Comments
aukir t1_iudkdzw wrote
Can we just stop wasting water on most grass lawns?
8to24 t1_iudkuny wrote
Lawns, golf courses, washing cars, flushing toilets, etc
Kytyngurl2 t1_iudoog4 wrote
Toilets ought to be grey water only. Using old shower, laundry, and rain water. We throw away water that’s still usable for something.
thintoast t1_iudpjub wrote
I’m not sure how common it is, but when I visited Ireland a few years back, a place we stayed at had a rainwater collection tank that held partially treated water for toilet flushing and bathroom hand washing. A super simple concept and extremely resourceful.
H3rbert_K0rnfeld t1_iudxr5k wrote
You don't want to get caught with a rain barrel in Utah or Cali
Celesticle t1_iudy63x wrote
Rain barrels are legal in Utah now have been for a few years.
H3rbert_K0rnfeld t1_iue07av wrote
Ah! TIL! Now ya'll just need rain to fill them ;-)
Celesticle t1_iue1hwx wrote
Yeah that would be lovely. Consistent rain anyway. We got sporadic heavy rain over the summer. Plenty of floods in Southern Utah, Moab hit hard a few times, but Great Salt Lake is dangerously low and our legislature is incompetent and greedy so I have little faith they'll fix anything before it's too late.
SNRatio t1_iue6og6 wrote
They're fine in California, at least where I live. I have three near my front door.
[deleted] t1_iudzrl5 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iudtci2 wrote
Population of Ireland 4.6 million
Population of the United States 326 million
Population of China 1.39 Billion
You see how rain barrels aren't going to scale?
strausbreezy28 t1_iudvzhp wrote
This is a silly comment. You would need to do an analysis that involves population, population density, rainfall, rainfall density and frequency, etc. in order to say whether or not that kind of system would scale. Not just looking at population.
MyNameis_Not_Sure t1_iudxf24 wrote
And determine where unlimited rain water harvesting is still legal… Colorado has already regulated this and I’m sure they aren’t alone
[deleted] t1_iudxtg3 wrote
Colorado legalized collecting years ago...right after the longest hardest rains came to a sudden and permenant end. I collected ridiculous amounts of water, then found out I wasn't allowed to, dumped it and then they changed the damn law.
MyNameis_Not_Sure t1_iudyi3m wrote
They codified a limited amount of rainwater collection. Colorado did nothing to legalize it, it’s been legal since the dawn of time
[deleted] t1_iudyy0f wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iudxvvl wrote
How many rain barrels you need to wash 100,000 people's hands?
10,000 people?
1000 people?
100 people?
1.28 gallons per toilet that's 69.5 Billion gallons required to flush Chinese toilets if they only flush once day. 50 gallons per barrel, you need 1.39 Billion barrels filled every single day.
8to24 t1_iudytxk wrote
This pedantic argument totally misses the point. It isn't that rain water is the answer for the whole world. It is that treated potable water shouldn't be used for toilets. In some places rain water may work. In other places lightly filtered gray water (sink & laundry) might do the trick.
cammoblammo t1_iuffyqi wrote
Why would you only have a fifty gallon barrel?
Here in Australia a small water tank is about 250 gallons. It’s not uncommon to find tanks twenty or even fifty times that size.
I know plenty of people who run their entire house with rainwater.
[deleted] t1_iufouut wrote
The law says 110 gallons max. There's a deal to get water from the Colorado River signed by five states, taking water on residential properties prevents water from running off into the river.
Something like 70% of Australia is uninhabitable.
cammoblammo t1_iugvsmf wrote
A large area of Australia is uninhabitable, which is why we use big-arse tanks to catch the rain.
In most new dwellings in some states (even—especially—in cities) it’s mandatory to have rainwater tanks installed.
Rednys t1_iug487w wrote
You flushing your toilet is not simply throwing it away. And adding more plumbing and tanks to hold and distribute your grey water adds complexity and cost to housing and more maintenance. All this for an extremely small amount of water "saved".
Additionally if your waste water isn't being diluted by some "clean" water it's much more toxic and much more solid which could also lead to problems.
xeneks t1_iugs9lb wrote
The waste being diluted enough so it’s able to be treated and doesn’t solidify or clog in pipes is something that I am sure is an actual issue. I wonder if they have to add water sometimes to offset the water saving of residents who achieve amazing low water consumption patterns? Also, if they have to add water to be able to actually process the wastewater as it’s received? This is why I think a way to create little bags of faeces like in the martian movie and book, makes sense. The faeces is a high cost, high value component. Simply bagging it means suddenly pipes have less physical material to address, and also, the faeces isn’t contaminated with other chemicals such as detergents or hair or clothes or or teeth or hand washing compounds.
