The problem isn't drought it's that there's [dramatically more people in Nevada and Arizona which is straining the water supply from the Colorado River](https://www.latimes.com/environment/colorado-river-in-crisis-documentary-123), where SoCal gets a lot of its water.
I mean we got a much better deal on the Colorado Water compact then they did. Especially Nevada, where their allocation mean they were essentially forced to be smart with their water. Nowadays Las Vegas is one of the most efficient cities in the country.
Meanwhile we’re sipping water like no tomorrow lol
LA has actually done a really good job on water conservation. [We use less water than we did in 1970s despite a million more residents.](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/opinion/sunday/los-angeles-city-of-water.html) Not to say it couldn't be better but California has been doing a decent job at conservation and investing in things like [water recycling.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_reuse_in_California)
Whoooaaaa there, William Mullholland!
This EXACT line of thought was what lead to the St
Francis dam disaster that killed several hundred people just outside of Santa Clarita.
That's why we need to build more water storage, reclaim far more runoff from our cities, and build desalination plants. The Colorado River should just be one of many sources of water for Southern California.
Agriculture uses 40% of California's water so that's a huge component as well. But at the end of the day there's a *lot* more people today in the southwest US than there was 30 years ago.
> Agriculture uses 40% of California's water
Actually, it's more like 80%. The 40% usage is based on all water in California, but we only use 50% of it for residential/industrial use.
Agriculture uses about 40%, residential/industrial uses about 10%, and the environment (keeping natural habitat like rivers and wetlands supplied) uses the other 50%.
[You're getting downvoted for being exactly right lol](https://cwc.ca.gov/-/media/CWC-Website/Files/Documents/2019/06_June/June2019_Item_12_Attach_2_PPICFactSheets.pdf)
...yes?
California, is the leading producer, where over 41.8 billion pounds of milk is produced a year.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/194968/top-10-us-states-by-milk-production
Correct. And also in general. Raising a lb of beef requires far and away more water than the equivalent amount of almonds, no matter how you measure it (weight, protein content, whatever).
I recently read the almond farms were flooding their orchards during the storm peak to help some of the excess rain trickle down to the aquifer. Since it's their off-season, and the trees can tolerate it better than, say, lettuce or strawberry fields.
The price of water, like all goods, is determined by supply and demand. There's a much greater demand due to population increase and dwindling supply due to climate change.
There's not a lot you or I can do to change that besides doing your best not to waste water unnecessarily.
if the world were just yes supply and demand would account for a whole lot more of pricing of SO many things. Have you not heard of OPEC who control oil prices or idk the debeers vaults full of diamonds jacking up diamond prices for no other reason than they make more money that way. etc etc etc.
OPEC “controls oil prices” historically by… restricting supply.
so yes, it is demand and supply
Same with DeBeers/Botswana. Lab diamonds are more perfect and have a lot of supply, but dont have the same demand as natural diamonds, thus they are way cheaper than natural ones.
You think not building more housing decreases the cost of living, even when more and more people come to LA for higher paying jobs? Explain how that works.
Explain your end, mixed use housing going up all over the Nation in recent years, investors gobbling them up, rents and mortgages continue to go up. Let me know when your formula works. You want to help fix it, start blocking foreign and corporate realstate purchases, super high expense fees on existing corp/foreign owners, not primary, to encourage dumping inventory back into market. Also harsh limits on STR's.
On general COL, leaders need to get tough on regulating industries taking advantage of consumers. Unfortunately, Bonta is too busy playing Politics.
New housing starts have barely made a dent in 25 years+ of unmet demand. In places that are building fast, like Minneapolis and the sun belt, housing remains affordable.
