Remember water? We're not quite at the point of calling it a thing of the past -- but it sure looks to become scarce in the U.S. West, says a new study in the journal Science. It's not natural weather variability or volcanic activity, say researchers, but quite clearly climate change that is leading to swiftly declining snowpack in Western mountains, which leads to rivers running dry, which leads to towns and cities short on what had been a consistent supply of power, irrigation, and thirst-quenching H2O. Climate change makes "modifications to the water infrastructure of the western U.S. a virtual necessity," says the study. As lead author Tim Barnett puts it, "Mother Nature is going to stop being our water banker."
sources:
Cautious optimism for Copenhagen deal as Barcelona climate talks end
Another coal plant bites the dust
Barcelona outcome: White House strategy is plea for more time
Comments
View as Threaded
GonzoDon Posted 3:58 am
02 Feb 2008
Remember that this is also the fastest-growing region of the country. Cities like Las Vegas and Phoenix are on unsustainable growth trajectories that look, to me, strangely like a trains headed for cliffs.
The Southwestern writer Richard Bowen noted that developing more water supplies for unsustainable desert cities like Vegas and Phoenix is akin to providing more liquor to an alcoholic. Those cities are going on water binges that simply cannot be sustained over the long-term -- at least, not without doing untold damage to the environment (e.g., drying up regional aquifers for the next 10,000 years). And, given studies like this one in Science, they not even be sustainable even over the relatively short term of 25 to 50 years.
Of course this hasn't stopped people from moving to the southwest. Nor stopped local chamber of commerces from encouraging people to move there. Nor encouraged the powers-that-be to seriously address the flood of immigration, legal and otherwise, into the region.
We're headed straight for major 'overshoot' problems in the desert southwest. Not that you will hear any presidential candidates address the issue. (I'm not even sure if any politicians east of the Missouri really 'get' it.)
May you live in interesting times.
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 8:38 am
02 Feb 2008
The Bailo Model says that increases in regular precipitation will more than make up for and exceed any loss due to snowpack.
The Washington Post article that is one of your references says that "parts of the West have been hit by record snowfalls this winter".
So, what we lose in storage, we gain in throughput.
Permalink
Des Emery Posted 10:34 am
02 Feb 2008
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 10:35 am
02 Feb 2008
And if those parts that get extra precip. are usually drier areas? What then?
Ya need to realize that total amount is only parta the problem, just as important is distribution.
For example, if Teaxs gets it's regular amount of rainfall per year total, but almost all of that falls near, say, El Paso, then we have problems. Not only would the rest of the state be in drought, but El Paso would be flooded.
Distribution is an important factor.
Permalink
parkprotector Posted 7:53 am
04 Feb 2008
I live in central California and I see the dry lakes and reservoirs every day. Many in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys are at 24% of normal and one good snowpack isn't going to solve the problem of too much demand and too little planning. Building permits continue to be issued in water districts that can't even meet current demand and more people are moving to the area every day. But more dams are not being built and recharge areas for the aquifers are being paved over.
As an environmental planner, I see, first hand, the inability or outright refusal of governments and developers to look beyond the end of their terms or pocketbooks. It is a lethal combination of ignorance, greed, political ambition, and blind faith that "science" will solve all problems. And, unfortunately, most cities, counties, and individuals will only act with 20/20 hindsight after they start pumping mud.
Permalink