Kytyngurl2 t1_iugr7zw wrote
Thank you for the additional information!
draeath t1_iudy2d3 wrote
In most (non-septic) US households at least, the drains and toilets all go to the same place. I don't think you want to recirculate that for flushing, the result won't be much better than letting it sit.
AaronJeep t1_iuffgvo wrote
Most of the smaller 1.5" pipe drains (sinks, tubs, washers) make their way under the house via PVC networks until they connect with larger 3" and 4" drains used by toilets. You could reroute just the shower drain on millions of homes to a tank and a small put could feed it back to toilets. It would never mix with raw sewage. It wouldn't be reasonable with homes built on a slab, you could still do it pretty easy on millions and millions of homes, apartments and such. That would save millions and million of gallons of water.
[deleted] t1_iudp7h4 wrote
[removed]
LateMiddleAge t1_iudt40v wrote
Golf course worldwide use ~4.5B people's sustainment water. A simplifying statement---water is unevenly distributed, heavy, and hard to move---but is helpful for framing the scope.
Lord_Montague t1_iuduyhr wrote
Golf courses even in nice climates should be forced to use reclaimed water or runoff where possible. It's not like we are using that water anyway. Golf courses in the desert can just go away. Green grass is not meant to exist there and that is the most wasteful use of water I can think of.
1stGetAClew t1_iufuj9g wrote
I live in a nice climate. The city I live in uses less than 50% of it's allowed draw from underground aquifers and the aquifers send hundreds of billions of litres beyond all the consented draws of water straight into the ocean every year. What justification do you have for any of my local courses using reprocessed water which requires significant energy input for irrigation? It seems like a very poorly thought out idea to be honest.
xeneks t1_iugse5t wrote
I see the profit motive now. Interesting number.
[deleted] t1_iuerqa6 wrote
Gold courses should be criminalized.
ZSCampbellcooks t1_iudzdnk wrote
Those are a “drop in the bucket” compared to livestock production for profit.
namsur1234 t1_iudrwqj wrote
Im helping by not washing my car.
[deleted] t1_iue5wa7 wrote
[removed]
rustajb t1_iue892p wrote
Business parks.
m4fox90 t1_iudt8hy wrote
You can take my clean, shiny car from my cold, dead hands
8to24 t1_iudwdtg wrote
One doesn't need consumable clean water to clean a car. I didn't mean one should never wash a car. Rather the way we wash cars is wasteful.
aukir t1_iudzmpg wrote
They do recycle water, but those unlimited drive through spray washers seem so wasteful.
m4fox90 t1_iudypf2 wrote
Have you ever washed a car with dirty water? It doesn’t work. Mineral deposits prevent wax and ceramic sealants from adhering properly, as well as leaving stains. You have to use clean water.
8to24 t1_iudziot wrote
Just because water isn't potable doesn't mean it is too dirty to clean your car.
Palpitating_Rattus t1_iuffbhr wrote
You CANT use graywater to wash your car. Try using your shower water to wash your windows. It doesn't work. This is common sense.
8to24 t1_iufg04o wrote
Filter gray water would work.
Palpitating_Rattus t1_iufg8mx wrote
Soap and dirt and bacteria are still there. Your car will smell and look like dog turd
8to24 t1_iufiddr wrote
>In order to reduce fresh water and sewer costs, and to eliminate the impact of contaminated water on the environment, car wash owners install recycling systems in their washes. In many municipalities, these systems are required in order for the business to meet code and receive a permit. https://columbiatireauto.com/the-high-value-of-recycled-water-in-an-automatic-car-wash/
It is literally already a thing. I don't understand what point you are attempting to make.
phyrros t1_iue1vk3 wrote
well, considering the direction we are going both car usage as well as a far higher death rate will me more common anyway
Momoselfie t1_iudr4xm wrote
That actually makes up a very small portion of our water usage. A huge amount is spent feeding the meat industry.
SoupaSoka t1_iudtbj0 wrote
And, people don't have to go 100% vegan to have an impact. We'd see huge reductions in water usage if every citizen in developed countries went meatless just a few extra days or even meals a week.
Lord_Montague t1_iudv8t6 wrote
Already have due to meat prices right now.
SoupaSoka t1_iudvoig wrote
I don't think it'll singlehandedly solve issues we're facing, but as climate change and water shortages worsen, costs of foods and goods will go up so much that it wouldn't surprise me if our water, land, and energy use drops significantly. Almost a "self-correcting" problem if you toss on top of it the amount of people that will die and the reduction in birth rates. Note that I hope we can find better routes that don't result in widespread death or famine.