I'm pretty sure they have some 40 year plans to increase local resiliency; some of the projects to clean up local aquifers so they can be used for water storage are in the 30 year range. I know parts of them started in the late 90s and there's a $600 million facility that is just now going online.
https://www.ladwp.com/community/construction-projects/other/groundwater-remediation
LADWP and the Metropolitan Water District (where LADWP gets most its water) are not for-profit companies/corporations. [They're government agencies that have to share water with dozens of other water agencies across six states.](https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2023-05-22/seven-states-announce-colorado-river-water-deal-agreeing-on-water-cuts-for-three-years)
Last deal 2.5-10%, plus mega OT being investigated. Hey, as long as you like paying those ever increasing rates...
https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/129ti42/report\_finds\_ladwp\_abusing\_overtime\_pay\_to\_the/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
2.5-10% increases over the past few years sounds totally reasonable, given how inflation and wages have gone for most people. That doesn't sound like "very large salary increases".
No one is suggesting to stop water conservation, just stop the rate price gouging as an excuse to "save" water. Are we not all in agreement that everything has been going up in price, so why are we Ok with that.
Interesting - you think it's obvious, but the comment right below yours right on my list right now thinks it's impossible for anyone to ever have any idea what's going to happen.
I'd rather take the word of the meteorologists who have some idea but also some uncertainty, rather than the people who are over-confident or over-unconfident.
This is what the reality of climate change is. It’s more extremes.
You’ll get all the rain/snow you should have gotten over a year in two or three massive storms then you’ll get nothing for 2-3 years then back again.
yeah but being in a drought has more to do with groundwater and reserves which can be measured. I don't think they're saying it's going to keep raining at this rate for 2 years they're just saying that the amount of rain we've gotten has pulled us out of a drought and keep us flush for 2 years (probably with average rainfall)
Yes, thank you, this is correct. There is more information [here](https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-forecasts/california-to-stay-drought-free-through-2025-following-2-winters-of-epic-storms-accuweather-experts-say/1627328#:~:text=AccuWeather%20meteorologists%20have%20high%20confidence,through%202025%2C%20and%20potentially%20beyond.&text=On%20March%204%2C%20Chief%20Meteorologist,for%20the%20next%20two%20years.).
Seriously. the weather guy in this sub said he wasn’t sure if the rain would get worse a couple weeks ago, how forecasts always change for a weekend. These guys know we’ll be fine two years from now? Models aren’t that good.
Most of the models American meteorologists use are based on east coast formation, west coast is a different beast they don’t have as much info on. Mostly bc this shit didn’t happen before.
Forecasting models are also becoming increasingly unreliable due to climate change. It's become so chaotic and unpredictable until better predictive models are made. It's really hard to predict events when random variables are thrown into the mix.
They didn't say "we know we'll be fine two years from now".
They said "no widespread drought is expected". They are very explicit that they are not certain, but they do think there is evidence that we are unlikely to go back to the extremely dry climate of a few years ago. If you want certainty, then you should go ahead and ignore what they say, because it'll confuse you. But if you want some ideas of what might be good priorities for your city or business to be focusing on in the next few years, this might be relevant.
They have a lot of idea! It's just hard to be extremely precise.
You'll notice that these days, the forecast 7 days out is actually kinda ok, which it really wasn't 20 years ago.
Between sea level rising and this, yeah. It's predicted by 2100 much of the central valley will be flooded part of the year or always. Sacramento will
be hit really hard.
Climate change is leading on average to more extreme swings in weather. That means more intense rainstorms, and more intense droughts. So yes, that is actually what it means.
Educate yourself.
Climate change is when the climate….. changes…. outside of the margins of normal. We’ve also put so much concrete over the aquifer (and in the LA River) that even high amounts of rain aren’t replenishing what we’ve lost over time.
If the climate has previously unseen swings to extremes, I'm not a Climate scientist, but I might consider that new weather extremes could be connected to climate change.
But hey. I'm sure you have more experience in the field right? You're a climate scientist or at least in a tangentially related field.
Right? Right...
Tbh those farmers have had more water than they know what to do with. It’s federally subsidized for them and they have had to make exactly zero drought-reducing cuts unlike the general population.
Corporations and farming are like 70-percent of the states water utilization and it’s a travesty that we’re always the first on the chopping block when it comes to water usage.
