for a victory garden.

There are many techniques, of course, for minimizing the amount of water needed for gardens, and those should be encouraged, too. But in any case, they use much less water than a lot of the really stupid things people do with water.

(That's not so say we won't need desalination plants. But that is a very energy intensive affair, and energy is not something we will have lots of going forward, especially if we ever get serious on actually cutting back on ff use.

[LRC1962]

Stupid question alert: Supposing that you can develop an effective solar/wind/renewable power type of desalination. How do you deal with the effluent? Can you sell the salt? Or do you just let it pollute the sea?

That is a very big question and not stupid. If you take in the ocean as a whole it will do nothing, but on a local level unless you pump it into major currents that is a big impact. There are though very serious effluent problems though. Salt is the least. You would also raise concentrations of all sorts industrial pollutants and that you will have to deal with safely.
wili:

But that is a very energy intensive affair, and energy is not something we will have lots of going forward, especially if we ever get serious on actually cutting back on ff use.

We have to get off of ff. the sooner the better. As for present day water sources. Major river systems of the world get most of their water from glaciers. Those are going, going, gone. With weather systems changing places like the US west will turn into a Sahara. Move them? where? East? doubling the pop of eastern states will turn that area into a desert. Then where do you go? Also where do you replace the food production lost? Right now the US west is keeping production going by replacing surface water with underground water. That is disappearing. OK you can conserve.
Most water is actually used in agriculture and industry. Somehow in order to keep those 2 areas working you have to find a new source of water because most of the old sources are disappearing fast.
For energy it has been stated that if you use the non food producing areas of the midwest US into solar farms you can generate all the energy needs of North America. So generating energy is not the problem. The problem is we have to start rethinking  of the way we have always done things. The end result is we take for granted of what we have around us. Very little R&D has actually gone into desalination because of the idea that it was always costlier then putting a pipe into a local river.
Another point of energy. Do you have any idea how much energy and water is needed for the lithium battery that is in most of our batteries? If the totals where compared, I would be shocked if it would take more energy to run a desalination plant for a million people then it would be to keep those same people provided with lithium batteries. The issue is not costs, is not energy, it comes down to what is more important.
We also have as a western world always thought of getting things done by brute force. And now because you can get proprietary compensation for your invention, costlier, more energy inefficient and environmentally damaging ways of getting a job done all in the name of greed.
Unless you want to see the US west turn into a depopulated Sahara dessert, which climatologist are saying will happen because of AGW and changes to weather patterns, desalinization is the only option you have to save it because there is no fresh water source option left. It also is easier to make the changes now before everything does turn to desert and you lose your top soil, then wait until everything has turned into desert then try and rehabilitate it.
My belief is that it can be done and at an affordable and environmentally sustainable way, the question is are we going to continue to buy into the notion that it can not be done because it has never been done before until it is too late to find a solution.

[Shared Humanity]

Sorry guys. I am not talking about victory gardens. I am talking about commercial farms growing and selling produce in cities. These farms are expanding all around Chicago and more and more groceries are advertising locally grown produce....even leafy produce in winter that is being grown in commercial greenhouses.

[wili]

First, I agree with LRC that Anne's question is not stupid and that it is potentially a large problem of local environmental consequences where to put all the salt (and other stuff) that is extracted from the ocean, especially as these plants start to grow to the scale that they are supplying much of the water needed in a densely populated and for supporting ag and industry.

LRC wrote: "where do you replace the food production lost?"

Yes, this is a huge problem. Mostly, we have to vastly reduce the amount of land that needs to be watered from these kinds of aquifers. One thing to keep in mind in these discussions is that by far the largest portion of ag crops is taken up by corn and soy together. But only a very small percentage of those crops go toward feeding humans directly. So you could get the same amounts of calories and protein from a much smaller portion of ag land if you re-purposed those crops to direct consumption by humans. Do this, and suddenly you have lots more wiggle room for all sorts of conservation efforts.


"Most water is actually used in agriculture and industry."

Right, and that is exactly why we have to look closely at how that water is used and for what purposes.

"For energy it has been stated that if you use the non food producing areas of the midwest US into solar farms you can generate all the energy needs of North America. So generating energy is not the problem."

I hope you are kidding here, but I suspect you are not.

You might as well point out that there is more hydrogen in the universe than any other element, so there should be  no problem creating a hydrogen based energy infrastructure.

