Hacker News Reader

Comment by boringg | Hacker News Reader

At 1-2% savings of water thats roughly $20M–$40M/year on 2M AF of throughput using the 2024 SWP as base reference for volumes + 1000$/AF.

Though I think saving water in drought years has a massive value that isn't properly measured in this calculation. Likewise in boom years saving water almost doesn't matter.

See what the proposals come in as. See if the politicians turn it into a jobs project for the interior...

View on HN

I notice there's no surface area in your calculations. Solar panels alone, without labor or infrastructure, cost $5/sqft. What percentage of exposed canals would be covered at what cost?

People are determined to waste our public capacity on projects that make no economic sense. Is it any wonder the electorate doesn't have any faith that government will spend effectively?

I really like the idea of using this as a jobs program to keep the capacity to build, "muscle memory," strong in the workers in this community: metalworking, electrical, etc. There is much left to be built over the next 20-50 years.

The Hoover Dam was also a sort of jobs program similarly.

I mean the industrial policy of America is a jobs program. I think the governments en masse are trying to correct their assumptions from the 90s. Update their priors if you would.

Strong agree!

Construction labor is already expensive in California. We don't need make work construction projects.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com