Submitted by bluelotus214 t3_109977a in news
DeadwoodNative t1_j3x5plz wrote
This may be a stupid question, but are there expanded/enhanced statewide efforts in California to collect and divert flood waters to reservoirs? I know you can’t easily control flood waters but with all the resources and technology and brain power of that state, I’ve never heard of any brilliant collection diversion efforts. For instance I read a few months ago they plan on covering canals to lessen solar evaporation, covering them with solar panels to also generate energy. Sounds like a genius win/win. Any genius collection efforts?
InsuranceToTheRescue t1_j3xbawb wrote
I think the issue is, how often does California get torrential rains like this (personally, I don't know)? Diverting them to reservoirs is possible, but that's a lot of expensive infrastructure to build and maintain for something that maybe only happens once every 50 years.
DeadwoodNative t1_j3xqfzl wrote
would def be interesting to study feasibility based on recent and changing patterns, but it seems every year or 2 there’s serious flooding somewhere in the state.
and if the reports are true about exorbitant water allocated to almond growing… a gallon per nut or whatever; I like almonds but that’s ridiculous
Friedumb t1_j3xzzlh wrote
Its in the works as of right now.
I believe the plan is to use wind/solar to pump water to the new reservoir and then utilize hydro to capture energy from the release.
Another decent project can be found here: https://apnews.com/article/floods-climate-science-business-wildlife-502590d610a78cb027baf260e79b8555
By recreating the old floodplains we can increase recharge while reducing flood risk. The issue with this project is that farmers are reluctant to give up land adjacent to rivers due to water rights.
There is hope, it just requires everyone coming together for a single goal. Ok maybe there isnt much hope...
[deleted] t1_j3y66bh wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j41ic2d wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3xt6xo wrote
[removed]
PhoenixReborn t1_j3y3hwz wrote
There was a segment on our local NPR station the other day about this.
One of the things they mentioned was having to strike a balance between pumping water from the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta for human use, and maintaining enough water flow to the bay to prevent backfill with salt water. One of the guests wrote an op-ed arguing for intelligent land use to allow water to refill the water table.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/07/opinion/california-flood-atmospheric-river-drought.html
Johns-schlong t1_j3yjbgb wrote
Depopulate the rural areas, reintroduce the beavers, destroy the levies and turn most of it back into flood plains. We don't own the land, and we can't keep disrupting it. Our kids only get what we leave them. More human intervention isn't the answer.
[deleted] t1_j3zcqe3 wrote
[removed]
hellomondays t1_j423u5a wrote
I think it's the same segment, one of the guest talks about how snowpack is key to the water system for North Cal, so unfortunately all this rain isn't going to make much of a long-term difference
Mad_V t1_j3y3rbo wrote
Yes, construction is underway on the Sites Resivoir in the Sacramento Valley.
The_Meek t1_j3zldn5 wrote
Another notable issue is that the first duty of these reservoirs is flood control (and even if you deprioritize flood control, you need to maintain the integrity of the dam itself). That means that collecting rainwater mid season isn’t actually all that helpful—most of the dams will be doing large releases to bring their levels down over the next few days and weeks. You can’t absorb the large surge from a flooding event without unused reservoir capacity. Bad things happen when reservoirs are full with more rain on the way, eg Oroville 2017. Once the forecast dries up and snow starts to melt, the reservoirs will shift to maximizing stored volume for the dry season (vs maintaining flood control capacity for the rainy season).
[deleted] t1_j3xkjhb wrote
[removed]
pattydickens t1_j3xbxur wrote
"With all the resources and technology and brain power" they should have been building desalination plants for the last 20 years.
DeadwoodNative t1_j3xpoxo wrote
Totally agree 100% They def dropped the ball there. Guessing some of it was ‘NIMBY’. Know the costs were gonna be ridiculous. That is def one area CA needs to pull there head out and deregulate a bit. Maher had a horror story of like 4 yrs to get his solar plans approved and built. There was a big story of proposals to build temp transitional housing to ease homeless fiasco, and it was like the price of a luxury apt per unit. Come fucking on! I’ve also heard disposal of salt byproduct would be a nightmare. Almost seems harnessing their reappearing ‘atmospheric river’ would be just as ‘easy’
kazyllis t1_j3xszkj wrote
We built a desal plant in San Diego. It cost a ton of money and only gives us 10% of our daily water usage, while being criticized by environmental groups because it impacts the ocean life. Still glad we have it but it would take a lost of these plants to support SD, and 4 times that amount to support LA.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments