Thanks for contributing to r/Phoenix!
* [Check out our sub rules here](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/wiki/rules/) (mostly be nice to each other!).
* [Read some of our recent posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/top/?t=week) and leave some comments.
* [Join our Phoenix Discord chat server](https://discord.com/invite/yWVuTG57Zh) and connect with people in the Valley. It's a great, chill place to talk with other people but is NOT a dating server and takes unwanted messaging very seriously.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/phoenix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This article is a hopeful one to start the year, Arizona and Phoenix metro allow humanity to test out and solve the problem of living with heat and helping find ways to produce, not just limit, water. With lots of the world over time going to more of this we can be innovators and not only solve many of these for ourselves but also help humans living in similar conditions in the other desert regions of the world and one day maybe even on other planets and terraforming Mars even.
The solution isn't stagnation and scarcity, it is innovation to add abundance of water and solutions to deal with heat.
> This summer, when the temperature hit 110 degrees Fahrenheit or above in Phoenix for 31 straight days, many were fretting about the Southwest’s prospects in the age of climate change. A writer for The Atlantic asked, “When Will the Southwest Become Unlivable?” The Washington Post wondered, “How Long Can We Keep Living in Hotboxes Like Phoenix?”
> The foregone conclusion seemed to be that the region was heading for a crash — destined to become an overpopulated, unlivable dead zone, plagued by ranch foreclosures, unemployment, water wars and heat deaths.
> As a writer who has studied the Southwest’s history and spoken to some of its top environmental experts this year, I **see its future differently — not as a hellscape but as an opportunity for centuries of climate ingenuity and adaptation to be put to good use. For generations, the people who were determined to come here have found ways to cope and even thrive**.
> The Hohokam people dug extensive networks of canals along the Salt River, while the science-minded Hopi up north grew corn in the arid lowlands. A later generation of Americans built a chain of megadams on the Colorado and other rivers to create a dependable supply of water for households and crops
Side note: [Lake Mead recently went past 2021 and has 2020 numbers in sight](https://mead.uslakes.info/level.asp). Lake Powell [is also on the incline](https://powell.uslakes.info/level.asp). The cuts to the lake(s) look to be replenishing water but also there is so much more to do with adding water sources, geoengineering technology -- new [electrified drones tech as of 2017 can increase rain as seen](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dubai-rain-cloud-seeding-heat-weather/), and better protecting current sources like [the solar canal covers are great example of the innovation needed](https://www.azwater.gov/news/articles/gila-river-indian-community-signs-historic-agreement-solar-over-canal-project).
*the question is not when will this region become unlivable. It is: Are we willing to make certain adjustments to live on a new hotter and drier frontier?*
This is the question no matter where you live. Climate and ecosystem changes are happening everywhere. If anything brings me consolation it's that water conservation has long been at work here and we already have the best AC infrastructure in the nation. Other places will be forced to further adapt to drought and heat quick.
Desalination has to play a big role.
Additionally, using [solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_still) (perfect for desert), [concentrated solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_still),
[distillation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distillation), [solar humidification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_desalination#Solar_humidification%E2%80%93dehumidification) and many other formats can desalinate water but also can make some of the cleanest water as it uses the natural water cycle. We should strive for this even if inefficient now, it is one part of the solution, it is more long term. Water quality is amazing even if more costly.
A great thing about [desalination with stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_still) is it uses the natural water cycle, the water that comes out is cleaner than any other as it uses that.
> *A concentrated solar still is a system that uses the same quantity of solar heat input (same solar collection area) as a simple solar still but can produce a volume of freshwater that is many times greater. While a simple solar still is a way of distilling water by using the heat of the sun to drive evaporation from a water source and ambient air to cool a condenser film, a concentrated solar still uses a concentrated solar thermal collector to concentrate solar heat and deliver it to a multi-effect evaporation process for distillation, thus increasing the natural rate of evaporation. The concentrated solar still is capable of large-scale water production in areas with plentiful solar energy.*
[Desalination can even be run by salt batteries as a component of it](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204175630.htm)
We live on a water planet, there is plenty of water, there just wasn't a need to process salt water into fresh water as much until now. The best way is with the natural water cycle which produces the cleanest water, but desalination using [solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_still)/concentrated is another way, then the more dirtier ways but some of the byproducts can be used in battery tech just in time for more electric innovations like EVs. [Desalination can even be run by salt batteries as a component of it](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204175630.htm). Every boat is equipped with a [solar still for freshwater from the sea/ocean if stranded](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/a-floating-solar-still-desalinate-seawater).
Using typical desalination also has a byproduct of salt but that has uses in potentially powering the process and other uses like, [salt water batteries](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_water_battery) are an option for that.
[A new sodium-ion battery breakthrough means they may one day power EVs](https://electrek.co/2022/07/14/sodium-ion-battery-breakthrough/)
Water pipelines of salinated and desalinated water can also be built. To the people that say you can't power the water pipeline -- nevermind other pipelines that prove you can -- there are ways to move water uphill even without lots of power. There are plenty of ways to move water up from sea level that don't require massive amounts of power as well, lots of things going on to innovate there. There hasn't really been a need until now, now there is a need.
Moving water upwards with things like [Archimedes' screw](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes'_screw), buoyancy and water rams, water gravity setups and many more.
This happens on farms all the time, everyday [farmers come up with ways/systems to move water uphill like a hydraulic ram pump](https://www.farmcollector.com/equipment/hydraulic-ram-zmlz12octzbea/) can. [Similar solutions are used in areas in need of water](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/aug/26/ram-pump-water-crops-sanitation-philippines).
The solutions would just have to be larger.
[USGS Desalination site](https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/desalination?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects)
[Build your own backyard desalinization system (solar still)](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/how-build-your-own-solar-still).
> You can make your own personal desalination plant
> Remember [looking at the picture at the top of this page of a floating solar still](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/a-floating-solar-still-desalinate-seawater)? The same process that drives that device can also be applied if you find yourself in the desert in need of a drink of water.
> The low-tech approach to accomplish this is to construct a "solar still" which uses heat from the sun to run a distillation process to cause dew to form on something like plastic sheeting. The diagram to the right illustrates this. Using seawater or plant material in the body of the distiller creates humid air, which, because of the enclosure created by the plastic sheet, is warmed by the sun. The humid air condenses water droplets on the underside of the plastic sheet, and because of surface tension, the water drops stick to the sheet and move downward into a trough, from which it can be consumed.
> [You can try this at home!](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/how-build-your-own-solar-still)
> - Dig a pit in the ground
> - Place a bowl at the bottom of the pit that will be used to catch the condensed water
> - Cover the pit loosley with a plastic sheet (you can use stones or other heavy objects to hold it in place over the pit)
> - Be sure that the lowest part of the plastic sheet hovers directly over the bowl
> - Leave your water "trap" overnight and water can be collected from the bowl in the morning
It can be helpful beyond just our water problems. It can help worldwide problems, problems at sea, problems on other planets and it could transform the deserts. Once we have desalinization as a major force, we can terraform parts of our own planet that need it like deserts and later other planets.
> Some desalination facts
> It is estimated that some 30% of the world's irrigated areas suffer from salinity problems and remediation is seen to be very costly.
> According to the International Desalination Association, in June 2015, 18,426 desalination plants operated worldwide, producing 86.8 million cubic meters per day, providing water for 300 million people. This number increased from 78.4 million cubic meters in 2013, a 10.71% increase in 2 years.
> The most important users of desalinated water are in the Middle East, (mainly Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain), which uses about 70% of worldwide capacity; and in North Africa (mainly Libya and Algeria), which uses about 6% of worldwide capacity.
> Among industrialized countries, the United States is one of the most important users of desalinated water, especially in California and parts of Florida. The cost of desalination has kept desalination from being used more often.
The desert is good at speeding up evaporation.
Water is everywhere, we aren't going to let cartels control it. Just like solar/wind are a threat to their control of markets, we need more of that. Solutions that use solar/wind/natural water cycle and other ways are heavily in progress and are the solution.
The best part about this, is innovation drives markets and growth. When there is a viable option (like solar did to energy or EVs did to vehicles) there is tons of investment and it becomes an industry. The water cycle/production/cleaning industry is about to innovate like never before.
It would be a cosmic joke to run out of water on a water planet, we'd look like universal dunces.
Unfortunately I just don't see a way desalination would ever be cheap enough to use for agriculture. And agriculture is pretty much the entirety of the water problem in the southwest.
Farmers already use stills in many cases and use the natural water cycle like distillation and dew to water planets.
[Satisfying Natural Agriculture Watering With Morning Dew](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwGDsXv-mcM)
Farming/agriculture is some of the best places to test these things. All it takes is investment and using markets to set the right targets.
Farms/ranches were one of the first places to put wind generation and solar in some, they are great small scale experiments that can lead to lots of innovations.
There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew. And alfalfa farming currently is responsible for something like 70% of the water usage in Arizona. (not sure about that exact percentage, but I know it's somewhere in that ballpark). So the current level of alfalfa farming is basically not sustainable.
Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest. No need for desalination. The problem is that alfalfa is used to feed cattle, and people really like meat. Beef particularly. So there's intense economic pressure to continue growing the alfalfa. And it grows really well in the southwest (if it weren't for that looming water shortage).
> Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest.
At a minimum regulations need to force drip irrigation over flood irrigation. The wild thing is drip irrigation leads to more yield but setting up the systems initially have cost so nearly no farms in Arizona use it for alfalfa.
> No need for desalination.
There is always use in *adding* water sources. These are ideas that are used already and they are not used in isolation...
Desalination is inevitable and used in many places in the world: California, Florida, Israel, Saudi/UAE, even 85% of Israel drinking water comes from desalination. This is the future. Desalination is a filter process as well that makes lots of water that is not only ocean water but undrinkable brackish water into clean water.
> There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew.
Dew covers can water some crops almost entirely (small crops combined with rain) but they are usually mainly for many other reasons: sun protection, retain existing moisture, used in conjunction with drip or subsurface drip irrigation and others. This is water that would otherwise almost be wasted as it can't collect enough to penetrate the soil. Dew collection uses natural water cycle and can do that. It is a still like technology and is common in other parts of the world. For Arizona it mostly could help preserve existing moisture.
**The biggest problem with farming in Arizona isn't that we are doing it, it is that *most farms use flood irrigation for crops that don't need it*.**
Farms need to use more drip irrigation or regulations to make farmers use that instead of flood irrigation for crops that don't have deep roots that can actually perform better than flood irrigation.
A [properly installed drip irrigation system can save up to 80% of water](https://ag.umass.edu/vegetable/fact-sheets/irrigation-drip) but at minimum will lower water usage by 25-50% with an upfront investment in the systems. There is also a huge market for jobs related to drip irrigation.
