Comment by mdavis6890 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mdavis6890 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Regarding California in particular, there is actually plenty of water for the residents. About 80-90% of usable water is used for agriculture, and the majority of that produce is exported from California to other countries and states. For example, all around the capital of Sacramento there are 1000's of acres of rice fields. About half the rice is exported to Asia. Appx 8% or so of California water is used in and around homes, including landscaping. It takes a gallon of water to grow a single almond, and 95%+ of the worlds almonds come from CA. It takes FIFTY gallons to grow an avocado, and 95% of the WORLD's come from CA also. These are not cherry-picked examples. I could have chosen dozens of other crops.

So, in effect, California's farmers are selling roughly half of its water (in the form of produce) to other states and countries. It's a bit like Saudi Arabia in this sense, but with water instead of oil. Unlike oil, of course, water does replenish, but nevertheless the rate of export is so high that the aquifers are nearly empty now.

Do make sure to take shorter showers though, fellow Californians!

The fact that there's water for people doesn't mean the drought doesn't affect the state. Drought causes large amounts of dead trees (of which California is covered in) these dead trees catch fire and burn cities down. Water isn't just a consumable for humans

Pumping excessive amounts of groundwater for agriculture lowers the water table and may be a bigger driver for tree die-off:

https://www.azcentral.com/in-depth/news/local/arizona-enviro...

> 95%+ of the worlds almonds come from CA

Does this indicate that the climate required to grow an almond is found in very few places, CA being the top of the list? In that case, there really is no alternative to not growing it (apart from abandoning it, similar to the issue some people raise with growing meat in CA and its water requirements).

Got a downvote or two, so I thought I'd add some references:

First, I retract my numbers about 95% of world almonds and avocados coming from CA - I was typing from memory from research I did a year ago, and now I can't find sources to corroborate this. Nevertheless:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almonds_in_California "The state produces 80% of the world's almonds and 100% of the United States’ commercial supply."

https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/ "Over a third of the country's vegetables and two-thirds of the country's fruits and nuts are grown in California." "In 2020 California's farms and ranches received $49.1 billion in cash receipts for their output." "California agricultural exports totaled $21.7 billion in 2019"

https://spoonuniversity.com/lifestyle/the-problem-with-drink... "...between 33 and 248 gallons of water go into producing just a half-gallon of almond milk. I'll let that sink in for a second, before I remind you that 99% of almonds grown in the United States are grown in California..."

https://www.truthordrought.com/almond-milk-myths "8% of CA ag water is used to grow almonds" (and keep in mind that ag water is 90% of the total usable)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281474989_How_much_... "On average, about 2,500 liters of water need to be supplied (by rainfall and/or irrigation) to a rice field to produce 1 kg of rough rice." - That's 2.5L per GRAM of rice.

https://news.yahoo.com/many-california-farmers-water-cut-130... "A handful of districts supplying farmers including Gallagher are receiving nearly 2 million acre feet of water this drought year, enough to supply the city of Los Angeles for roughly four years." People like to talk about the cities being problems, or that it's the water we send down south, or whatever like that. Meanwhile, a handful of (farm) districts, in a single year, are using the equivalent of a 4-year supply of water for the entire city of LA. Wow.

And yet: https://abc7news.com/san-jose-water-california-drought-conse... "Whaley said the [San Jose Water] company is asking customers to cutback 15-percent from their 2019 water use levels, and pay $7.13 in surcharges for every unit of water used beyond that amount."

I wonder if these numbers are the amount sprayed on a field/orchard (I assume?) or somehow measures how much was absorbed by the trees/plants which would be less. What I’m getting at, is where does the water not taken in by the plants go? Evaporates? Sinks to the aquifer? What side effect would there be if all almond orchards were no longer watered (other than to the orchard)?

It all sucks, but it does make sense. The water was essentially homesteaded just like the land when white settlers first entered the area. If you were the first to use the water, you owned it.

I guess theoretically the state could take the water and redistribute it using eminent domain, but then they would have to pay the current owners for it. I have no idea what that would cost.

And don't forget Apple changing reusable porcelain to 'biodegradable' plates to save on /staff costs/ water for washing up!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com