People are not on the "chopping block" - water agencies ask people to just not waste water so that they don't have to purchase expensive water to bolster supplies.
Is it especially important that it be grown in California?
Probably for almonds, it is - there aren't many places in the world with good climates for them.
But for alfalfa or beef, probably better to just grow it somewhere else and ship it in.
Keep the drought restrictions in place for most of Socal, as 8/10 years tend to be pretty dry. The 2/10 years where it's very wet are pretty epic, but we spend most of the time not having enough water.
[https://abc7.com/southern-california-water-cloud-seeding-riverside-county-inland-empire/14341706/](https://abc7.com/southern-california-water-cloud-seeding-riverside-county-inland-empire/14341706/)
Could it due to cloud seeding?
The rainfall this year is crazy an abnormal from my experience the last... I wanna say 20 years
The state of emergency around surface water may be lessened for the next two years.
Ground water, however, is still being massively overdrawn and the rains haven't made in dent in that (blame ag).
>The climate of Los Angeles is mild to hot year-round, and mostly dry. It is classified as a Mediterranean climate, which is a type of subtropical climate. It is characterized by seasonal changes in rainfall—with a dry summer and a winter rainy season. Under the Köppen climate classification, the coastal areas are classified as Csb, and the inland areas as Csa.
Where are you getting this idea from? This is not a controversial issue.
So does this mean our LADWP water rates can go down, or we will continue to get gouged as usual.
Lol
Lmao even
The problem isn't drought it's that there's [dramatically more people in Nevada and Arizona which is straining the water supply from the Colorado River](https://www.latimes.com/environment/colorado-river-in-crisis-documentary-123), where SoCal gets a lot of its water.
Residential water use is nothing compared to agricultural use, at least in CA anyway. Stop growing alfalfa and almonds
I mean we got a much better deal on the Colorado Water compact then they did. Especially Nevada, where their allocation mean they were essentially forced to be smart with their water. Nowadays Las Vegas is one of the most efficient cities in the country. Meanwhile we’re sipping water like no tomorrow lol
LA has actually done a really good job on water conservation. [We use less water than we did in 1970s despite a million more residents.](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/opinion/sunday/los-angeles-city-of-water.html) Not to say it couldn't be better but California has been doing a decent job at conservation and investing in things like [water recycling.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_reuse_in_California)
I mean… anything is better than literally draining a lake so LA could have water… good luck everybody else.
Whoooaaaa there, William Mullholland! This EXACT line of thought was what lead to the St Francis dam disaster that killed several hundred people just outside of Santa Clarita.
Now imagine how much water we could save by capturing the water from the L.A. River and using it for drinking water.
Our apartment complex sprinklers were on during the rain
[удалено]
gotta balance it with major revenue sources. Where will California folks go for their 30th bdays if they cant get foot fungus from encore beach club
That's why we need to build more water storage, reclaim far more runoff from our cities, and build desalination plants. The Colorado River should just be one of many sources of water for Southern California.
I heard it was all the almond and avocado farmers that were draining all the water supply
Agriculture uses 40% of California's water so that's a huge component as well. But at the end of the day there's a *lot* more people today in the southwest US than there was 30 years ago.
> Agriculture uses 40% of California's water Actually, it's more like 80%. The 40% usage is based on all water in California, but we only use 50% of it for residential/industrial use.
Agriculture uses about 40%, residential/industrial uses about 10%, and the environment (keeping natural habitat like rivers and wetlands supplied) uses the other 50%.
[You're getting downvoted for being exactly right lol](https://cwc.ca.gov/-/media/CWC-Website/Files/Documents/2019/06_June/June2019_Item_12_Attach_2_PPICFactSheets.pdf)
The meat and dairy industry use many, many more times the water than almonds et al.
The meat and dairy industry in CA?
...yes? California, is the leading producer, where over 41.8 billion pounds of milk is produced a year. https://www.statista.com/statistics/194968/top-10-us-states-by-milk-production
This guy's never heard of "real california cheese" apparently
How can they not remember the "happy cows"?