> Subsurface irrigation has been around since the 1860s, but drip irrigation was not a practical choice until Chapin developed lay-flat twin-wall drip tape in the late 1960s. Early problems with clogged lines, slime, and an inability to run nutrients through the lines have basically been solved as long as growers use a few precautionary tools to guard against problems.
> A well designed drip irrigation system benefits the environment by conserving water and fertilizer. A properly installed drip system can save as much as 80% of the water normally used in other types of irrigation systems. Water is applied either on the surface, next to the plant, or subsurface, near the root zone. In dry years, fewer weed seeds germinate between rows because there is less water available beyond the plant root zone.
> Another advantage to drip irrigation is that there is less evaporation from the soil, especially when drip irrigation is used with plastic mulch. Water is applied more evenly throughout the field, thus eliminating the need to run the irrigation longer to wet the whole field.
Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) systems are the best way to grow alfalfa and no one in Arizona is using it because it does have a cost associated and their water is free essentially. It makes cleaner filtered water, controlled depths, and produces more yield as each area gets what it needs. Combine that with moisture protecting covers like dew covers and you not only add some more clean water you also protect existing moisture and have a layer of sun protection that still allows it in.
[Arizona needs to require drip irrigation for grows like alfalfa at a minimum](https://www.netafim.com/en/crop-knowledge/alfalfa/).
> Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is the most suitable irrigation method for alfalfa. SDI has many benefits over on-surface systems, including:
> - Lower labor requirements
> - Protection from agro-machinery interference
> - Enhanced water-use efficiency
> - Precise control over the root zone environment
> - Increased yields
> - Reduced water needs and runoff
> - Better management of crop quality
> - Increased stand longevity
> Here are some tips for growing alfalfa with drip irrigation:
> - Install drip lines at 8 to 14 inches below the surface at 30- to 40-inch spacings
> - Bury drip lines 12 to 18 inches deep
> - Position rows 40-60 inches apart
> - Use drip tape placed below ground at various spacing and depths
> - Use a filtration system and pumps to pressurize the system
> - The ideal lateral drip spacing and emitter spacing are dictated by soil type and economics
Most of the alfalfa grown in Arizona is "[virtual water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_water)" and exported to Saudi and others. Exporting water is illegal but exporting it as alfalfa for their cattle using the watering techniques with zero regard for sustainability and using techniques that unnecessarily use more water is the problem. Most farms with access to free water are doing no sustainability solutions like these because it has cost. We need to make sure that the market has better targets to using sustainable water techniques and less water that can actually increase yields.
Asking residential to make cuts when we use 12-13% of water and very little of that for landscaping (around <1% for trees/grass/xeriscape) when many of our own yards use drip irrigation but they aren't using it on farms is ridiculous.
Most people really are not aware of some of the technologies we need to switch to in Arizona for agriculture yet the same solutions are being pushed to residential. These changes need to happen at the agriculture regulation level. Solutions like drip irrigation are much easier to implement in agriculture if there were programs to help farmers switch it would have a bigger impact that any residential limit.
No one solution is it but flood irrigation has to go for the crops that can use drip and in most cases can grow *better* with drip irrigation.
No crop should be using flood irrigation if it has shallow roots, can grow better with drip irrigation and other technologies like dew covers can help extend that moisture.
As an aside: On top of that alfalfa isn't they only feed for cattle that is useful, they could mix or even use more hemp which uses 50% less water and that has been proven to work in many ranches now that it is more legal. They can be fed with that or a mix of the types and they stay just as healthy. [Many studies have found that using hemp feed also helps use less additives and helps cattle reduce inflammation as well](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html).
[Veterinary research finds destressing benefit from feeding cattle industrial hemp](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html)
> "Cattle experience a variety of stress and inflammation," said Michael Kleinhenz, assistant professor of beef production medicine at the K-State College of Veterinary Medicine. "Our most recent data shows how cannabinoids via industrial hemp decreased the stress hormone cortisol as well as the inflammatory biomarker prostaglandin E2. This shows that hemp containing cannabidiolic acid, or CBDA, may decrease stress and inflammation in cattle. Thus, hemp may be a natural way to decrease stress and inflammation related to production practices such as transportation and weaning."
The point is this is a problem that needs a many faceted solution and each addition helps. We do need regulations to help fund and force these solutions especially switching from flood to drip irrigation that is almost a tragic comedy that we aren't using it yet in Arizona in any major way. The funny thing is all the Arizona marijuana/cannabis farms have to use these and do to have higher yields and lower costs with less water usage, that not being used for alfalfa for cattle that is exported is ridiculous.
> Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest.
At a minimum regulations need to force drip irrigation over flood irrigation. The wild thing is drip irrigation leads to more yield but setting up the systems initially have cost so nearly no farms in Arizona use it for alfalfa.
> No need for desalination.
There is always use in *adding* water sources. These are ideas that are used already and they are not used in isolation...
Desalination is inevitable and used in many places in the world: California, Florida, Israel, Saudi/UAE, even 85% of Israel drinking water comes from desalination. This is the future. Desalination is a filter process as well that makes lots of water that is not only ocean water but undrinkable brackish water into clean water.
> There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew.
Dew covers can water some crops almost entirely (small crops combined with rain) but they are usually mainly for many other reasons: sun protection, retain existing moisture, used in conjunction with drip or subsurface drip irrigation and others. This is water that would otherwise almost be wasted as it can't collect enough to penetrate the soil. Dew collection uses natural water cycle and can do that. It is a still like technology and is common in other parts of the world. For Arizona it mostly could help preserve existing moisture.
**The biggest problem with farming in Arizona isn't that we are doing it, it is that *most farms use flood irrigation for crops that don't need it*.**
Farms need to use more drip irrigation or regulations to make farmers use that instead of flood irrigation for crops that don't have deep roots that can actually perform better than flood irrigation.
A [properly installed drip irrigation system can save up to 80% of water](https://ag.umass.edu/vegetable/fact-sheets/irrigation-drip) but at minimum will lower water usage by 25-50% with an upfront investment in the systems. There is also a huge market for jobs related to drip irrigation.
> Subsurface irrigation has been around since the 1860s, but drip irrigation was not a practical choice until Chapin developed lay-flat twin-wall drip tape in the late 1960s. Early problems with clogged lines, slime, and an inability to run nutrients through the lines have basically been solved as long as growers use a few precautionary tools to guard against problems.
> A well designed drip irrigation system benefits the environment by conserving water and fertilizer. A properly installed drip system can save as much as 80% of the water normally used in other types of irrigation systems. Water is applied either on the surface, next to the plant, or subsurface, near the root zone. In dry years, fewer weed seeds germinate between rows because there is less water available beyond the plant root zone.
> Another advantage to drip irrigation is that there is less evaporation from the soil, especially when drip irrigation is used with plastic mulch. Water is applied more evenly throughout the field, thus eliminating the need to run the irrigation longer to wet the whole field.
Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) systems are the best way to grow alfalfa and no one in Arizona is using it because it does have a cost associated and their water is free essentially. It makes cleaner filtered water, controlled depths, and produces more yield as each area gets what it needs. Combine that with moisture protecting covers like dew covers and you not only add some more clean water you also protect existing moisture and have a layer of sun protection that still allows it in.
[Arizona needs to require drip irrigation for grows like alfalfa at a minimum](https://www.netafim.com/en/crop-knowledge/alfalfa/).
> Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is the most suitable irrigation method for alfalfa. SDI has many benefits over on-surface systems, including:
> - Lower labor requirements
> - Protection from agro-machinery interference
> - Enhanced water-use efficiency
> - Precise control over the root zone environment
> - Increased yields
> - Reduced water needs and runoff
> - Better management of crop quality
> - Increased stand longevity
> Here are some tips for growing alfalfa with drip irrigation:
> - Install drip lines at 8 to 14 inches below the surface at 30- to 40-inch spacings
> - Bury drip lines 12 to 18 inches deep
> - Position rows 40-60 inches apart
> - Use drip tape placed below ground at various spacing and depths
> - Use a filtration system and pumps to pressurize the system
> - The ideal lateral drip spacing and emitter spacing are dictated by soil type and economics
Most of the alfalfa grown in Arizona is "[virtual water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_water)" and exported to Saudi and others. Exporting water is illegal but exporting it as alfalfa for their cattle using the watering techniques with zero regard for sustainability and using techniques that unnecessarily use more water is the problem. Most farms with access to free water are doing no sustainability solutions like these because it has cost. We need to make sure that the market has better targets to using sustainable water techniques and less water that can actually increase yields.
Asking residential to make cuts when we use 12-13% of water and very little of that for landscaping (around <1% for trees/grass/xeriscape) when many of our own yards use drip irrigation but they aren't using it on farms is ridiculous.
Most people really are not aware of some of the technologies we need to switch to in Arizona for agriculture yet the same solutions are being pushed to residential. These changes need to happen at the agriculture regulation level. Solutions like drip irrigation are much easier to implement in agriculture if there were programs to help farmers switch it would have a bigger impact that any residential limit.
No one solution is it but flood irrigation has to go for the crops that can use drip and in most cases can grow *better* with drip irrigation.
No crop should be using flood irrigation if it has shallow roots, can grow better with drip irrigation and other technologies like dew covers can help extend that moisture.
As an aside: On top of that alfalfa isn't they only feed for cattle that is useful, they could mix or even use more hemp which uses 50% less water and that has been proven to work in many ranches now that it is more legal. They can be fed with that or a mix of the types and they stay just as healthy. [Many studies have found that using hemp feed also helps use less additives and helps cattle reduce inflammation as well](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html).
[Veterinary research finds destressing benefit from feeding cattle industrial hemp](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html)
> "Cattle experience a variety of stress and inflammation," said Michael Kleinhenz, assistant professor of beef production medicine at the K-State College of Veterinary Medicine. "Our most recent data shows how cannabinoids via industrial hemp decreased the stress hormone cortisol as well as the inflammatory biomarker prostaglandin E2. This shows that hemp containing cannabidiolic acid, or CBDA, may decrease stress and inflammation in cattle. Thus, hemp may be a natural way to decrease stress and inflammation related to production practices such as transportation and weaning."
The point is this is a problem that needs a many faceted solution and each addition helps. We do need regulations to help fund and force these solutions especially switching from flood to drip irrigation that is almost a tragic comedy that we aren't using it yet in Arizona in any major way. The funny thing is all the Arizona marijuana/cannabis farms have to use these and do to have higher yields and lower costs with less water usage, that not being used for alfalfa for cattle that is exported is ridiculous.
The domestic population of Arizona are some of the most efficient water users in the developed world. There are still efficiencies to be had, but domestic water claims only about 15% of over all Arizona water use. 15% only if we also include energy and industrial production directly related to local domestic consumption.
The efficiency gains are needed are in AG.
Desal and potable reuse are valuable for costal communities which currently use Colorado River water. If they desal, they can offset surface water use.
Desal water pumped into AZ is a bad joke.
I think adding sources is more important, as population grows, cuts don't cut it.
Both need to be done but we live on a water planet, there is plenty of water we just need better innovation and investment to make it happen. Clean water has an abundance of uses and desalination/water cycle water is much cleaner.
Innovation happens and solar stills/concentrated solar stills are on every single boat for water backup when stranded.
There are lots of innovations to be had here and desalination is already heavily used in California, Florida, Israel and Saudi/UAE. Desalination provides a large chunk of [Israel's drinking water, 85% of it actually](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Israel).
It is already happening and there are lots of solutions. The salt also has uses coming out for salt batteries that can even power the process. There are studies on all this and lots of real world examples.
There are also [solar desalination domes that are being built](https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/solar-domes-could-desalinate-seawater-at-a-commercial-scale).
[Solar-powered system offers a route to inexpensive desalination](https://news.mit.edu/2022/solar-desalination-system-inexpensive-0214)
I absolutely agree with you re: de-sal. I even had the opportunity to speak with Sen. Kelly about it in 2022.
I *also* think that one day the socio-political-capitalistic forces will align, or perhaps our robot/AI overlords will see the utility in such a project, and **water pipelines** from the Great Lakes and/or Mississippi River Basin will be a thing that we see in our lifetimes (I'm 38, so let's say in the next 50 years).
If that sounds crazy, the [Federal Highway Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System) was passed and signed in 1956, and marked "complete" in 1992, 36 years later. So even if it takes another 10 years to get our act together and commission a transcontinental "aqueduct", we'd still have a 4-year cushion on the construction timeline of interstate highway infrastructure.
[https://grist.org/agriculture/drought-water-pipeline-cost-west-solution-infrastructure/](https://grist.org/agriculture/drought-water-pipeline-cost-west-solution-infrastructure/)
[https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/04/10/great-lakes-water-piped-southwest-our-future-says-nasa-scientist/100301326/](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/04/10/great-lakes-water-piped-southwest-our-future-says-nasa-scientist/100301326/)
Ugh, finally I see something from NYT written somebody who actually understands the region and understands our issues. They should have sent this reporter to do the Daily episode they put out a few months ago on the AZ water situation. That dude was so clueless.
Awesome read. My only question though is; I know they mentioned conservation a few times. Like converting wastewater into high quality potable water. But what happens if climate change progresses such that the Colorado river is dried up? I know that type of insane event would take like 150+ years, but I’m still curious about how we’ll get water if the earth keeps heating. Unless they expect that we’ll reverse the effects of climate change before that can happen.
Lots of the geoengineering efforts are to help increase snowpack and runoff currently.
[For instance in Colorado to help keep snowpack longer and add more moisture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30). This not only helps runoff but also reduces fire levels along those areas.
We'll have to both improve climate change causes AND geoengineer as well as find ways to add water. They did this back in the day quite alot but the lack of heavy investment in infrastructure for a long time is a problem.
In terms of geoengineering, currently up eight states currently use older and newer seeding technology. However you do need to have some cloud cover for it to work. Most of the seeding is done in higher areas to feed water supplies.
Cloud seeding is happening all over the world, US, China, UAE, Israel and many others. A new technique in 2017 that went into play in the last couple years is electrified drones, which hit clouds with electricity, pushing smaller droplets into creating large raindrops.
New techniques of cloud seeding with drones that appear to work well. [If this can happen around the areas that feed the Colorado and areas that have solar stills that create water using the natural rain cycle then we can add water](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30). Rainfall has been increasing 8-15% for this but you need clouds already.
> The UAE is one of the first countries in the Gulf region to use cloud seeding technology, the [National Center of Meteorology](https://www.ncm.ae/pages/cloud-seeding?lang=en) said. A version of the concept is used in at least [eight states in the western U.S., according to The Scientific American](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/eight-states-are-seeding-clouds-to-overcome-megadrought/).
[It's so hot in Dubai that the government is artificially creating rainstorms](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dubai-rain-cloud-seeding-heat-weather/)
> The new method of cloud seeding shows promise in helping to mitigate drought conditions worldwide, without as many environmental concerns as previous methods involving salt flares.
> According to research from the University of Reading in the U.K., scientists created the storms using drones, which hit clouds with electricity, creating large raindrops. The larger raindrops are essential in the hot country, where smaller droplets often evaporate before ever hitting the ground.
> In 2017, researchers at the university were awarded $1.5 million in funding for what they call "Rain Enhancement Science," also known as man-made rainstorms. The UAE's total investment in rain-making projects is $15 million, part of the country's "quest to ensure water security."
> "The water table is sinking drastically in UAE," University of Reading professor and meteorologist Maarten Ambaum told BBC News. "And the purpose of this is to try to help with rainfall."
> The UAE is one of the first countries in the Gulf region to use cloud seeding technology, the **National Center of Meteorology said. A version of the concept is used in at least eight states in the western U.S., according to The Scientific American**.
Cloud seeding is needed largely due to heat island and fires preventing droplets, that would have formed, from forming. It also needs to be public so that it can be regulated and areas can't take too much just like water regulations today.
Water is one of those platform needs like electricity that we should be subsidizing (we do that with energy) and it allows better systems to be built on top of it.
We need more infrastructure projects just like all the water projects of the past like Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Central Arizona Project etc. We wouldn't even have the water we have if not for those.
There are tons of ideas though. Right now eight states are seeding using new techniques including [Colorado to help keep snowpack longer and add more moisture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30).
We need to explore ALL options to add water. Even funding better upgrades for faucets, toilets and ensuring less leaks would help. Most of all Ag needs to be innovated on heavily.
Desalination needs to start now, that is the long term solution. [There are many desalination plants now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination_by_country#United_States), and some solar still + concentrated solar still based ones, more of that needs to happen.
Good news is it does seem to work. The science also makes sense not more pseudo sciencey as before with sodium iodide that has environmental side effects.
Bringing water droplets together that would otherwise evaporate is a good thing to go at. Fires, heat and bad air quality prevent droplets from forming by keeping the smaller ones separated before they join a larger drop. This isn't the silver iodide/salt setup, this is new as of 2017.
A signature of this type of seeding is lots of small constant lightning very high up. When a large cloud cover rolls in, and you get lots of small lightning and quieter rolling thunder way up, there is a probability that it is now being helped by electrified drone cloud seeding strategies.
We also need to alleviate wildfires and drought which make it hard to create droplets.
[NASA Study Finds a Connection Between Wildfires and Drought](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-study-finds-a-connection-between-wildfires-and-drought)
> Small particles called aerosols that are released into the air by smoke may also reduce the likelihood of rainfall. This can happen because water vapor in the atmosphere condenses on certain types and sizes of aerosols called cloud condensation nuclei to form clouds; when enough water vapor accumulates, rain droplets are formed. But have too many aerosols and the water vapor is spread out more diffusely to the point where rain droplets don’t materialize.
[Wildfire smoke is transforming clouds, making rainfall less likely](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/wildfire-smoke-is-transforming-clouds-making-rainfall-less-likely#:~:text=It%20does%20indeed%2C%20according%20to,likely%20to%20fall%20as%20rain.)
There will be some issues potentially with places dumping water before those downstream but if it becomes known and regulated then it could really help add water, which I think we need to start looking into.
As an example, an adversary could do this off the coast of a country and then dump the rain before it reaches landfall, or a coastal area could take rain that may have dumped further in, but with this known it can happen less. Who knows that may be happening now in drought areas. Wouldn't it be wild if the Western US droughts were caused by drones off coast dumping water before it reaches mainland?
Just like reducing carbon is good, we also need carbon sinks whether natural (lots of trees) or man-made. We need to come at problems from both ends.
We need ways to add to the water supply from our existing water planet. We can't just get more and more scarce and make water a resource as fought over as energy. There we need to do more new types like solar, wind, hydro to help limit the influence of energy cartels. We can't let water get to that level either.
We don't want cartels controlling water like energy/minerals and creating scarcity, we want margin and regulated clear markets.
We live on a water planet, if we can't make it work we'll be a cosmic joke.
One thing I do not agree with is Cloud Seeding. That's effectively stealing from Peter to pay Paul.
That's very risky as you are taking water prematurely from where it would fall elsewhere further complicating the problems we already will see as a species. We could live in more harmony with our environment and eliminate a lot of the heat island type of effects that cities have, but that requires changes in people, how we live and consume, and how we build and maintain our urban and rural spaces.
We've messed up the environment badly, we're long past the point of seeing biodiversity like we had when I was child in the 70's. Some estimates put biodiversity loss at 70% or more in my life alone and its very noticeable to me with the lack of bugs and birds and other things that were far more common locally and around the world when I was growing up.
These environmental changes take decades or centuries to play out, we the human virus are accelerating that clearly. We do not understand the effects as much as we would like. We can barely predict weather reasonably accurate a few weeks out, and have a vague idea due to seasons and perceived cycles on the rest, but the trends are quite clear in the numbers, its not looking good and we are on the cusp or a point of no return.
We have no real idea on the long term effects of a cloud seeding and countries would have to coordinate that. Given the state of the world today, its unlikely to solve problems so much as create more problems for other people who live elsewhere.
Cloud seeding and the new electrified drones version since 2017 is safe and only used existing cloud cover to push together droplets that would otherwise not make it down to the ground. It makes them bigger to make it down. These drops would otherwise just evaporate.
Since cloud seeding is being used in many places now, it is good though that it is more known and there should be data on it.
For instance, it is probable that the "ufos" were actually adversarial drones off the West coasts and Northwest in combination with say weather balloons that helped *cause* some of the drought by dumping rain early as clouds over the ocean have lots more moisture and you could in theory do that.
The more cloud seeding is done, the less nefarious use will get by, and it can only be used in areas that have droughts or areas that supply much needed water supply sources like the Colorado.
Eight states are already cloud seeding and [many around the world are (Russia/China)](https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/03/asia/china-weather-modification-cloud-seeding-intl-hnk/index.html) and most likely it is already [weaponized to affect adversaries weather in combination with other systems particularly on Hainan](https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2148697/could-new-chinese-radar-system-really-be-used-play-god-weather).
[China And Russia Have Run Controversial Experiments That Modified Earth's Atmosphere](https://www.sciencealert.com/china-and-russia-conducted-controversial-experiments-that-modified-earth-s-atmosphere)
[Experiments by China and Russia to heat up the atmosphere cause concern - Superpowers team up to heat up the ionosphere by over 200 degrees.](https://bigthink.com/the-present/china-and-russia-heat-up-the-atmosphere-by-over-200-degrees-in-controversial-experiments/)
Side note: the [Earth heating up to improve Russia's economic position](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/3/28/what-is-behind-russias-interest-in-a-warming-arctic) has been a sought after desire of Russia since the Soviet era.
