• Friends: Please double-check the email address you have on file. Make sure that it is current and able to receive email. When our emails are rejected it can damage our ratings and slow down future deliveries.
    Thanks!

Water

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jimmy

Member
We're growing cotton and other water intensive crops in the desert. There is no reason to be growing these crops on subsidized water when they can be grown in the east with what falls from the sky. It's absurd that these farmers are paying next to nothing for water, subsidized by the taxpayers of yesteryear and today. Yet they get to grow water intense plants that are in reality surplus.

Get rid of these ridiculous desert-grown crops and the southwest no longer has a water deficit. Who remembers offhand what percentage of Colorado River water is used for crops versus cities? And yet the cities contribute much more to the gdp.
 

Hoskm01

Well-Known Member
70% or so to agriculture

We have to eat- you can't grow lettuce outside in most places in mid winter as in some place like Yuma. Can't grow a lot of things outside, commercially, because of the more prolific moisture.

We need cotton to produce textiles etc, can't grow that "in the east where it rains," look up the climate requirements on these crops.

It's not just as easy as moving crops where the water is or someone would have done it already.
 

Lakewood85

New Member
I wasn't aware that colorado river water went to the central valley. Imperial but not central.
The Saudis have bought a ton of ag.and are exporting our water. Farmers that are down stream from these farms are screaming.
Export Livestock feed needs to come from the midwest. Maybe we can get the corn growers to grow that, rather than be stuck on the ethanol disaster.The imperial valley needs to grow fruit and vegetables.
They are growing both alfalfa and cotton with this water. These are two of the most thirsty crops. Then they export this back to their home country all the while taking advantage of our farm subsidies and easy export laws.
 

stevenk2

Well-Known Member
Water is unquestionably critical to our enjoyment of Lake Powell. This discussion seems to be moving away from Lake Powell as the primary subject. Let's circle back to Powell or let this one end. Thanks!
Agreed - however, decisions made on how water resources are used in the desert southwest will ultimately have an impact on the future of Lake Powell.
 

JTJ

Well-Known Member
It is called NAWAPA. It would cost about 2 trillion to build. The last stimulus package would have paid for and put a lot of people to work.
 

Havalina

Well-Known Member
Nevada seems to be on top of reducing their water use. One question that I have is if they let Powell get down to dead pool, how many people will be without power. The cheap eletric versus cheap water fight over Powell is going to be interesting.
 

Dworwood

Well-Known Member
It is called NAWAPA. It would cost about 2 trillion to build. The last stimulus package would have paid for and put a lot of people to work.
Very interesting read.
 

fisheye

Well-Known Member
I still haven't heard what method they use to dispose of the salts and minerals from desalinization of marine salt water? It was the biggest problem 50 years ago and probably still is? I tend to lean towards tertiary treatment plants in order to recycle and re-use our waste water. There are several of these type treatment plants around the nation, and they work! The city of Santa Ana, pumps their treated water back down to an aquifer underground. Las Vegas recycles and uses around 94% of its waste water. Another sad fact is the Hyperion Outflow pipe that dumps most of LA Counties water into the ocean 5 miles off the coast off Long Beach. It secondarily treats the water and then adds chemicals to kill the remaining bacteria before dumping this sludge into the ocean! If this pipeline were above ground it would be the 3rd largest river by volume in the state. LA, says it costs the city $2500/month, to allow and clean-up after each homeless tent around the area? Something is seriously wrong with the people who live there and allow this stuff! How you going to fix stupid?
 

flowerbug

Well-Known Member
Nevada seems to be on top of reducing their water use. One question that I have is if they let Powell get down to dead pool, how many people will be without power. The cheap eletric versus cheap water fight over Powell is going to be interesting.

at 1,320 MW it is a significant power supply, but current large solar and wind farm installations can replace that. right now the critical role it supplies is a source of "black start" power if the grid goes down completely. with the additions of battery storage and other storage technologies this isn't as critical a role.

i think the common metric used is 1MW can supply about a thousand homes but i think that's non-peak and light load where a house could coast on 1KW. on the days that AC is needed and the hot water heater kicks in and you need to run the dryer and cook i'd put that at about 1/4. so say between 250-1000 homes per MW (if my math is correct :) ).

i should have also noted that the Glen Canyon Dam power station also supplies voltage regulation services to the grid and acts as an emergency supply up to full capacity, but reserves 800-1200cfs for that purpose (30-40MW).

here is a quote from the wiki saying my guesstimates above are not too far off. :)

"
Between 1980 and 2013, Glen Canyon Dam generated an average of 4,717 gigawatt hours (GWh) per year, enough for about 400,000 homes. The highest was 8,703 GWh in 1984, and the lowest was 3,299 GWh in 2005.[6] Power generation is affected not only by the volume of water passing through the dam, but also the depth of water in the reservoir, as a higher water level means more pressure (head) on the turbines.[6] Hydropower generated at Glen Canyon serves about 5 million people in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, and is sold to utilities in these states as 20-year contracts.[135] Power sales have been managed by the Western Area Power Administration since 1977. Glen Canyon Dam generates enough power to offset 6.7 billion pounds (3 billion kg) of carbon dioxide emissions each year.[139] However, drought conditions in the 21st century have reduced the amount of hydropower available from Glen Canyon Dam.[140]
"

 

JTJ

Well-Known Member
To all you people that think solar and wind are green, read about how they are made. Wind is the worst and kills a lot of birds.
Carbon dioxide makes up .04% of the atmosphere. Man contributes 3% of that .04%. You are being lied to and manipulated by the propaganda media and politicians that have a political agenda. 80% of scientists do not believe man is responsible for climate change but are put down by the propaganda media and politicians. The other 20% sold out for grant money. Ice does not lie but money grubbing pseudo scientists do. The ice tells a much different climate story. Much of what we are seeing now is solar related. All the planets got slightly warmer and will most likely cool in the near future as the solar cycle changes.
We should be worrying about other pollution not carbon dioxide.
 

daip1380

New Member
This is essentially madness, so they buried an amazing canyon in silt never to be seen again in order to make profit from large cities in the desert that are completely unnatural and unsustainable and what's the suggestion? Let's do some monstrosity of a godawful pipeline to further all that, oof what a world nowadays. The whole colorado river dam system is just about greed and it's all a huge ecological disaster, they are huge evap pools and also the water seeping into the sandstone, now dredged by the NPS on low vistor times btw. You would have MORE water if it was just the river still, the canyons are so deep you'd get less evap, not as much soak into the ground and a natural ecological system that everyone's on about now, except here and other places.
 

BartsPlace

Moderator
Staff member
Okay, folks. This site is for recreational information sharing about fishing / boating / camping / and general leisure use of Lake Powell. Those are pretty broad areas already. Let's strive to stay within them. There are other venues for discussing fossil fuels vs solar, dams vs free-flowing rivers, greed vs insightful preparation for tougher times, etc. We're done here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top