Hacker News Reader

The small area in the South you are talking about has more than half the State's population and is the largest constituency of the Colorado Compact. While the Imperial County claim is the bulk of California's claim to the Colorado, the water finds its way to cities as well. Thus California has a very large stake in the Colorado Compact (arguably the largest in terms of people and served and dollars made). If these people don't get water from the Colorado, they will look for it in the northern half of the state. It is cheaper and easier to collectively defend the very legitimate claims to the Colorado than to try to reallocate the state's other water resources.

I live in Mesa - Scottsdale will be less impacted then the rest of the state. SRP serves Mesa and Scottsdale as well as PHX. There's an unincorporated area north of Scottsdale, that's already screwed - and people are still buying houses there! I think PHX Metro will be fine, but the rest of the state doesn't have the resources PHX does.

PS - and due to there being less agriculture in the area now, PHX metro is down to 1950s levels of water usage.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/16/us/arizona-water-rio-verd...

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands...

By law, anyone who wants to sell or lease land in Scottsdale needs to prove that there's a water supply for at least 100 years[0].

Is that phony or something? What was the writing on the wall that you saw that made you leave Scottsdale? Curious as a Phoenix-native who maybe one day might want to move back to the valley.

[0]: https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/water-supply

No. Anyone who wants to sell or lease subdivided land has to prove that. Not only that, but if the development gets water from Scottsdale, then it does not have to prove a 100 year reserve.

Scottsdale is confident, (or, at least, shows outward confidence), in its ability to provide water for 100 years because of its three pillars. One, that the Salt River gambit will always pay off. Two, that Scottsdale's water from the Colorado will never run dry. And three, that if all else fails, I mean, hey, Phoenix is sitting on an ocean. They can't leave us out high and dry can they?

With respect to two and three, we had zero confidence. Additionally, our faith in the ability of Scottsdale's leaders to effectively manage unexpected events with 1 was, limited.

I'm not saying move out of Scottsdale. I'm saying for us, it was too much risk and inconsistent with sustainability. I believe for a place like Scottsdale to become sustainable, somebody has to move out. Not saying who that should be, but mother nature is clearly signaling limits on our growth ambitions. Not all places in Arizona are unsustainable. Tuscon, Sedona, Phoenix proper. Etc. There are lots of places in Arizona that I think have put forth credible plans to manage their growth in the face of uncertain water security. But climate, geography and a failure to get out in front of the issue long ago has just put other areas in a precarious spot. That's just reality.

Thanks for the reply.

I do hold out some hope for technology in solving this problem. In theory (albeit at great cost), we could build a desalination pipeline from San Diego/Baja California to Arizona, and there's also the Source water panel[0] which pulls water out of the air, and seems like a potentially good option for residential water usage.

[0]: https://www.source.co/

There is some interesting stuff with Scottsdale and water going on now.

https://www.azfamily.com/2023/05/16/arizona-legislature-pass...

https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/ScottsdaleAZ/News/News+I...

https://kjzz.org/content/1847190/scottsdale-wants-governor-v...

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands...

https://www.abc15.com/news/region-northeast-valley/scottsdal...

Looks like it was just vetoed by the governor today.

So now now.

> Posted at 11:35 AM, May 22, 2023 and last updated 52 minutes ago

Thank you for the update on this.

I looked into this and saw this as well, but Rio Verde Foothills is a tiny community far northeast of Scottsdale. It seems like more of a political issue (i.e., people who aren't paying taxes to the city are benefitting from the city's management of water resources), than a technological issue.

Correct. There are also issues like Scottsdale limits the use of water for lawns ( https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/desert-plant-care ) and encouraging desert friendly yards ( https://www.azfamily.com/2022/08/01/ditch-grass-city-scottsd... ).

With the unincorporated town that... lets say "has a dislike of government" it becomes difficult for Scottsdale water district to implement the same restrictions for other areas.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/27/arizona-scot...

> Incorporating could give the community more options for water supply in future but forming an official town or city brings requirements, such as paved roads, street lights, more taxation and rules. This would be expensive but also change the secluded, quaint feel of Rio Verde Foothills, where people own chickens, donkeys, horses and ride motorbikes straight out their doors to nearby Tonto national forest.

> And forming a new water utility district doesn’t appeal either, with residents reluctant to have another government agency overseeing their neighborhood.

> California could care less if the Colorado Compact is changed.

It's behavior everytime the issue comes up suggest you are very wrong.

> Their use of it is limited to a small area south of LA.

No, its not; while most of it is used in the Imperial Valley, L.A. (by far the largest city in the State) itself also uses it for about half of its municipal supply, (as does San Diego, but I guess that could technically be considered part of the “small area south of LA”.)

Counterpoint is that imperial valley farming is very productive because the climate is great for many crops other than the lack of water.

>Their use of it is limited to a small area south of LA. Mostly for farming. Which they shouldn't be doing there anyway.

People say this all the time, but where else do you propose this be done? Where's the empty land that can be as productive as the Imperial Valley? If you want to stop farming there, we're going to have to reduce our population or it'll happen naturally in an unpleasant way.

makes me think of "The Water Knife" by Paolo Bacigalupi

I'm surprised this isn't the top comment.

Which part of the country (or the world) did you move to, out of curiosity? Is it one with a much more stable outlook on water supply?

Yes.

Wisconsin on Lake Michigan.

But again, if you can get a place in the border areas of Phoenix proper, I think that would be the ideal for the average person who lives in Scottsdale. We are from the Midwest, so.

I suspect the water under Phoenix is at least part of the reason developers got to places like Biltmore and Arcadia so many years ago. They're always one step ahead. But there is also the north Phoenix area bordering Scottsdale. I'd recommend that for the well off, but not wealthy. Still close to Kierland Commons area, and Scottsdale Rd is right there. (Although I'd bet even that area will still run you close to a mil for anything decent right now. And the prices there will only rise in the future if the water issues persist.)

How does Phoenix manage to store water?

They pump water into wells to fill up the aquifer.

But how do they stop folks with other wells from just pumping it all back out immediately?

"I drink your milkshake."

SRP does a lot of interesting stuff to store it. PHX gets water from 3 rivers - salt, verde, and Colorado. The Salt and Verde contribute 52%, and the Colorado River 38%. Reclaimed water accounts for 8% of the city's water supply, and groundwater the remaining 2%.

(note: the reclaimed water is interesting - Palo Verde nuke plant uses PHX's reclaimed water for cooling the (still?) largest nuclear power plant in the country.)

SRP uses large ponds/takes to 'recharge' the aquifers under PHX, as well as maintaining reservoirs.