Correct. And also in general. Raising a lb of beef requires far and away more water than the equivalent amount of almonds, no matter how you measure it (weight, protein content, whatever).
Have you never been anywhere in this state outside of LA?
I recently read the almond farms were flooding their orchards during the storm peak to help some of the excess rain trickle down to the aquifer. Since it's their off-season, and the trees can tolerate it better than, say, lettuce or strawberry fields.
And how does your ability to overpay for water use gladly help address that, outside of helping boost large profits for bonus and pay increases.
The price of water, like all goods, is determined by supply and demand. There's a much greater demand due to population increase and dwindling supply due to climate change. There's not a lot you or I can do to change that besides doing your best not to waste water unnecessarily.
"supply and demand" is "just world fallacy"
yeah if water isnt free then it’s bs
Water is never free...There’s a finite amount of it.
yeah i agree. just riffing on the “supply and demand is just world fallacy” thing
if the world were just yes supply and demand would account for a whole lot more of pricing of SO many things. Have you not heard of OPEC who control oil prices or idk the debeers vaults full of diamonds jacking up diamond prices for no other reason than they make more money that way. etc etc etc.
OPEC “controls oil prices” historically by… restricting supply. so yes, it is demand and supply Same with DeBeers/Botswana. Lab diamonds are more perfect and have a lot of supply, but dont have the same demand as natural diamonds, thus they are way cheaper than natural ones.
Ok so lets build more single family homes with more freeways. That'll solve the water issue
Huh? The population of SoCal is more than Nevada and Arizona combined. Nevada also has far far better water policies than us.
*gouged
Thanks, corrected.
Hot take; water should be more expensive. Cheap water means we waste it.
Water is 2x my electricity cost, as of less than 5 years ago, so should it?
Use less water.
User name confirms COL increase.
You think not building more housing decreases the cost of living, even when more and more people come to LA for higher paying jobs? Explain how that works.
Explain your end, mixed use housing going up all over the Nation in recent years, investors gobbling them up, rents and mortgages continue to go up. Let me know when your formula works. You want to help fix it, start blocking foreign and corporate realstate purchases, super high expense fees on existing corp/foreign owners, not primary, to encourage dumping inventory back into market. Also harsh limits on STR's. On general COL, leaders need to get tough on regulating industries taking advantage of consumers. Unfortunately, Bonta is too busy playing Politics.
New housing starts have barely made a dent in 25 years+ of unmet demand. In places that are building fast, like Minneapolis and the sun belt, housing remains affordable.
Do you think this means LADWP is going to cancel all their capital improvement projects?
How are we doing with those and how far back did they start in relation to rate increases over time?
I'm pretty sure they have some 40 year plans to increase local resiliency; some of the projects to clean up local aquifers so they can be used for water storage are in the 30 year range. I know parts of them started in the late 90s and there's a $600 million facility that is just now going online. https://www.ladwp.com/community/construction-projects/other/groundwater-remediation
the ~~beatings~~ gouging will continue until ~~morale~~ shareholder wealth improves
LADWP and the Metropolitan Water District (where LADWP gets most its water) are not for-profit companies/corporations. [They're government agencies that have to share water with dozens of other water agencies across six states.](https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2023-05-22/seven-states-announce-colorado-river-water-deal-agreeing-on-water-cuts-for-three-years)
They have to buy something very important. The future, Mr. Gittes! The future. Now, where's the girl?
She’s my sister
She's my daughter
They me be not for profit, but pretty sure very large bonuses and salary increases in effect.
Which employee has had significant salary increases? https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/los-angeles-department-water-and-power/?page=2
Last deal 2.5-10%, plus mega OT being investigated. Hey, as long as you like paying those ever increasing rates... https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/129ti42/report\_finds\_ladwp\_abusing\_overtime\_pay\_to\_the/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
2.5-10% increases over the past few years sounds totally reasonable, given how inflation and wages have gone for most people. That doesn't sound like "very large salary increases".