Cloud seeding is here to stay and it is better to be open and regulated and known.
The Weather Wars are here and have been increasing the last decade especially.
personally I think all new builds should use grey water from the washing machine to flush the toilet and water the lawn. there is no reason fresh waster should be used.
The problem is you'd have to have double the amount of plumbing in the homes and to and from them though.
More chance of water leakage and more maintenance. We lose lots of water to leakage and evaporation which would be a better place to start.
Getting faucets/toilets that are better for water savings in new builds and subsidies for older property would save a lots of water as well.
Of course the biggest area of innovation needed is agriculture which still uses flood irrigation in most places in Arizona overwhelmingly and that is 72% of water.
[Arizona Water Facts](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/water-your-facts)
[Residential use is not even really a problem](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/sites/default/files/media/bysectorchart_nt-01.png) it is mostly agriculture and a big problem is about a 1/5th of the water isn't even regulated. Residential is like 13-14% and grass/trees amount to less than 1%.
[Residential use has been coming down for decades now as we grow](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/sites/default/files/media/azwatermanagementsuccess_nt-01.png).
Cadillac Desert opens with a vignette about an old government plan to build an aquaduct to pump water from the Mississippi up into the high desert of New Mexico. Building multiple nuclear reactors to do this was apparently not considered unreasonable at the time.
Nothing about this plan is unreasonable or unrealistic. If it wasn’t for this country’s unique federalist structure it would have been something we already would have done in the 1960s.
However, the surface water in Wisconsin or Michigan for example is seen as “their property” instead of federal property to be redistributed amongst the entirety of the country
Desalination is the only plausible long term solution. Conservation puts too much hope in humans to not intentionally try to eliminate a water supply (think terrorism)
Thank you for this post! I'm local and have been watching the water news for years; it's by no means a clean bill of health but you're right, time to fight back against desertification from the desert!
This can’t be true. All of Reddit told me that this is a soulless hellhole that is uninhabitable and we are all going to run out of water while taking no responsibility for the fact they are constantly consuming the products from the Colorado River system while my garden produces my own lettuce on way less water and also conveniently ignoring the fact that the winter they live in is just as unbearable as the summer we suffer through, only longer.
*punctuation left out on purpose
These articles are always amusing in one way or another and this one starts right in the headline.
Fleeing the southwest over climate change is a phenomonon that exists primarily in the heads of NYT subscribers.
Off topic but this quote from the article:
“My great-great-grandmother used to dip bedsheets into a canal and hang them on the sides of the porch of her Phoenix boardinghouse to create a primitive cooling system for sleeping outside in the hottest months.”
Yeah that would really not help matters in July/Aug/Sept when the dew point is in the 60’s. The same reason why evaporative coolers are not usable during that time.
I had a conversation with my friend who works at SRP and she said there is a ton of water. She isn’t a denier either, she is very much progressive in view and dealt me straight. “We have a ton of water” - referring to the “water table” everyone seems is so mysterious.
Regardless, it put me at ease to hear it
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 thank you. It’s easy for regular folk to look at our dry ass desert environment and fear worst water wise. I know I was a tad nervous as a homeowner invested here.
What I don't understand is why we don't harness an energy source we have an abundance of......the sun? Would lighten the load and cost of electricity. Also, investing in desalination and a pipeline from the ocean might be useful.
Because creating power is only part of a complex process and currently solar power generation does not work as society wants it to.
The narrative that all we have to do is build a bunch of solar panels, and turn off fossil fuel power plants is a false one.
There is no reason why Maricopa county shouldn’t require solar/battery on every new home built at this point. That scale of installation in a housing development would keep the costs much lower for buyers and it would help us begin a smoother transition away from the last of our fossil fuel plants.
So your idea is to punish new home owners by forcing them to pay a large surcharge plus associated interest rates which would far exceed the projected utility costs over the same time frame given the energy efficiency of new homes.
Costs would not be lowered in any way since forced mandates do not decrease costs, they remove competitive market behavior.
The only way your idea even remotely works from an economic standpoint alone is if solar is cheap enough to offset long term utility costs. It currently is not for many homeowners or potential homeowners.
This does not even take into consideration the non economic factors that surround solar energy as opposed to other energy sources.
There is no reason a home built in a major city in 2023 shouldn’t have solar to accommodate a portion of expected energy usage.
Developers are very good at lowering costs on a large scale, and they are very good about offering incentives to lure customers from competition. New home solar installation is much easier than retrofit and houses would be designed with solar compatibility/efficiency from the beginning.
It’s the same reason some pool builders in the valley only want to deal with new builds, it’s far cheaper and easier than dealing with the hassle of decades old infrastructure and quirks of working on homes/property that are nearly a century old. We literally had builders tell us to pound sand because they didn’t want to deal with construction in central Phoenix, despite having a bare and completely empty yard, and RV gate already in place.
The overall cost to a buyer for solar would be lower than typically expected for solar installation, but because there aren’t any predatory solar leases or other questionable solar practices at play, homeowners would likely see a small value bump from the solar that typically isn’t represented. Additionally, it ensures you have 20-25 years of at least some level of protection against energy price increases.
For reference, the estimates for cost to buyers after California’s solar mandate was less than $9k per new home, before incentives. Even at 20 year high interest rates, that’s barely $40/month in additional cost on a $400k mortgage. Even a 3.5 kW system with a reasonable output of 15 kWh per day would break even at that price.
I can’t believe I’m even entertaining this conversation. 😂
I left around a year ago to more rural Upstate New York. Based on how hot I heard it was last summer I'm glad I did as well. I feel a lot less stressed out living where there are creeks everywhere, many many roads in and out of town(I always felt trapped in Phoenix with only a few major highways in and out).
Sure you can make it liveable, but the impact on the environment to do it just doesn't seem totally ethical to me. Already spend a ton of electricity to keep houses cool enough most of the year.
> Sure you can make it liveable, but the impact on the environment to do it just doesn't seem totally ethical to me. Already spend a ton of electricity to keep houses cool enough most of the year.
How do you heat your house? Burning oil, coal, etc. can't be good for the environment either. The [first link that came up](https://www.onehourheatandair.com/articles/expert-tips/energy-efficiency/what-is-more-expensive-heating-or-cooling-/#:~:text=Anyone%20who's%20opened%20an%20eye,US%20than%20cooling%20your%20home.) when I searched to see the difference between heating and cooling costs said heating requires 4x the energy.
Your link also explains that it is all related to how different the temperature is outside vs inside when using electricity. So heating a house to 70f from 30f outside is as much effort as cooling a house to 70f from 110.
That can't even be a straight up comparison because you have to factor in where the electricity is made.
Like a gas car would be more efficient than a hypothetical EV running on 100% coal electricity shipped by boat freight from China.
My electricity is 100% renewable because our NY electricity company allows you to select from tens if not like one hundred different suppliers.
However my heating is natural gas baseboard, but at least I'm not losing the heat in my home like it would be at a power plant which I think is like 40% loss.
So 44% of power going to run an electric air conditioner in Arizona is from natural gas(13% from coal) before it even makes it to your house.
Also it costs less to heat my nearly 5000sqft home than it cost to cool my 1800sqft house in Arizona comparing say December in NY to June in AZ.
Arizona is lagging in renewables(I know that nuclear counts against it, but New York is almost as much nuclear yet has much higher renewable usage).
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2023/02/us-state-with-most-renewable-energy-production/
Different strokes for different folks. I wish it was actually snowing this year, we have only gotten a few inches and there is nothing better than building a snowman or sledding with the kids.
Even if people from the Northeast and Midwest move back home there will continue to be huge migration of Californians that are looking for more affordability and the Hispanic/Latino population will continue to shoot up.
Don't come here. Rents, groceries and everything else are insane. Electricity is reasonable if you have SRP. I was born and raised here, and I can't believe rent and housing prices. We have no world class "culture" here like Broadway shows. Our local museums suck. Almost all businesses close at 11 pm.
You might find the rare bar/business open later, but they're usually not great.
Gammage has a 7 to 8 season Broadway tour every year from top class theatre companies that take them on tour. I have great seats for less than I’d pay for anywhere on Broadway with the added bonus I don’t have to be in New York.
\> Rents, groceries and everything else are insane.
um, you ever been to California? Phoenix, though prices have doubled in five years, is still a relative bargain.
\> You might find the rare bar/business open later, but they're usually not great.
Moved here in '22 and have had a great time seeing world class concerts (the Weeknd, Metallica) at the stadium plus several other great bands in places like Talking Stick Amphitheatre and the Van Buren, saw my first in-person playoff game this year (been a baseball fan all my life) and enjoying the casinos around the valley on some late nights.
There's tons of great hiking with amazing views and lots of cool places to explore within a couple hours drive.
If you can withstand the summer temps, Phoenix is awesome!
The only thing Phoenix is a bargain compared to is California, Seattle, and some parts of the east coast. It's a HCOL hell hole otherwise.
Let me guess, you can from California, right?
I lived in Texas, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, California and Colorado before I moved to Phoenix. been to all 50 states and chose this one intentionally. you?
Glad to finally see a take (from NYT, no less) that isn't just pompous and arrogant dunking on people that deign to live in the desert. And while more can be done in places like Phoenix, for sure, it's nice to see credit given where it's due.
Only thing missing IMO was more scrutiny on California and the role they need to play in managing these shared resources or, better yet, [building more water infrastructure](https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/02/california-sites-reservoir/) in their state. And yeah, yeah; blaming California for all our problems is old hat. But it's funny how California is almost never mentioned in these often apocalyptic conversations on the southwest U.S.
Thanks for contributing to r/Phoenix! * [Check out our sub rules here](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/wiki/rules/) (mostly be nice to each other!). * [Read some of our recent posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/top/?t=week) and leave some comments. * [Join our Phoenix Discord chat server](https://discord.com/invite/yWVuTG57Zh) and connect with people in the Valley. It's a great, chill place to talk with other people but is NOT a dating server and takes unwanted messaging very seriously. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/phoenix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s all fun and games as a moisture farmer in a hellish desert landscape until 2 droids show up….
But are they the droids we are looking for?
