The fact the population has surged this much but water usage has gone down over that period is quite miraculous.Arizona’s population has surged 555 percent while water usage has decreased 3 percent.
The fact the population has surged this much but water usage has gone down over that period is quite miraculous.
There is more than enough water available for municipal/residential use in Arizona. What there isn't enough water for in Arizona are alfalfa farms, pecan orchards, and golf courses.About half of Arizona is semiarid, one-third is arid, and the remainder is humid. They're idiots for building in a desert state.
People don't use much water. Landscaping does. Agriculture uses much more.The fact the population has surged this much but water usage has gone down over that period is quite miraculous.
And of those uses, you could keep the golf courses if they stopped growing water-intensive crops in a desert.There is more than enough water available for municipal/residential use in Arizona. What there isn't enough water for in Arizona are alfalfa farms, pecan orchards, and golf courses.
Also, no, there are no "humid" climate zones in Arizona.
Simply too many people and activities…all activities…for the region and its available water supply.A very forthright case of limited resources limiting growth. Any and all growth. Extrapolate.
Ding ding ding. They trimmed all the fat. The next cuts are going to have to go deeper, and rock-ribbed conservative constituencies who are going to be very angry that the government will necessarily stop subsidizing their free enterprise with low-cost water from public water projects.Yeah, that's really impressive. The downside, though, is that it probably means that they've already captured all of the low-hanging fruit, and further reductions will be more difficult and increasingly painful.
I get that desert and near-desert agriculture is part of what allows us to have fresh fruits and vegetables year round, but why do the farmers grow such a thirsty yet low value crop as alfalfa? Is it needed for nitrogen fixing of the soil, or is water just so underpriced it's economic for them to grow it?This article and the article I saw in the Times miss the forest for the trees. 70% of Arizona's water goes to agriculture, 1% of their economy. They're effectively exporting 70% of their water in the form of alfalfa and other agricultural products. Building more houses would actually decrease water usage if built on agricultural land. Stop subsidizing uneconomic farms and this problem goes away.
Golf courses and unnecessary crops qualify as unnecessary activities.And of those uses, you could keep the golf courses if they stopped growing water-intensive crops in a desert.
Exactly. If you talk about natural limits and growth-limiting factors, people lose their shit in places like Arizona. It's like you've suggested that Antifa and the resurrected ghost of Che Guevara should personally put them and their whole families against the wall and shoot them.“It’s not about stopping growth,” said Haley Paul, Arizona policy director for the National Audubon Society.
It sounds like it should be about stopping growth, since the region's resources can't really support its current population as it is. But I guess anything other than "line go up" is commie talk.
A dose of reality. Our actions on this earth have consequences that we can’t ignore.rock-ribbed conservative constituencies who are going to be very angry that the government will necessarily stop subsidizing their free enterprise with low-cost water from public water projects.
Spot on. Essentially Arizona allows outsourcing water.Maybe stop growing nuts and Saudi alfalfa first?
Yeah. The Colorado River and groundwater in arid places just needs to stop being used for agriculture and golf. There is plenty, plenty of farmland in other parts of the U.S. that can support all the nuts, sprouts, vineyards, and more. Let people in California and elsewhere have more water for their homes, schools, and places of business instead of using all of it to make wine & almonds.There is more than enough water available for municipal/residential use in Arizona. What there isn't enough water for in Arizona are alfalfa farms, pecan orchards, and golf courses.
Also, no, there are no "humid" climate zones in Arizona.
This article and the article I saw in the Times miss the forest for the trees. 70% of Arizona's water goes to agriculture, 1% of their economy. They're effectively exporting 70% of their water in the form of alfalfa and other agricultural products. Building more houses would actually decrease water usage if built on agricultural land. Stop subsidizing uneconomic farms and this problem goes away.
Arizona laws allow unregulated access to the watershed, to the point where people in some towns don't have access to tap water. It isn't about cuts. It is about a fundamental change to how Arizona has structured its economy.Ding ding ding. They trimmed all the fat. The next cuts are going to have to go deeper, and rock-ribbed conservative constituencies who are going to be very angry that the government will necessarily stop subsidizing their free enterprise with low-cost water from public water projects.
The fact the population has surged this much but water usage has gone down over that period is quite miraculous.
The perfectly kept grass lawn needs to die. It only became a thing in the post-war period suburban housing boom.People don't use much water. Landscaping does. Agriculture uses much more.
For California, the rule of thumb is 80% of the water goes to agriculture, and 20% to the cities. Of the water that goes to the cities, 80% of that goes to landscaping.
Saudi Arabia needs to feed cows.I get that desert and near-desert agriculture is part of what allows us to have fresh fruits and vegetables year round, but why do the farmers grow such a thirsty yet low value crop as alfalfa? Is it needed for nitrogen fixing of the soil, or is water just so underpriced it's economic for them to grow it?
Let's be real - they were highly incentivized to build out in that desert state. The state government and the Federales made it very lucrative to go out into the desert and build a state there for a long, long time.About half of Arizona is semiarid, one-third is arid, and the remainder is humid. They're idiots for building in a desert state.
I'm going to be that guy: "mi·rac·u·lous; adjective: miraculous; occurring through divine or supernatural intervention, or manifesting such power."The fact the population has surged this much but water usage has gone down over that period is quite miraculous.
Pricing necessities is always difficult ethically... now if you did it just for commercial uses I'd get behind that. It's kind of wild Arizona limited housing before farms in the desert.Or, you could just price water appropriately.
Gold courses are only "unnecessary" if you consider recreational activities as "unnecessary". Golf isn't my thing, but gaming PCs use a lot of power, and could be considered "unnecessary". Ski resorts use a lot of water, even with on-site capture and recycling. Hiking & camping contribute to degradation of nature and result in forest fires. And so on.Golf courses and unnecessary crops qualify as unnecessary activities.
I cant speak for the entire state but last time I was there pretty much all the houses were xeriscaped I didnt see any with grass lawns.The perfectly kept grass lawn needs to die. It only became a thing in the post-war period suburban housing boom.