.....

SH, thanks for the clarification. But I think the issue of priorities still holds. Water is used for a lot of stupider things in our society than to grow crops of whatever kind. I do think, though, that it is more important to learn to eat crops that are in season than to figure out how to build millions of acres of greenhouses to ensure we can have endive in February in Chicago.

If you want local greens in winter, sprout some beans or grains and leave them in a south-facing window to green up a bit before consumption. Use the left over water to water household plants that double as air purifiers and humidifiers.

[jbatteen]

Greenhouses don't just enable typically out-of-season produce, they also dramatically increase agricultural productivity per acre by protecting plants from the elements, on top of dramatically decreasing water usage by keeping humidity in and blocking the wind.  Greenhouses, high tunnels and low tunnels are the way forward for agriculture in this country if we are to thrive.  Especially as the storms grow more severe, you can't just let your plants get battered now that we have technology to prevent it.  This is particularly applicable to produce, rather than grains which can take some abuse.  High tunnels growing fruit crops such as raspberries pay for themselves in just 2 to 3 years in Minnesota, up to quadrupling weight of fruit per acre on top of improving fruit quality and extending the season.

[LRC1962]

SH: Thanks for clarity. Across the border from you in Canada the story is very much different. most of the best farm land in the country is being paved and housed over .
Wili:

I hope you are kidding here, but I suspect you are not.

Semi kidding in that it was using as an example of what in theory could be done. Best case IMO would be the carrot and stick approach. every property owner for every piece of property must generate x% of power used on that property by renewable resources on that property or pay a penalty annually based on power used. Idea is that local power is far more efficient as you limit power losses you get carrying over long distances and you lower stress on power grid. Carrot is you get an upfront aid to build it (argument is that it would be too costly. How much tax money is spent via upfront aid and tax benefits on every power plant?) and if you generate more then you need you get a healthy return by providing it to the grid.
Guaranteeing the grid money does 2 things. gets more power onto the grid locally and if owners see how much they get from providing that power would increase efforts at saving power. Do not have the stats, but I believe you would find out that for most people a greater incentive is found when you get paid in cash for doing something then convincing people how much you would save if you did not use it in the first place.

[Sigmetnow]

As if the looming drought wasn't bad enough... a new USGS study updates the risk of earthquakes in California.

Good news: earthquakes of around magnitude 6.7, the size of the destructive 1994 Northridge earthquake, has gone down by about 30 percent, from an average of one per 4.8 years to about one per 6.3 years.

Bad news:

However, in the new study, the estimate for the likelihood that California will experience a magnitude 8 or larger earthquake in the next 30 years has increased from about 4.7% for UCERF2 to about 7.0% for UCERF3.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=4146

[Sigmetnow]

LA Times editorial.

California has about one year of water left. Will you ration now?

Right now the state has only about one year of water supply left in its reservoirs, and our strategic backup supply, groundwater, is rapidly disappearing. California has no contingency plan for a persistent drought like this one (let alone a 20-plus-year mega-drought), except, apparently, staying in emergency mode and praying for rain.
...
Several steps need be taken right now. First, immediate mandatory water rationing should be authorized across all of the state's water sectors, from domestic and municipal through agricultural and industrial. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is already considering water rationing by the summer unless conditions improve. There is no need for the rest of the state to hesitate. The public is ready. A recent Field Poll showed that 94% of Californians surveyed believe that the drought is serious, and that one-third support mandatory rationing.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-famiglietti-drought-california-20150313-story.html

[Sigmetnow]

California rice farmers are selling their water.

With the drought stretching into its fourth year, a heavyweight water agency from Los Angeles has come calling on Sacramento Valley rice farmers, offering up to $71 million for some of their water.

The price being offered is so high, some farmers can make more from selling water than from growing their rice. ...

As many as 115,000 acre-feet of water could be sold, or more than 37 billion gallons, to Metropolitan and its fellow buyers. The result: a reduction in the amount of rice planted as farmers take fields out of production. As it is, California’s rice industry is struggling to recover from a difficult 2014, in which 140,000 acres were idled due to drought and one-fourth of the crop didn’t get planted.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article13908632.html

[Sigmetnow]

May need to change the thread to "U.S. West Coast Declares Drought Emergency."