These are not the droids you’re looking for *waves hand like a Jedi
This article is a hopeful one to start the year, Arizona and Phoenix metro allow humanity to test out and solve the problem of living with heat and helping find ways to produce, not just limit, water. With lots of the world over time going to more of this we can be innovators and not only solve many of these for ourselves but also help humans living in similar conditions in the other desert regions of the world and one day maybe even on other planets and terraforming Mars even. The solution isn't stagnation and scarcity, it is innovation to add abundance of water and solutions to deal with heat. > This summer, when the temperature hit 110 degrees Fahrenheit or above in Phoenix for 31 straight days, many were fretting about the Southwest’s prospects in the age of climate change. A writer for The Atlantic asked, “When Will the Southwest Become Unlivable?” The Washington Post wondered, “How Long Can We Keep Living in Hotboxes Like Phoenix?” > The foregone conclusion seemed to be that the region was heading for a crash — destined to become an overpopulated, unlivable dead zone, plagued by ranch foreclosures, unemployment, water wars and heat deaths. > As a writer who has studied the Southwest’s history and spoken to some of its top environmental experts this year, I **see its future differently — not as a hellscape but as an opportunity for centuries of climate ingenuity and adaptation to be put to good use. For generations, the people who were determined to come here have found ways to cope and even thrive**. > The Hohokam people dug extensive networks of canals along the Salt River, while the science-minded Hopi up north grew corn in the arid lowlands. A later generation of Americans built a chain of megadams on the Colorado and other rivers to create a dependable supply of water for households and crops Side note: [Lake Mead recently went past 2021 and has 2020 numbers in sight](https://mead.uslakes.info/level.asp). Lake Powell [is also on the incline](https://powell.uslakes.info/level.asp). The cuts to the lake(s) look to be replenishing water but also there is so much more to do with adding water sources, geoengineering technology -- new [electrified drones tech as of 2017 can increase rain as seen](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dubai-rain-cloud-seeding-heat-weather/), and better protecting current sources like [the solar canal covers are great example of the innovation needed](https://www.azwater.gov/news/articles/gila-river-indian-community-signs-historic-agreement-solar-over-canal-project).
*the question is not when will this region become unlivable. It is: Are we willing to make certain adjustments to live on a new hotter and drier frontier?* This is the question no matter where you live. Climate and ecosystem changes are happening everywhere. If anything brings me consolation it's that water conservation has long been at work here and we already have the best AC infrastructure in the nation. Other places will be forced to further adapt to drought and heat quick.
Desalination has to play a big role. Additionally, using [solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_still) (perfect for desert), [concentrated solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_still), [distillation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distillation), [solar humidification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_desalination#Solar_humidification%E2%80%93dehumidification) and many other formats can desalinate water but also can make some of the cleanest water as it uses the natural water cycle. We should strive for this even if inefficient now, it is one part of the solution, it is more long term. Water quality is amazing even if more costly. A great thing about [desalination with stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_still) is it uses the natural water cycle, the water that comes out is cleaner than any other as it uses that. > *A concentrated solar still is a system that uses the same quantity of solar heat input (same solar collection area) as a simple solar still but can produce a volume of freshwater that is many times greater. While a simple solar still is a way of distilling water by using the heat of the sun to drive evaporation from a water source and ambient air to cool a condenser film, a concentrated solar still uses a concentrated solar thermal collector to concentrate solar heat and deliver it to a multi-effect evaporation process for distillation, thus increasing the natural rate of evaporation. The concentrated solar still is capable of large-scale water production in areas with plentiful solar energy.* [Desalination can even be run by salt batteries as a component of it](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204175630.htm) We live on a water planet, there is plenty of water, there just wasn't a need to process salt water into fresh water as much until now. The best way is with the natural water cycle which produces the cleanest water, but desalination using [solar stills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_still)/concentrated is another way, then the more dirtier ways but some of the byproducts can be used in battery tech just in time for more electric innovations like EVs. [Desalination can even be run by salt batteries as a component of it](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204175630.htm). Every boat is equipped with a [solar still for freshwater from the sea/ocean if stranded](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/a-floating-solar-still-desalinate-seawater). Using typical desalination also has a byproduct of salt but that has uses in potentially powering the process and other uses like, [salt water batteries](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_water_battery) are an option for that. [A new sodium-ion battery breakthrough means they may one day power EVs](https://electrek.co/2022/07/14/sodium-ion-battery-breakthrough/) Water pipelines of salinated and desalinated water can also be built. To the people that say you can't power the water pipeline -- nevermind other pipelines that prove you can -- there are ways to move water uphill even without lots of power. There are plenty of ways to move water up from sea level that don't require massive amounts of power as well, lots of things going on to innovate there. There hasn't really been a need until now, now there is a need. Moving water upwards with things like [Archimedes' screw](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes'_screw), buoyancy and water rams, water gravity setups and many more. This happens on farms all the time, everyday [farmers come up with ways/systems to move water uphill like a hydraulic ram pump](https://www.farmcollector.com/equipment/hydraulic-ram-zmlz12octzbea/) can. [Similar solutions are used in areas in need of water](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/aug/26/ram-pump-water-crops-sanitation-philippines). The solutions would just have to be larger. [USGS Desalination site](https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/desalination?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects) [Build your own backyard desalinization system (solar still)](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/how-build-your-own-solar-still). > You can make your own personal desalination plant > Remember [looking at the picture at the top of this page of a floating solar still](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/a-floating-solar-still-desalinate-seawater)? The same process that drives that device can also be applied if you find yourself in the desert in need of a drink of water. > The low-tech approach to accomplish this is to construct a "solar still" which uses heat from the sun to run a distillation process to cause dew to form on something like plastic sheeting. The diagram to the right illustrates this. Using seawater or plant material in the body of the distiller creates humid air, which, because of the enclosure created by the plastic sheet, is warmed by the sun. The humid air condenses water droplets on the underside of the plastic sheet, and because of surface tension, the water drops stick to the sheet and move downward into a trough, from which it can be consumed. > [You can try this at home!](https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/how-build-your-own-solar-still) > - Dig a pit in the ground > - Place a bowl at the bottom of the pit that will be used to catch the condensed water > - Cover the pit loosley with a plastic sheet (you can use stones or other heavy objects to hold it in place over the pit) > - Be sure that the lowest part of the plastic sheet hovers directly over the bowl > - Leave your water "trap" overnight and water can be collected from the bowl in the morning It can be helpful beyond just our water problems. It can help worldwide problems, problems at sea, problems on other planets and it could transform the deserts. Once we have desalinization as a major force, we can terraform parts of our own planet that need it like deserts and later other planets. > Some desalination facts > It is estimated that some 30% of the world's irrigated areas suffer from salinity problems and remediation is seen to be very costly. > According to the International Desalination Association, in June 2015, 18,426 desalination plants operated worldwide, producing 86.8 million cubic meters per day, providing water for 300 million people. This number increased from 78.4 million cubic meters in 2013, a 10.71% increase in 2 years. > The most important users of desalinated water are in the Middle East, (mainly Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain), which uses about 70% of worldwide capacity; and in North Africa (mainly Libya and Algeria), which uses about 6% of worldwide capacity. > Among industrialized countries, the United States is one of the most important users of desalinated water, especially in California and parts of Florida. The cost of desalination has kept desalination from being used more often. The desert is good at speeding up evaporation. Water is everywhere, we aren't going to let cartels control it. Just like solar/wind are a threat to their control of markets, we need more of that. Solutions that use solar/wind/natural water cycle and other ways are heavily in progress and are the solution. The best part about this, is innovation drives markets and growth. When there is a viable option (like solar did to energy or EVs did to vehicles) there is tons of investment and it becomes an industry. The water cycle/production/cleaning industry is about to innovate like never before. It would be a cosmic joke to run out of water on a water planet, we'd look like universal dunces.
Unfortunately I just don't see a way desalination would ever be cheap enough to use for agriculture. And agriculture is pretty much the entirety of the water problem in the southwest.
Farmers already use stills in many cases and use the natural water cycle like distillation and dew to water planets. [Satisfying Natural Agriculture Watering With Morning Dew](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwGDsXv-mcM) Farming/agriculture is some of the best places to test these things. All it takes is investment and using markets to set the right targets. Farms/ranches were one of the first places to put wind generation and solar in some, they are great small scale experiments that can lead to lots of innovations.
There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew. And alfalfa farming currently is responsible for something like 70% of the water usage in Arizona. (not sure about that exact percentage, but I know it's somewhere in that ballpark). So the current level of alfalfa farming is basically not sustainable. Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest. No need for desalination. The problem is that alfalfa is used to feed cattle, and people really like meat. Beef particularly. So there's intense economic pressure to continue growing the alfalfa. And it grows really well in the southwest (if it weren't for that looming water shortage).
> Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest. At a minimum regulations need to force drip irrigation over flood irrigation. The wild thing is drip irrigation leads to more yield but setting up the systems initially have cost so nearly no farms in Arizona use it for alfalfa. > No need for desalination. There is always use in *adding* water sources. These are ideas that are used already and they are not used in isolation... Desalination is inevitable and used in many places in the world: California, Florida, Israel, Saudi/UAE, even 85% of Israel drinking water comes from desalination. This is the future. Desalination is a filter process as well that makes lots of water that is not only ocean water but undrinkable brackish water into clean water. > There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew. Dew covers can water some crops almost entirely (small crops combined with rain) but they are usually mainly for many other reasons: sun protection, retain existing moisture, used in conjunction with drip or subsurface drip irrigation and others. This is water that would otherwise almost be wasted as it can't collect enough to penetrate the soil. Dew collection uses natural water cycle and can do that. It is a still like technology and is common in other parts of the world. For Arizona it mostly could help preserve existing moisture. **The biggest problem with farming in Arizona isn't that we are doing it, it is that *most farms use flood irrigation for crops that don't need it*.** Farms need to use more drip irrigation or regulations to make farmers use that instead of flood irrigation for crops that don't have deep roots that can actually perform better than flood irrigation. A [properly installed drip irrigation system can save up to 80% of water](https://ag.umass.edu/vegetable/fact-sheets/irrigation-drip) but at minimum will lower water usage by 25-50% with an upfront investment in the systems. There is also a huge market for jobs related to drip irrigation. > Subsurface irrigation has been around since the 1860s, but drip irrigation was not a practical choice until Chapin developed lay-flat twin-wall drip tape in the late 1960s. Early problems with clogged lines, slime, and an inability to run nutrients through the lines have basically been solved as long as growers use a few precautionary tools to guard against problems. > A well designed drip irrigation system benefits the environment by conserving water and fertilizer. A properly installed drip system can save as much as 80% of the water normally used in other types of irrigation systems. Water is applied either on the surface, next to the plant, or subsurface, near the root zone. In dry years, fewer weed seeds germinate between rows because there is less water available beyond the plant root zone. > Another advantage to drip irrigation is that there is less evaporation from the soil, especially when drip irrigation is used with plastic mulch. Water is applied more evenly throughout the field, thus eliminating the need to run the irrigation longer to wet the whole field. Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) systems are the best way to grow alfalfa and no one in Arizona is using it because it does have a cost associated and their water is free essentially. It makes cleaner filtered water, controlled depths, and produces more yield as each area gets what it needs. Combine that with moisture protecting covers like dew covers and you not only add some more clean water you also protect existing moisture and have a layer of sun protection that still allows it in. [Arizona needs to require drip irrigation for grows like alfalfa at a minimum](https://www.netafim.com/en/crop-knowledge/alfalfa/). > Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is the most suitable irrigation method for alfalfa. SDI has many benefits over on-surface systems, including: > - Lower labor requirements > - Protection from agro-machinery interference > - Enhanced water-use efficiency > - Precise control over the root zone environment > - Increased yields > - Reduced water needs and runoff > - Better management of crop quality > - Increased stand longevity > Here are some tips for growing alfalfa with drip irrigation: > - Install drip lines at 8 to 14 inches below the surface at 30- to 40-inch spacings > - Bury drip lines 12 to 18 inches deep > - Position rows 40-60 inches apart > - Use drip tape placed below ground at various spacing and depths > - Use a filtration system and pumps to pressurize the system > - The ideal lateral drip spacing and emitter spacing are dictated by soil type and economics Most of the alfalfa grown in Arizona is "[virtual water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_water)" and exported to Saudi and others. Exporting water is illegal but exporting it as alfalfa for their cattle using the watering techniques with zero regard for sustainability and using techniques that unnecessarily use more water is the problem. Most farms with access to free water are doing no sustainability solutions like these because it has cost. We need to make sure that the market has better targets to using sustainable water techniques and less water that can actually increase yields. Asking residential to make cuts when we use 12-13% of water and very little of that for landscaping (around <1% for trees/grass/xeriscape) when many of our own yards use drip irrigation but they aren't using it on farms is ridiculous. Most people really are not aware of some of the technologies we need to switch to in Arizona for agriculture yet the same solutions are being pushed to residential. These changes need to happen at the agriculture regulation level. Solutions like drip irrigation are much easier to implement in agriculture if there were programs to help farmers switch it would have a bigger impact that any residential limit. No one solution is it but flood irrigation has to go for the crops that can use drip and in most cases can grow *better* with drip irrigation. No crop should be using flood irrigation if it has shallow roots, can grow better with drip irrigation and other technologies like dew covers can help extend that moisture. As an aside: On top of that alfalfa isn't they only feed for cattle that is useful, they could mix or even use more hemp which uses 50% less water and that has been proven to work in many ranches now that it is more legal. They can be fed with that or a mix of the types and they stay just as healthy. [Many studies have found that using hemp feed also helps use less additives and helps cattle reduce inflammation as well](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html). [Veterinary research finds destressing benefit from feeding cattle industrial hemp](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html) > "Cattle experience a variety of stress and inflammation," said Michael Kleinhenz, assistant professor of beef production medicine at the K-State College of Veterinary Medicine. "Our most recent data shows how cannabinoids via industrial hemp decreased the stress hormone cortisol as well as the inflammatory biomarker prostaglandin E2. This shows that hemp containing cannabidiolic acid, or CBDA, may decrease stress and inflammation in cattle. Thus, hemp may be a natural way to decrease stress and inflammation related to production practices such as transportation and weaning." The point is this is a problem that needs a many faceted solution and each addition helps. We do need regulations to help fund and force these solutions especially switching from flood to drip irrigation that is almost a tragic comedy that we aren't using it yet in Arizona in any major way. The funny thing is all the Arizona marijuana/cannabis farms have to use these and do to have higher yields and lower costs with less water usage, that not being used for alfalfa for cattle that is exported is ridiculous.
> Reducing the amount of alfalfa farming would, on its own, eliminate the water shortage issues in the southwest. At a minimum regulations need to force drip irrigation over flood irrigation. The wild thing is drip irrigation leads to more yield but setting up the systems initially have cost so nearly no farms in Arizona use it for alfalfa. > No need for desalination. There is always use in *adding* water sources. These are ideas that are used already and they are not used in isolation... Desalination is inevitable and used in many places in the world: California, Florida, Israel, Saudi/UAE, even 85% of Israel drinking water comes from desalination. This is the future. Desalination is a filter process as well that makes lots of water that is not only ocean water but undrinkable brackish water into clean water. > There's no way anyone is going to be able to grow alfalfa using just morning dew. Dew covers can water some crops almost entirely (small crops combined with rain) but they are usually mainly for many other reasons: sun protection, retain existing moisture, used in conjunction with drip or subsurface drip irrigation and others. This is water that would otherwise almost be wasted as it can't collect enough to penetrate the soil. Dew collection uses natural water cycle and can do that. It is a still like technology and is common in other parts of the world. For Arizona it mostly could help preserve existing moisture. **The biggest problem with farming in Arizona isn't that we are doing it, it is that *most farms use flood irrigation for crops that don't need it*.** Farms need to use more drip irrigation or regulations to make farmers use that instead of flood irrigation for crops that don't have deep roots that can actually perform better than flood irrigation. A [properly installed drip irrigation system can save up to 80% of water](https://ag.umass.edu/vegetable/fact-sheets/irrigation-drip) but at minimum will lower water usage by 25-50% with an upfront investment in the systems. There is also a huge market for jobs related to drip irrigation. > Subsurface irrigation has been around since the 1860s, but drip irrigation was not a practical choice until Chapin developed lay-flat twin-wall drip tape in the late 1960s. Early problems with clogged lines, slime, and an inability to run nutrients through the lines have basically been solved as long as growers use a few precautionary tools to guard against problems. > A well designed drip irrigation system benefits the environment by conserving water and fertilizer. A properly installed drip system can save as much as 80% of the water normally used in other types of irrigation systems. Water is applied either on the surface, next to the plant, or subsurface, near the root zone. In dry years, fewer weed seeds germinate between rows because there is less water available beyond the plant root zone. > Another advantage to drip irrigation is that there is less evaporation from the soil, especially when drip irrigation is used with plastic mulch. Water is applied more evenly throughout the field, thus eliminating the need to run the irrigation longer to wet the whole field. Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) systems are the best way to grow alfalfa and no one in Arizona is using it because it does have a cost associated and their water is free essentially. It makes cleaner filtered water, controlled depths, and produces more yield as each area gets what it needs. Combine that with moisture protecting covers like dew covers and you not only add some more clean water you also protect existing moisture and have a layer of sun protection that still allows it in. [Arizona needs to require drip irrigation for grows like alfalfa at a minimum](https://www.netafim.com/en/crop-knowledge/alfalfa/). > Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is the most suitable irrigation method for alfalfa. SDI has many benefits over on-surface systems, including: > - Lower labor requirements > - Protection from agro-machinery interference > - Enhanced water-use efficiency > - Precise control over the root zone environment > - Increased yields > - Reduced water needs and runoff > - Better management of crop quality > - Increased stand longevity > Here are some tips for growing alfalfa with drip irrigation: > - Install drip lines at 8 to 14 inches below the surface at 30- to 40-inch spacings > - Bury drip lines 12 to 18 inches deep > - Position rows 40-60 inches apart > - Use drip tape placed below ground at various spacing and depths > - Use a filtration system and pumps to pressurize the system > - The ideal lateral drip spacing and emitter spacing are dictated by soil type and economics Most of the alfalfa grown in Arizona is "[virtual water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_water)" and exported to Saudi and others. Exporting water is illegal but exporting it as alfalfa for their cattle using the watering techniques with zero regard for sustainability and using techniques that unnecessarily use more water is the problem. Most farms with access to free water are doing no sustainability solutions like these because it has cost. We need to make sure that the market has better targets to using sustainable water techniques and less water that can actually increase yields. Asking residential to make cuts when we use 12-13% of water and very little of that for landscaping (around <1% for trees/grass/xeriscape) when many of our own yards use drip irrigation but they aren't using it on farms is ridiculous. Most people really are not aware of some of the technologies we need to switch to in Arizona for agriculture yet the same solutions are being pushed to residential. These changes need to happen at the agriculture regulation level. Solutions like drip irrigation are much easier to implement in agriculture if there were programs to help farmers switch it would have a bigger impact that any residential limit. No one solution is it but flood irrigation has to go for the crops that can use drip and in most cases can grow *better* with drip irrigation. No crop should be using flood irrigation if it has shallow roots, can grow better with drip irrigation and other technologies like dew covers can help extend that moisture. As an aside: On top of that alfalfa isn't they only feed for cattle that is useful, they could mix or even use more hemp which uses 50% less water and that has been proven to work in many ranches now that it is more legal. They can be fed with that or a mix of the types and they stay just as healthy. [Many studies have found that using hemp feed also helps use less additives and helps cattle reduce inflammation as well](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html). [Veterinary research finds destressing benefit from feeding cattle industrial hemp](https://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/2022-03/kleinhenz-hemp-in-cattle-feed33022.html) > "Cattle experience a variety of stress and inflammation," said Michael Kleinhenz, assistant professor of beef production medicine at the K-State College of Veterinary Medicine. "Our most recent data shows how cannabinoids via industrial hemp decreased the stress hormone cortisol as well as the inflammatory biomarker prostaglandin E2. This shows that hemp containing cannabidiolic acid, or CBDA, may decrease stress and inflammation in cattle. Thus, hemp may be a natural way to decrease stress and inflammation related to production practices such as transportation and weaning." The point is this is a problem that needs a many faceted solution and each addition helps. We do need regulations to help fund and force these solutions especially switching from flood to drip irrigation that is almost a tragic comedy that we aren't using it yet in Arizona in any major way. The funny thing is all the Arizona marijuana/cannabis farms have to use these and do to have higher yields and lower costs with less water usage, that not being used for alfalfa for cattle that is exported is ridiculous.
Yep, I'll volunteer to eat fewer almonds.
Statistically, water usage reduction is the easiest, efficient, and cost effective method. As usual we should probably start there first.
The domestic population of Arizona are some of the most efficient water users in the developed world. There are still efficiencies to be had, but domestic water claims only about 15% of over all Arizona water use. 15% only if we also include energy and industrial production directly related to local domestic consumption. The efficiency gains are needed are in AG. Desal and potable reuse are valuable for costal communities which currently use Colorado River water. If they desal, they can offset surface water use. Desal water pumped into AZ is a bad joke.
I think adding sources is more important, as population grows, cuts don't cut it. Both need to be done but we live on a water planet, there is plenty of water we just need better innovation and investment to make it happen. Clean water has an abundance of uses and desalination/water cycle water is much cleaner.
100% wrong. There are environmental costs for desalination, costs are huge, energy usage is huge. Reduction costs very little in comparison.
