'Worse Than Anything Seen in 2,000 Years' as Megadrought Threatens Western States

[adirondacker]

New study indicates chances are increasingly high that California and other states could be facing a water crisis without compare
by
Jon Queally, staff writer

"A new study warns that the chances of western states in the U.S. experiencing a multi-decade 'megadrought'—not seen in historical climate records in over 2,000 years—has a much higher chance of occurring in the decades ahead than previously realized. In fact, scientists are warning, the drought now being experienced in California and elsewhere could be just the beginning of an unprecedented water crisis across the west and southwest regions of the country.

The research—a project between scientists at Cornell University, the University of Arizona, and the U.S. Geological Survey—shows that chances for a decade-long drought this century is now at fifty-fifty, and that a drought lasting as long as 35 years—defined as a "megadrought"—has a twenty- to fifty-percent chance of occurring.

“For the southwestern U.S., I’m not optimistic about avoiding real megadroughts,” Toby Ault, Cornell assistant professor of earth and atmospheric sciences and lead author of the paper, told the Cornell Chronicle. “As we add greenhouse gases into the atmosphere – and we haven’t put the brakes on stopping this – we are weighting the dice for megadrought.”

And if such a megadrought does occur, warned Ault, "This will be worse than anything seen during the last 2,000 years.”

And as USA Today notes, "The difference now, of course, is the Western USA is home to more than 70 million people who weren't here for previous megadroughts. The implications are far more daunting.""
<SNIP>

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/09/03/worse-anything-seen-2000-years-megadrought-threatens-western-states

[Curtis]

1. Very worrisome for us out here

My question is why is our only solution to build more dams? Brown wants to build a new dam and divert flood water from the Sacramento River to fill it instead of sending that water through the Yolo Bypass. How is that going to happen if we don't get the water in the first place. Why are we not investing heavily into desalination plants? That would seem to be a much better solution while bringing down greenhouse gasses at the same time.

[adirondacker]

2. Desalinization is both expensive and energy demanding.

Santa Barbra tried it and shut it down nearly two decades ago...
http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/gov/depts/pw/resources/system/sources/desalination.asp

They may be able to supply the cities with drinking water, but the billions of gallons necessary for agriculture will be the problem.

[Demeter]

11. Bet it's a lot cheaper and more efficient now, 20 years later

otherwise, the Middle East would be a lot less populated.

[NickB79]

13. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't rely heavily on desal. to exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Saudi_Arabia#Desalination

Total municipal water use in Saudi Arabia has been estimated at 2.1 cubic kilometers per year in 2004, or 9% of total water use. Agriculture accounts for 88% of water use and industry for only 3%. Demand has been growing at the rate of 4.3% per annum (average for the period 1999-2004), in tandem with urban population growth (around 3%). Water supply is usually not metered, neither at the source nor the distribution point. It is tentatively estimated that average water consumption for those connected to the network is about 235 liters per capita per day, a level lower than in the United States.[2]

snip

Saudi Arabia is one of the driest regions in the world, with no perennial rivers. Water is obtained from four distinct sources:

non-renewable groundwater from the deep fossil aquifers
desalinated water
surface water
renewable groundwater from shallow alluvial aquifers
Only the last two sources are renewable. Their volume, however, is minimal. Desalination plants provide about half the country’s drinking water. About 40% comes from groundwater. The remainder comes from surface water (about 10%). Desalinated water is prevalent along the coasts, surface water in the southwest region and groundwater elsewhere. The capital Riyadh, however, is supplied to a great extent with desalinated water pumped from the Persian Gulf over 467 km to the city located in the heart of the country.

It states that desal. provides half the municipal water, which means only 4.5% of all water used there is from desal. plants.

And that's in an insanely wealthy country in prime solar territory to boot.

[phantom power]

5. they want to build more dams because that's what we've always done

and so of course it will keep working, right?

right?

[truedelphi]

9. Brown's 24 bilion dollar boondoggle of a project has been very much

opposed by John Garamendi, but I guess since Garmanedi is no longer involved inside the state government, he won't be listened to. (Garamendi is now a congressman in US Congress.)

BTW, big constructiion projects are beloved of almost all politicans everywhere as they represent kickbacks, and/or revolving door jobs, and campaign contributions to boot.

[NickB79]

10. The only solution to a megadrought: MOVE!

We have no technological fixes that are both economically feasible and scalable that could combat such an event.

Even if we built desal. plants to provide drinking water for the populace, the massive amounts of water required by industry and agriculture would be impossible to meet (unless you build HUNDREDS of said desal. plants).

And without industry or agriculture, the Western state's economies go into free fall, and people end up moving anyway on their own.

There will always be enough water to support some people, but 70 million and growing? No fucking way.

[progressoid]

3. How will this affect the Kardashians?

That's the big question on everyone's minds.

[GliderGuider]

4. The closer you look, the worse it appears.

Welcome to The Predicament™.

[Indydem]

6. 2000 years? A blip on the time scale.

As if the last one was yesterday.

[Sopkoviak]

7. A "megadrought" is defined by a time period

Not the relative dryness. The "study" itself suggests that some years could be above average wetness and some below.

And a 20 to 50% chance that it "could" occur means there is a 50 to 80% chance that it won't.

What a worthless piece of crap scaremongering study. It's virtually meaningless.

Is it any wonder many people dismiss this kind of crap?

I wonder who profits from this.

[Nihil]

12. "What a worthless piece of crap scaremongering study. It's virtually meaningless. "

> Is it any wonder many people dismiss this kind of crap?

Strangely enough, I believe that
>> Cornell University, the University of Arizona, and the U.S. Geological Survey
are more likely to get it right than some anonymous prick on the internet who
prefers to stick his fingers in his ears so he doesn't hear any bad news.

[adirondacker]

14. 50% chance of a thunderstorm. Time to grab your umbrella and walk around in an open field.

"And a 20 to 50% chance that it "could" occur means there is a 50 to 80% chance that it won't."

[truedelphi]

8. Rain clouds in the autumn dry up, as

perhaps the silicon distillates added to the sky do their job of destroying the farming communities of California.

And not only that, Nestle is given free reign to haul off truckloads of pure water from communities near Los Angeles and up here in the northern Countiies.

[Enthusiast]

15. Nestle's CEO has made it clear that access to clean water is not a human right.

So there! Corporate rule, baby!

[truedelphi]

16. I know - it is very clear that the only choice that you and I have to make is

for us to become Nestle executives - the sooner the better!

[Enthusiast]

17. Yes, but we wouldn't be

able to pass the asshole test as we would have compassion and a sense of fairness.

You have to be cut throat to make it in the world of the executive. Rare exceptions, like Arthur T. Demoulas, do exist of course.