So what you're experiencing is probably going to be true for many people and amplified as things worsen.
MiseALepreuve t1_iuee2ky wrote
Mostly just minimize beef. The difference in water usage for chicken vs beef is immense.
In fact, this site puts the liters per g of protein of chicken at just moderately higher than cereals and vegetables and barely above eggs and milk. And far, far below nuts and beef.
Momoselfie t1_iue1xc3 wrote
I think the biggest culprit is beef. Just cut back on beef intake.
[deleted] t1_iueb5cq wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iudy2im wrote
[removed]
runtheplacered t1_iudtdq3 wrote
I'd be curious for someone actually knowledgeable to check in with this. This feels like a very misleading statistic to me. It seems like the water used for agriculture, while technically greater, would still cause less of a localized disruption than a municipal water supply being hit by landscape irrigation.
In other words, I think this understates how much of an impact it would have if everybody stopped watering their lawns, considering landscape irrigation accounts for 50% of all annual residential water usage. Or at the very least stopped over watering it, which is typically what happens anyway.
Momoselfie t1_iue1t3r wrote
I don't know about other states, but here in AZ, agriculture makes uo 72% of our total water usage.
Bajabound4surf t1_iuf401v wrote
I'm down here for the first time near Yuma and I cannot believe the water waste by the farmers. It's 82 degrees out, full sun and literally a hundred yards from my van they are watering a lettuce field.
fire_bent t1_iuev8ey wrote
I just mulched half my backyard to turn it into a garden! It's gunna be badass
NotObviouslyARobot t1_iufwe7b wrote
Almonds use as much water as the entirety of residential uses in California. Restricting water-intensive agriculture on a regional basis has the greatest returns for the least effort.
[deleted] t1_iudxy77 wrote
[removed]
Eupion t1_iueio8y wrote
I wish the cities would just plant fruit trees instead of trees that do nothing but provide shade. Feed people and wildlife, and provide shade and oxygen. And totally get rid of grass lawns!
Worriedrph t1_iughfic wrote
Planting fruit trees in an urban environment is a great way to create stink and attract rats.
Downvote_me_dumbass t1_iue2btl wrote
The word you’re looking for is Xeriscaping, and it should be mandatory all over the planet.
Dry-Gulch-Slim t1_iue83sa wrote
>and it should be manditory all over the planet.
You know the whole planet isn't the American southwest, right? Please tell me you know that. What an awful take.
Downvote_me_dumbass t1_iue8zwg wrote
> You know the whole planet isn't the American southwest, right? Please tell me you know that. What an awful take.
You realize there are significant portions of the planet that could benefit from saving water and using plants that are grown regionally that still could make their property look beautiful, right?
Please let me know you understand this isn’t an American problem, but a global problem (even more so when another country controls water rights to other countries).
This is such an ignorant take.
[deleted] t1_iueabss wrote
[removed]
Rugkrabber t1_iuec6mj wrote
I don’t think that will happen anytime soon unless we educate children from the start how to do this and why. It requires a lot of knowledge and a lot of effort and hard work every day, which not many people already can do now. On top of it it’s costly, which I would assume might be the largest hurdle for the large majority of people.
jetro30087 t1_iudriy9 wrote
Capitalism will solve it once the price of water increases enough to justify building desalinization plants to make more money and not a second sooner. Look forward to trading fresh water on the futures market.
Kytyngurl2 t1_iudosi5 wrote
I’d kill for some sea peas right now
dumnezero t1_iuejqrh wrote
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/09/sea-rice-eelgrass-marine-grain-chef-angel-leon-marsh-climate-crisis not peas, but at should be good with peas
random314 t1_iudj59f wrote
I recently started eating kelp burgers. They're actually quite good. Especially with swiss and mushrooms.
tinycole2971 t1_iue0lrh wrote
Where do you find kelp burgers?
random314 t1_iue14ao wrote
https://akua.co/products/kelp-burger
I got this brand.
Belostoma t1_iueotqs wrote
Add sea beans to the list -- they're delicious!
I'm not sure if your idea works overall though, rather than trading one problem for another. I'm sure there are places it could be helpfully done, but where would we find the physical space to grow enough saltwater crops to replace a large proportion of freshwater-driven industrial agriculture? Coastal and especially estuary habitat is fragile and critical to begin with, and the last thing we want to do is convert any of it from biodiverse native vegetation to a monoculture of human food, even if it helps slightly with the water problem.
Maybe this would be a good application for futuristic vertical farming tech in high-rises near the sea. I don't know which crops might be amenable to that.