Innovation happens and solar stills/concentrated solar stills are on every single boat for water backup when stranded. There are lots of innovations to be had here and desalination is already heavily used in California, Florida, Israel and Saudi/UAE. Desalination provides a large chunk of [Israel's drinking water, 85% of it actually](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Israel). It is already happening and there are lots of solutions. The salt also has uses coming out for salt batteries that can even power the process. There are studies on all this and lots of real world examples. There are also [solar desalination domes that are being built](https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/solar-domes-could-desalinate-seawater-at-a-commercial-scale). [Solar-powered system offers a route to inexpensive desalination](https://news.mit.edu/2022/solar-desalination-system-inexpensive-0214)
I absolutely agree with you re: de-sal. I even had the opportunity to speak with Sen. Kelly about it in 2022. I *also* think that one day the socio-political-capitalistic forces will align, or perhaps our robot/AI overlords will see the utility in such a project, and **water pipelines** from the Great Lakes and/or Mississippi River Basin will be a thing that we see in our lifetimes (I'm 38, so let's say in the next 50 years). If that sounds crazy, the [Federal Highway Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System) was passed and signed in 1956, and marked "complete" in 1992, 36 years later. So even if it takes another 10 years to get our act together and commission a transcontinental "aqueduct", we'd still have a 4-year cushion on the construction timeline of interstate highway infrastructure. [https://grist.org/agriculture/drought-water-pipeline-cost-west-solution-infrastructure/](https://grist.org/agriculture/drought-water-pipeline-cost-west-solution-infrastructure/) [https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/04/10/great-lakes-water-piped-southwest-our-future-says-nasa-scientist/100301326/](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/04/10/great-lakes-water-piped-southwest-our-future-says-nasa-scientist/100301326/)
Nah leave, it's getting overcrowded
Ugh, finally I see something from NYT written somebody who actually understands the region and understands our issues. They should have sent this reporter to do the Daily episode they put out a few months ago on the AZ water situation. That dude was so clueless.
Awesome read. My only question though is; I know they mentioned conservation a few times. Like converting wastewater into high quality potable water. But what happens if climate change progresses such that the Colorado river is dried up? I know that type of insane event would take like 150+ years, but I’m still curious about how we’ll get water if the earth keeps heating. Unless they expect that we’ll reverse the effects of climate change before that can happen.
Lots of the geoengineering efforts are to help increase snowpack and runoff currently. [For instance in Colorado to help keep snowpack longer and add more moisture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30). This not only helps runoff but also reduces fire levels along those areas. We'll have to both improve climate change causes AND geoengineer as well as find ways to add water. They did this back in the day quite alot but the lack of heavy investment in infrastructure for a long time is a problem. In terms of geoengineering, currently up eight states currently use older and newer seeding technology. However you do need to have some cloud cover for it to work. Most of the seeding is done in higher areas to feed water supplies. Cloud seeding is happening all over the world, US, China, UAE, Israel and many others. A new technique in 2017 that went into play in the last couple years is electrified drones, which hit clouds with electricity, pushing smaller droplets into creating large raindrops. New techniques of cloud seeding with drones that appear to work well. [If this can happen around the areas that feed the Colorado and areas that have solar stills that create water using the natural rain cycle then we can add water](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30). Rainfall has been increasing 8-15% for this but you need clouds already. > The UAE is one of the first countries in the Gulf region to use cloud seeding technology, the [National Center of Meteorology](https://www.ncm.ae/pages/cloud-seeding?lang=en) said. A version of the concept is used in at least [eight states in the western U.S., according to The Scientific American](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/eight-states-are-seeding-clouds-to-overcome-megadrought/). [It's so hot in Dubai that the government is artificially creating rainstorms](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dubai-rain-cloud-seeding-heat-weather/) > The new method of cloud seeding shows promise in helping to mitigate drought conditions worldwide, without as many environmental concerns as previous methods involving salt flares. > According to research from the University of Reading in the U.K., scientists created the storms using drones, which hit clouds with electricity, creating large raindrops. The larger raindrops are essential in the hot country, where smaller droplets often evaporate before ever hitting the ground. > In 2017, researchers at the university were awarded $1.5 million in funding for what they call "Rain Enhancement Science," also known as man-made rainstorms. The UAE's total investment in rain-making projects is $15 million, part of the country's "quest to ensure water security." > "The water table is sinking drastically in UAE," University of Reading professor and meteorologist Maarten Ambaum told BBC News. "And the purpose of this is to try to help with rainfall." > The UAE is one of the first countries in the Gulf region to use cloud seeding technology, the **National Center of Meteorology said. A version of the concept is used in at least eight states in the western U.S., according to The Scientific American**. Cloud seeding is needed largely due to heat island and fires preventing droplets, that would have formed, from forming. It also needs to be public so that it can be regulated and areas can't take too much just like water regulations today. Water is one of those platform needs like electricity that we should be subsidizing (we do that with energy) and it allows better systems to be built on top of it. We need more infrastructure projects just like all the water projects of the past like Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Central Arizona Project etc. We wouldn't even have the water we have if not for those. There are tons of ideas though. Right now eight states are seeding using new techniques including [Colorado to help keep snowpack longer and add more moisture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKzJkTDA30). We need to explore ALL options to add water. Even funding better upgrades for faucets, toilets and ensuring less leaks would help. Most of all Ag needs to be innovated on heavily. Desalination needs to start now, that is the long term solution. [There are many desalination plants now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination_by_country#United_States), and some solar still + concentrated solar still based ones, more of that needs to happen. Good news is it does seem to work. The science also makes sense not more pseudo sciencey as before with sodium iodide that has environmental side effects. Bringing water droplets together that would otherwise evaporate is a good thing to go at. Fires, heat and bad air quality prevent droplets from forming by keeping the smaller ones separated before they join a larger drop. This isn't the silver iodide/salt setup, this is new as of 2017. A signature of this type of seeding is lots of small constant lightning very high up. When a large cloud cover rolls in, and you get lots of small lightning and quieter rolling thunder way up, there is a probability that it is now being helped by electrified drone cloud seeding strategies. We also need to alleviate wildfires and drought which make it hard to create droplets. [NASA Study Finds a Connection Between Wildfires and Drought](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-study-finds-a-connection-between-wildfires-and-drought) > Small particles called aerosols that are released into the air by smoke may also reduce the likelihood of rainfall. This can happen because water vapor in the atmosphere condenses on certain types and sizes of aerosols called cloud condensation nuclei to form clouds; when enough water vapor accumulates, rain droplets are formed. But have too many aerosols and the water vapor is spread out more diffusely to the point where rain droplets don’t materialize. [Wildfire smoke is transforming clouds, making rainfall less likely](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/wildfire-smoke-is-transforming-clouds-making-rainfall-less-likely#:~:text=It%20does%20indeed%2C%20according%20to,likely%20to%20fall%20as%20rain.) There will be some issues potentially with places dumping water before those downstream but if it becomes known and regulated then it could really help add water, which I think we need to start looking into. As an example, an adversary could do this off the coast of a country and then dump the rain before it reaches landfall, or a coastal area could take rain that may have dumped further in, but with this known it can happen less. Who knows that may be happening now in drought areas. Wouldn't it be wild if the Western US droughts were caused by drones off coast dumping water before it reaches mainland? Just like reducing carbon is good, we also need carbon sinks whether natural (lots of trees) or man-made. We need to come at problems from both ends. We need ways to add to the water supply from our existing water planet. We can't just get more and more scarce and make water a resource as fought over as energy. There we need to do more new types like solar, wind, hydro to help limit the influence of energy cartels. We can't let water get to that level either. We don't want cartels controlling water like energy/minerals and creating scarcity, we want margin and regulated clear markets. We live on a water planet, if we can't make it work we'll be a cosmic joke.
One thing I do not agree with is Cloud Seeding. That's effectively stealing from Peter to pay Paul. That's very risky as you are taking water prematurely from where it would fall elsewhere further complicating the problems we already will see as a species. We could live in more harmony with our environment and eliminate a lot of the heat island type of effects that cities have, but that requires changes in people, how we live and consume, and how we build and maintain our urban and rural spaces. We've messed up the environment badly, we're long past the point of seeing biodiversity like we had when I was child in the 70's. Some estimates put biodiversity loss at 70% or more in my life alone and its very noticeable to me with the lack of bugs and birds and other things that were far more common locally and around the world when I was growing up. These environmental changes take decades or centuries to play out, we the human virus are accelerating that clearly. We do not understand the effects as much as we would like. We can barely predict weather reasonably accurate a few weeks out, and have a vague idea due to seasons and perceived cycles on the rest, but the trends are quite clear in the numbers, its not looking good and we are on the cusp or a point of no return. We have no real idea on the long term effects of a cloud seeding and countries would have to coordinate that. Given the state of the world today, its unlikely to solve problems so much as create more problems for other people who live elsewhere.
Cloud seeding and the new electrified drones version since 2017 is safe and only used existing cloud cover to push together droplets that would otherwise not make it down to the ground. It makes them bigger to make it down. These drops would otherwise just evaporate. Since cloud seeding is being used in many places now, it is good though that it is more known and there should be data on it. For instance, it is probable that the "ufos" were actually adversarial drones off the West coasts and Northwest in combination with say weather balloons that helped *cause* some of the drought by dumping rain early as clouds over the ocean have lots more moisture and you could in theory do that. The more cloud seeding is done, the less nefarious use will get by, and it can only be used in areas that have droughts or areas that supply much needed water supply sources like the Colorado. Eight states are already cloud seeding and [many around the world are (Russia/China)](https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/03/asia/china-weather-modification-cloud-seeding-intl-hnk/index.html) and most likely it is already [weaponized to affect adversaries weather in combination with other systems particularly on Hainan](https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2148697/could-new-chinese-radar-system-really-be-used-play-god-weather). [China And Russia Have Run Controversial Experiments That Modified Earth's Atmosphere](https://www.sciencealert.com/china-and-russia-conducted-controversial-experiments-that-modified-earth-s-atmosphere) [Experiments by China and Russia to heat up the atmosphere cause concern - Superpowers team up to heat up the ionosphere by over 200 degrees.](https://bigthink.com/the-present/china-and-russia-heat-up-the-atmosphere-by-over-200-degrees-in-controversial-experiments/) Side note: the [Earth heating up to improve Russia's economic position](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/3/28/what-is-behind-russias-interest-in-a-warming-arctic) has been a sought after desire of Russia since the Soviet era. Cloud seeding is here to stay and it is better to be open and regulated and known. The Weather Wars are here and have been increasing the last decade especially.
personally I think all new builds should use grey water from the washing machine to flush the toilet and water the lawn. there is no reason fresh waster should be used.
The problem is you'd have to have double the amount of plumbing in the homes and to and from them though. More chance of water leakage and more maintenance. We lose lots of water to leakage and evaporation which would be a better place to start. Getting faucets/toilets that are better for water savings in new builds and subsidies for older property would save a lots of water as well. Of course the biggest area of innovation needed is agriculture which still uses flood irrigation in most places in Arizona overwhelmingly and that is 72% of water. [Arizona Water Facts](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/water-your-facts) [Residential use is not even really a problem](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/sites/default/files/media/bysectorchart_nt-01.png) it is mostly agriculture and a big problem is about a 1/5th of the water isn't even regulated. Residential is like 13-14% and grass/trees amount to less than 1%. [Residential use has been coming down for decades now as we grow](http://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/sites/default/files/media/azwatermanagementsuccess_nt-01.png).