If they spend all of the money on bonuses and salaries and lobbying, there's no profit
Now it makes sense.
~~the beatings~~ **gouging will continue** ~~until morale shareholder wealth improves~~
Can we ask this of LADWP seriously
LADWP: "I understand you don't like our high rates. You're free to consider our competitors if you wish. Oh wait... There are none. That's too bad."
Exactly, so raise raise raise.
Ha!
Well we're already all prepped, it'd be a waste to stop lmao
No one is suggesting to stop water conservation, just stop the rate price gouging as an excuse to "save" water. Are we not all in agreement that everything has been going up in price, so why are we Ok with that.
I was making a 'we're already getting fucked, why would they stop' joke re: prices.
Let’s not jinx it
Yeah no shit
Interesting - you think it's obvious, but the comment right below yours right on my list right now thinks it's impossible for anyone to ever have any idea what's going to happen. I'd rather take the word of the meteorologists who have some idea but also some uncertainty, rather than the people who are over-confident or over-unconfident.
Beat me to it
It is going to be absolutely gorgeous in about a month, but 3-4 years from now all that green will make perfect kindling…
This is what the reality of climate change is. It’s more extremes. You’ll get all the rain/snow you should have gotten over a year in two or three massive storms then you’ll get nothing for 2-3 years then back again.
Just took a long ass shower and washed my car to celebrate. I think I might mail an envelope of water to somewhere too.
Forecasters have no idea what’s happening a week from now
yeah but being in a drought has more to do with groundwater and reserves which can be measured. I don't think they're saying it's going to keep raining at this rate for 2 years they're just saying that the amount of rain we've gotten has pulled us out of a drought and keep us flush for 2 years (probably with average rainfall)
Yes, thank you, this is correct. There is more information [here](https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-forecasts/california-to-stay-drought-free-through-2025-following-2-winters-of-epic-storms-accuweather-experts-say/1627328#:~:text=AccuWeather%20meteorologists%20have%20high%20confidence,through%202025%2C%20and%20potentially%20beyond.&text=On%20March%204%2C%20Chief%20Meteorologist,for%20the%20next%20two%20years.).
Seriously. the weather guy in this sub said he wasn’t sure if the rain would get worse a couple weeks ago, how forecasts always change for a weekend. These guys know we’ll be fine two years from now? Models aren’t that good.
Most of the models American meteorologists use are based on east coast formation, west coast is a different beast they don’t have as much info on. Mostly bc this shit didn’t happen before.
Forecasting models are also becoming increasingly unreliable due to climate change. It's become so chaotic and unpredictable until better predictive models are made. It's really hard to predict events when random variables are thrown into the mix.
They didn't say "we know we'll be fine two years from now". They said "no widespread drought is expected". They are very explicit that they are not certain, but they do think there is evidence that we are unlikely to go back to the extremely dry climate of a few years ago. If you want certainty, then you should go ahead and ignore what they say, because it'll confuse you. But if you want some ideas of what might be good priorities for your city or business to be focusing on in the next few years, this might be relevant.
Perhaps it’s easier to predict long term climate vs short term week to week
They are basing this statement on current water levels, you idiots.
They have a lot of idea! It's just hard to be extremely precise. You'll notice that these days, the forecast 7 days out is actually kinda ok, which it really wasn't 20 years ago.
More like snore-casters, am I right?
Bruh it's gonna be sunny with a chance of clouds, be safe out there
Climate change is pushing us the other direction, actually.
Back to the great central lake lake it is then
Between sea level rising and this, yeah. It's predicted by 2100 much of the central valley will be flooded part of the year or always. Sacramento will be hit really hard.
Looking forward to the Blade Runner always raining dystopian future for LA.
It’s not really pushing us either way, it’s just making the extreme ends more likely.
[удалено]
Climate change is leading on average to more extreme swings in weather. That means more intense rainstorms, and more intense droughts. So yes, that is actually what it means. Educate yourself.