Washington (state) declares drought emergency.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/13/usa-washington-drought-idUSL1N0WF20H20150313

Oregon declares drought emergency.
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2015/03/gov_kate_brown_to_declare_drou.html

[Laurent]

As California Drought Enters 4th Year, Conservation Efforts and Worries Increase
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/us/as-california-drought-enters-4th-year-conservation-efforts-and-worries-increase.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

[JimD]

While Sacramento has suffered drought, Nestle continues to drain California aquifers and sell the people's water back to them at great profit... under many dozen brand names.

The city of Sacramento is in the fourth year of a record drought - yet the Nestlé Corporation continues to bottle city water to sell back to the public at a big profit, local activists charge.

The Nestlé Water Bottling Plant in Sacramento is the target of a major press conference on Tuesday, March 17, by a water coalition that claims the company is draining up to 80 million gallons of water a year from Sacramento aquifers during the drought.

The coalition, the crunchnestle alliance, says that City Hall has made this use of the water supply possible through a "corporate welfare giveaway," according to a press advisory....

"Nestlé pays only 65 cents for each 470 gallons it pumps out of the ground – the same rate as an average residential water user. But the company can turn the area's water around, and sell it back to Sacramento at mammoth profits," the coalition said.

Activists say that Sacramento officials have refused attempts to obtain details of Nestlé's water used. Coalition members have addressed the Sacramento City Council and requested that Nestle’ either pay a commercial rate under a two tier level, or pay a tax on their profit.

In October, the coalition released a "White Paper" highlighting predatory water profiteering actions taken by Nestle’ Water Bottling Company in various cities, counties, states and countries. Most of those great “deals” yielded mega profits for Nestle’ at the expense of citizens and taxpayers. Additionally, the environmental impact on many of those areas yielded disastrous results....

http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/222681/index.php

[oren]

Unbelievable. Bottling business as usual for near-free in the middle of a drought emergency

[Sigmetnow]

While the bottled water industry makes an easy target, it uses only a tiny portion of the state's withdrawn water.  Much more water could be saved by addressing agricultural waste.

Statewide, the bottled water industry accounts for a small fraction of overall water use. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that roughly 1 percent of the water used in the state goes to industrial users, with bottling plants being a small portion of that.

http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2015/03/05/bottling-water-california-drought/24389417/

[Sigmetnow]

A Tiny California Fish Is On Brink Of Extinction And The Ramifications Are Huge

Jeff Miller, a California-based conservationist with the Center for Biological Diversity, agrees. He said the record-low numbers of Delta smelt in recent years indicate the Delta ecosystem is unraveling.

“Delta smelt, longfin smelt, several populations of salmon, steelhead trout, green sturgeon, and Sacramento splittail are facing extinction in the Delta,” he told ThinkProgress. “If state and federal regulators carry on with business as usual, allowing wealthy agribusiness interests to dictate water policy, we will lose all of these fish.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/19/3635666/delta-smelt-could-go-bottom-up/

[Sigmetnow]

Almonds!

Moreover, environmentalists say the proposed regulations fail to address the state's largest water waster: Big Agribusiness. In fact, California's agricultural interests use 80 percent of the available water in the state each year (even though they represent just 2 percent of California's economy). "But there's no target [reduction] for agricultural use," noted Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the nonprofit California Water Impact Network. Instead, Stokely pointed out that the state is just targeting urban and suburban water users in its rationing plan, even though they only consume about 20 percent of the California's available water each year.
...
But environmentalists rightly note that no one is calling for a cutback on water use for the state's essential food supplies. The problem is the water wasted on non-essential crops. Right now, California is producing far more almonds than state residents can consume. So much so that at least 70 percent of the state's almond crop is now exported — much of it to China. In other words, we're essentially exporting our water to China.

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/california-targets-wrong-water-wasters/Content?oid=4222724

[Anne]

Almonds!
To say nothing of the biohazard of bee transport (which is way off topic).

<snip>With more than 20,000 bees in each hive, this means that there are more than 30 billion honeybees in the Central Valley and all of them have been brought there to work. Beekeepers from across the US have put their hives onto flatbed trucks and hauled their insect livestock down to the almond orchards.

Worth a look on environmental grounds anyway.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21741651

[Sigmetnow]

California Gov. Jerry Brown Announces $1 Billion Drought Plan
http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/california-drought-governor-brown-plan