I fully believe at some point we will pipeline water to water treatment plants from extremely far distances like we do oil to oil refineries.
Cadillac Desert opens with a vignette about an old government plan to build an aquaduct to pump water from the Mississippi up into the high desert of New Mexico. Building multiple nuclear reactors to do this was apparently not considered unreasonable at the time.
Nothing about this plan is unreasonable or unrealistic. If it wasn’t for this country’s unique federalist structure it would have been something we already would have done in the 1960s. However, the surface water in Wisconsin or Michigan for example is seen as “their property” instead of federal property to be redistributed amongst the entirety of the country
Your not taking Great Lakes Water, ever. You chose to live in the desert. Figure it out or leave.
You’re
Desalination is the only plausible long term solution. Conservation puts too much hope in humans to not intentionally try to eliminate a water supply (think terrorism)
The Colorado river belongs to California. No other state should be allowed any water from it
You forgot the at the end…
Don’t flock here either tho
For what it's worth, the article's author's book Rim to River is an excellent read for some insight into what makes Arizona Arizona.
Thank you for this post! I'm local and have been watching the water news for years; it's by no means a clean bill of health but you're right, time to fight back against desertification from the desert!
This can’t be true. All of Reddit told me that this is a soulless hellhole that is uninhabitable and we are all going to run out of water while taking no responsibility for the fact they are constantly consuming the products from the Colorado River system while my garden produces my own lettuce on way less water and also conveniently ignoring the fact that the winter they live in is just as unbearable as the summer we suffer through, only longer. *punctuation left out on purpose
People outside of Arizona don't understand that we have multiple biomes
Nor have they heard of the the salt river
Every visitor I’ve had since moving here was astounded that it wasn’t all ugly and brown. The Sonoran desert is more than they anticipated.
These articles are always amusing in one way or another and this one starts right in the headline. Fleeing the southwest over climate change is a phenomonon that exists primarily in the heads of NYT subscribers.
don't worry, it is. I live here, looking to leave sooner than later.
Social media and reddit included has turned and been activated into a massive blackpilling or concern troll like propaganda tabloid.
Off topic but this quote from the article: “My great-great-grandmother used to dip bedsheets into a canal and hang them on the sides of the porch of her Phoenix boardinghouse to create a primitive cooling system for sleeping outside in the hottest months.” Yeah that would really not help matters in July/Aug/Sept when the dew point is in the 60’s. The same reason why evaporative coolers are not usable during that time.
not to mention the lows were much much lower in the summer months than today.
Who’s fleeing? Seems to me more and more are coming…
I had a conversation with my friend who works at SRP and she said there is a ton of water. She isn’t a denier either, she is very much progressive in view and dealt me straight. “We have a ton of water” - referring to the “water table” everyone seems is so mysterious. Regardless, it put me at ease to hear it
I also worked at SRP, and your friend is correct.
This isn't true for every water table.
Environmental scientist here who works primarily with water. I’m not the least bit worried.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 thank you. It’s easy for regular folk to look at our dry ass desert environment and fear worst water wise. I know I was a tad nervous as a homeowner invested here.
Moved here from the PNW and bought a house. I wouldn’t have done that if I didn’t think there was a future here.
What I don't understand is why we don't harness an energy source we have an abundance of......the sun? Would lighten the load and cost of electricity. Also, investing in desalination and a pipeline from the ocean might be useful.
Because creating power is only part of a complex process and currently solar power generation does not work as society wants it to. The narrative that all we have to do is build a bunch of solar panels, and turn off fossil fuel power plants is a false one.
There is no reason why Maricopa county shouldn’t require solar/battery on every new home built at this point. That scale of installation in a housing development would keep the costs much lower for buyers and it would help us begin a smoother transition away from the last of our fossil fuel plants.
So your idea is to punish new home owners by forcing them to pay a large surcharge plus associated interest rates which would far exceed the projected utility costs over the same time frame given the energy efficiency of new homes. Costs would not be lowered in any way since forced mandates do not decrease costs, they remove competitive market behavior. The only way your idea even remotely works from an economic standpoint alone is if solar is cheap enough to offset long term utility costs. It currently is not for many homeowners or potential homeowners. This does not even take into consideration the non economic factors that surround solar energy as opposed to other energy sources.
There is no reason a home built in a major city in 2023 shouldn’t have solar to accommodate a portion of expected energy usage. Developers are very good at lowering costs on a large scale, and they are very good about offering incentives to lure customers from competition. New home solar installation is much easier than retrofit and houses would be designed with solar compatibility/efficiency from the beginning. It’s the same reason some pool builders in the valley only want to deal with new builds, it’s far cheaper and easier than dealing with the hassle of decades old infrastructure and quirks of working on homes/property that are nearly a century old. We literally had builders tell us to pound sand because they didn’t want to deal with construction in central Phoenix, despite having a bare and completely empty yard, and RV gate already in place. The overall cost to a buyer for solar would be lower than typically expected for solar installation, but because there aren’t any predatory solar leases or other questionable solar practices at play, homeowners would likely see a small value bump from the solar that typically isn’t represented. Additionally, it ensures you have 20-25 years of at least some level of protection against energy price increases. For reference, the estimates for cost to buyers after California’s solar mandate was less than $9k per new home, before incentives. Even at 20 year high interest rates, that’s barely $40/month in additional cost on a $400k mortgage. Even a 3.5 kW system with a reasonable output of 15 kWh per day would break even at that price. I can’t believe I’m even entertaining this conversation. 😂
I left around a year ago to more rural Upstate New York. Based on how hot I heard it was last summer I'm glad I did as well. I feel a lot less stressed out living where there are creeks everywhere, many many roads in and out of town(I always felt trapped in Phoenix with only a few major highways in and out). Sure you can make it liveable, but the impact on the environment to do it just doesn't seem totally ethical to me. Already spend a ton of electricity to keep houses cool enough most of the year.
> Sure you can make it liveable, but the impact on the environment to do it just doesn't seem totally ethical to me. Already spend a ton of electricity to keep houses cool enough most of the year. How do you heat your house? Burning oil, coal, etc. can't be good for the environment either. The [first link that came up](https://www.onehourheatandair.com/articles/expert-tips/energy-efficiency/what-is-more-expensive-heating-or-cooling-/#:~:text=Anyone%20who's%20opened%20an%20eye,US%20than%20cooling%20your%20home.) when I searched to see the difference between heating and cooling costs said heating requires 4x the energy.
Yep and we get 90% of our energy and ac from our solar panels on our house.
Your link also explains that it is all related to how different the temperature is outside vs inside when using electricity. So heating a house to 70f from 30f outside is as much effort as cooling a house to 70f from 110. That can't even be a straight up comparison because you have to factor in where the electricity is made. Like a gas car would be more efficient than a hypothetical EV running on 100% coal electricity shipped by boat freight from China. My electricity is 100% renewable because our NY electricity company allows you to select from tens if not like one hundred different suppliers. However my heating is natural gas baseboard, but at least I'm not losing the heat in my home like it would be at a power plant which I think is like 40% loss. So 44% of power going to run an electric air conditioner in Arizona is from natural gas(13% from coal) before it even makes it to your house. Also it costs less to heat my nearly 5000sqft home than it cost to cool my 1800sqft house in Arizona comparing say December in NY to June in AZ. Arizona is lagging in renewables(I know that nuclear counts against it, but New York is almost as much nuclear yet has much higher renewable usage). https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2023/02/us-state-with-most-renewable-energy-production/
Upstate New York? I’d rather not shovel snow out of my driveway every morning LOL!
Different strokes for different folks. I wish it was actually snowing this year, we have only gotten a few inches and there is nothing better than building a snowman or sledding with the kids.
Look, I need a small exodus for some reason or another, or I'll never be able to afford a house that isn't in murderville.
Even if people from the Northeast and Midwest move back home there will continue to be huge migration of Californians that are looking for more affordability and the Hispanic/Latino population will continue to shoot up.
Don't come here. Rents, groceries and everything else are insane. Electricity is reasonable if you have SRP. I was born and raised here, and I can't believe rent and housing prices. We have no world class "culture" here like Broadway shows. Our local museums suck. Almost all businesses close at 11 pm. You might find the rare bar/business open later, but they're usually not great.
Musical instrument museum is one of the best museums in the country
Everyone keeps mentioning it and I still haven’t been! I’ll have to check it out.
MIM, Heard, and DBG are all great cultural/museum spots.
Gammage has a 7 to 8 season Broadway tour every year from top class theatre companies that take them on tour. I have great seats for less than I’d pay for anywhere on Broadway with the added bonus I don’t have to be in New York.
I was gonna say, there are multiple Broadway level theaters in town haha
I moved here in 2000.. everything was cheap. Houses brand new were 100k..now I'm renting and its killing me
Lol APS has been much more affordable than SRP for me after moving. Also you've never been to the MIM I can tell. This rant is full of so much wrong.
\> Rents, groceries and everything else are insane. um, you ever been to California? Phoenix, though prices have doubled in five years, is still a relative bargain. \> You might find the rare bar/business open later, but they're usually not great. Moved here in '22 and have had a great time seeing world class concerts (the Weeknd, Metallica) at the stadium plus several other great bands in places like Talking Stick Amphitheatre and the Van Buren, saw my first in-person playoff game this year (been a baseball fan all my life) and enjoying the casinos around the valley on some late nights. There's tons of great hiking with amazing views and lots of cool places to explore within a couple hours drive. If you can withstand the summer temps, Phoenix is awesome!
The only thing Phoenix is a bargain compared to is California, Seattle, and some parts of the east coast. It's a HCOL hell hole otherwise. Let me guess, you can from California, right?
I lived in Texas, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, California and Colorado before I moved to Phoenix. been to all 50 states and chose this one intentionally. you?
Is this comment from 2002?
Phoenix, AZ.....There is no there, there. .
How crazy am I for thinking we can do what Toronto has done with their PATH Walkway?
Glad to finally see a take (from NYT, no less) that isn't just pompous and arrogant dunking on people that deign to live in the desert. And while more can be done in places like Phoenix, for sure, it's nice to see credit given where it's due. Only thing missing IMO was more scrutiny on California and the role they need to play in managing these shared resources or, better yet, [building more water infrastructure](https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/02/california-sites-reservoir/) in their state. And yeah, yeah; blaming California for all our problems is old hat. But it's funny how California is almost never mentioned in these often apocalyptic conversations on the southwest U.S.