back
8 comments
Just a reminder that California has a ton of water. Plenty to supply all the people and lawns and a bunch of agriculture. What it doesn't have is enough to send a million tons of alfalfa overseas at $200 a pop. Each ton uses more water than a household does in a year. I bet you paid way more than $200 in water bills last year.

Yes, there are many locations that are actually short on water for real. Some of them are in very bad shape, with depleted reservoirs and aquifers and no prospect for access to more water resources. But the vast majority of Californians are getting their water from places where there would be surplus if the consumption wasn't so heavily subsidized. Read Cadillac Desert, it's a masterpiece and an eye opener.

I feel like there needs to be some kind of reckoning when it comes to water rights in CA. Like, say that water rights will be rationalized 25 years from now. Maybe it can be done under the guise of eminent domain. Give farmers who are getting essentially taxpayer subsidized free water enough time to prepare for it, and then 25 years from now create some kind of market based system where water goes to 1) people, and 2) whoever can use it most productively. Farmers can buy/sell water futures if they need higher certainty in what they will pay rather than a rate based on demand.

It just doesn't make sense that the fact that a plot of land which was occupied 300+ years ago is setting the precedent for how we use water today.

For an incredibly enjoyable fictional take on this, read The Water Knife, which posits a climate change driven future in which ancient water rights basically determine the survival of people and are thus the cause of violent struggle.
The interesting thing is that despite claims of shortages California water is essentially given away for free and there is plenty of it.

Setting a tax of 1 cent per gallon would likely solve water use issues (you'd still have distribution likely to sort out).

They actually grow alfalfa in the desert out here - imperial valley has ET rates of something like 60 inches(!!!!). That's 60 inches of water!

Maybe 5 million acre feet of water just for alfalfa (yes - in some cases exported to china).

8 trillion gallons of water for a crop that sells for $200 a ton. Meanwhile places without the subsidies can't grow it even if climate is better because they don't have this massive subsidy.

Umm.... this only works because water is basically cheap / free - growing rice and alfalfa are crazy in desert areas.

> California water is essentially given away for free and there is plenty of it

Where can I get me some of that free water?? I’m paying ~$7 per CCF (100cu ft / 748 gallons). That works out to $3-4000/yr to calwater…

$7 per CCF is not bad actually.

SFPUC will be $10.71 per CCF (plus base charges).

The trick for free/cheap water comes as follows:

Most western states never recognized riparian rights to water EXCEPT California (and maybe Oklahoma)! Needless to say this is going to be lawsuit land forever given how messy an approach that is. But under CA rules, if you have property touching a river, you can take that rivers water for various uses (not storing though).

One "trick" though - ponds - if you can get some ponds onto the property that can help you use the riparian rights.

https://www.landandfarm.com/property/Triple_Creek_Ranch-1372...

Other approach's - do a well close to a water source - you can pump that water and store it, then use the water from the river itself directly for ongoing uses etc.

The water deals in CA have historically favored the well connected.

"The San Fernando land syndicate were a group of wealthy investors who bought up large tracts of land in the San Fernando Valley with secret inside information from Eaton. The syndicate included friends of Eaton, such as Harrison Gray Otis and Henry E. Huntington."

Anyways, it's a fascinating world - I'd say the best way to get cheap water is to be rich and well connected.

Nestle does 58M gallons of water off these old rights - which it sells for $1+ per gallon! Enforcement of the rules has been years and years of talk.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/27/california-n...

Talk about cheap water :) Again, if they just had a tax of $0.01 per gallon - you'd solve a lot of wastage issues for uses that make absolutely no sense unless water is basically free.

“The essential point: California has never had enough water. The current drought is simply the latest evidence that this is a dry land, not “susceptible of supporting a very large population,” as an American military officer wrote in the 1840s. 2 But of course the region has shown itself more than susceptible of supporting — or at least attracting — a very large population.”

Expressing these truths on the oh so liberal internet is treated as a thought crime. However, it is as the author says, “the essential point.”

A version of this problem is taking place along the Australian river systems: Decisions at a state level about a resource flowing between the states. Federal/State politics is driving some truly horrendous outcomes.

Maximal use of the water tends to high profit maximal which tends to (a) capture as much as you can (b) what happens downstream is not my business.

It has also created a really bizarre third party market in water rights, which is being distorted for financial gain unrelated to the actual utility of water consumption.

"reserves for the environment" last as long as a paper bag in a firestorm. Nobody seems to be prepared to put a capital value on the natural resource, to "big" its value up to the economic extraction values of Almond trees or table grapes or cotton or rice.

And of course, people drink the water. For most people, it's been through a few kidneys along the way. By the time it gets down to South Australia, water quality for any use is a huge concern.

There's another version about the "great Artesian Basin" which is a battle between ground water flows, deep bores, fracking/mining and farming