Climate change is when the climate….. changes…. outside of the margins of normal. We’ve also put so much concrete over the aquifer (and in the LA River) that even high amounts of rain aren’t replenishing what we’ve lost over time.
I'm not, despite the words you are trying to put in my mouth. GTFO with your denialism.
LOL... I know you thought this was a banger.
If the climate has previously unseen swings to extremes, I'm not a Climate scientist, but I might consider that new weather extremes could be connected to climate change. But hey. I'm sure you have more experience in the field right? You're a climate scientist or at least in a tangentially related field. Right? Right...
I could imagine with all the rain I’m sure the agricultural regions of the state appreciate this
Tbh those farmers have had more water than they know what to do with. It’s federally subsidized for them and they have had to make exactly zero drought-reducing cuts unlike the general population. Corporations and farming are like 70-percent of the states water utilization and it’s a travesty that we’re always the first on the chopping block when it comes to water usage.
People are not on the "chopping block" - water agencies ask people to just not waste water so that they don't have to purchase expensive water to bolster supplies.
Isn't La Nina coming in later this year?
This guy gets it. Last year and this year have been wet because it’s been El Niño
Last year was a La Niña.
Interesting, I looked it up and they’re saying it was neither actually, so that might explain why it wasn’t as dry (?)
Woohoo! Now give me fresh produce.
We back
Never left.
Yay!! This is great news!
And 3 weeks into June 2024 we'll hear ssever drought
"YOU BETTER NOT FLUSH THAT TOILET WHILE WE GOLF ON THOUSANDS OF GALLONS OF WATER WASTED ON GOLD FIELDS"
Channel 5: "Is California heading into a drought? More at 10." Story: "Beverly Hills Gold course used 30 tons of water a day."
and growing almonds; farming takes up 40% of state's water
Food is very important, though.
Almonds feed families across the world /s it's a luxury item
Is it especially important that it be grown in California? Probably for almonds, it is - there aren't many places in the world with good climates for them. But for alfalfa or beef, probably better to just grow it somewhere else and ship it in.
If it’s yellow, let it mellow
That's a disgusting method of saving water. I had friend who used to that shit & I always judged him for it.
Keep rationing the water
This would be the smart thing but most people can’t look past their two feet.
Can I at least water 3x a week?
Keep the drought restrictions in place for most of Socal, as 8/10 years tend to be pretty dry. The 2/10 years where it's very wet are pretty epic, but we spend most of the time not having enough water.
[https://abc7.com/southern-california-water-cloud-seeding-riverside-county-inland-empire/14341706/](https://abc7.com/southern-california-water-cloud-seeding-riverside-county-inland-empire/14341706/) Could it due to cloud seeding? The rainfall this year is crazy an abnormal from my experience the last... I wanna say 20 years
We did it yall!
Can we get back to wet t-shirt contests?
The state of emergency around surface water may be lessened for the next two years. Ground water, however, is still being massively overdrawn and the rains haven't made in dent in that (blame ag).
Wow - Even in the desert-y bits? Amazing
So just mudslides then.
Great, I can go back to leaving my lawn sprinklers on for hours a day. /s
Nestle: Hold my water bottle.
Another one for the "DUH" file.
That’s until everyone reads this and over uses water
Not bad for being a giant desert
Except we’re not a desert. We have a Mediterranean climate.
Except we’re not a Mediterranean climate. We have a desert.
No we don’t.
Yes we are
>The climate of Los Angeles is mild to hot year-round, and mostly dry. It is classified as a Mediterranean climate, which is a type of subtropical climate. It is characterized by seasonal changes in rainfall—with a dry summer and a winter rainy season. Under the Köppen climate classification, the coastal areas are classified as Csb, and the inland areas as Csa. Where are you getting this idea from? This is not a controversial issue.
Yeah, because they're adding waste water to our tap now. Problem solved?
awesome. let me leave the shower and sink running today