8to24 t1_iueq7lw wrote
>but where would we find the physical space to grow enough saltwater crops to replace a large proportion of freshwater-driven industrial agriculture?
The ocean. Floating hydroponic style crops.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt t1_iudyuwg wrote
> We've just committed ourselves to wasteful practices.
You mean to tell me growing incredibly water-intensive plants in/near a desert is a BAD idea???
Someone tell California.
joanzen t1_iudzl58 wrote
I keep saying we should use recycled plastics to make automated floating solar desalination networks pumping fresh water inland while capturing salt deposits that can be unloaded and contained in dry storage areas.
If we deploy enough of these self-contained networks the rising ocean levels will get impacted and they will slow down the rate at which ocean salinity has been rising, while creating fresh water.
[deleted] t1_iufhunr wrote
[removed]
mynameiszack t1_iudpn5n wrote
Water is heavy
[deleted] t1_iudqel8 wrote
[removed]
Cliffe_Turkey t1_iudag1c wrote
It's almost as if pumping water out of every aquifer with reckless abandon for 150 yrs combined with global warming and surface water regulations that encourage overuse and waste has consequences!
It's unbelievably hard for me to be sympathetic towards farmers and ranchers in the west as what they've wrought comes home to roost. Anyone with an honest bone in their body could see this coming 100 years ago.
ShittDickk t1_iuey94n wrote
They created the dust bowl in the south and when that caused the damage it did, they just spread out and continued those techniques everywhere else.
Cliffe_Turkey t1_iufaro2 wrote
And the race to the bottom of the Ogallala aquifer threatens to bring it back all over again! Yaaaay! But don't regulate groundwater use or anything, we have traditions out here!
For real though: the IRA bill has serious money allocated to regenerative ag, super cool that the feds are actually investing in something like that. Hope it helps, not my area of expertise.
DamnDame t1_iugoahx wrote
Unlike surface water, in Nebraska the groundwater belongs to the people of the state. Now, people own the land above it and over several decades many wells have tapped the Ogallala Aquifer, but the state put a moratorium on new wells over a decade ago. Meters have also been put on groundwater wells.
There is a clear understanding of the need to conserve water in the state and there are many competing stakeholders. Unlike other areas of this massive aquifer (8 states), Nebraska has the good fortune of having a large mass of sand across most of the aquifer allowing rain to percolate through the sediment. The recharge rate is quite good. (The deepest part of the aquifer is in Nebraska and it contributes to 24,000 miles of streams in the state.)
For those who are unaware, precision agriculture is a growing practice that has environmental and economic benefits for producers and their communities. Reddit gets pretty dark, I'm offering this information to those who may be unaware of research and practices already in place to improve farming and ranching. (Using less resources, fertilizer, herbicides/pesticides is a win for all.)
Of all the water that covers the earth, 3% is fresh water. 2% is frozen in glaciers, leaving only 1% available for world to use.
Don't run the water when you brush your teeth.
kalasea2001 t1_iue66h7 wrote
>sympathetic towards farmers and ranchers in the west as what they've wrought
This is absolutely not just a farmer rancher issue. This is an everyone issue. We all allowed this to happen.
GreatAndPowerfulNixy t1_iueaz9r wrote
The percentage of water use by almond farmers alone in California dwarfs all other private usage.
Adamofatom t1_iuf1bhb wrote
And who do you think the farmers farm for?
I am definitely for more regulations for the industry. But at the end of the day the industry feeds the needs of the consumers.
TheLastForestOnEarth t1_iufaf1h wrote
Farmers farm for themselves. Farming is a for-profit business. They're not heroes, selflessly generating food so the rest of us can live.
kuroimakina t1_iuf3f6w wrote
Consumers are stupid, and those who aren’t stupid are often too overworked and tired to also spend all their time picking and choosing every single purchase to minimize their impact to the environment. It’s all just how the system works - make everyone overworked, undereducated, and/or generally disenfranchised and they’ll just accept anything
MewgDewg t1_iuf80fz wrote
idk friend - I understand your sentiment but anecdotally it only took me an afternoon to figure out what in my area was reasonably sustainable and what specifically was not, when certain things I like were in season etc.. I definitely agree with the "No ethical consumption" sentiment but I don't feel like it's a good excuse not to try
blumpkinmania t1_iug02od wrote
Almonds? Europe, China and India.
Cliffe_Turkey t1_iuf8x3l wrote
Sure, I agree. We shouldn't build giant cities in the desert either. Or let private equity buy up water rights and sell them to the highest bidder. Lawns and golf courses are ridiculous.
But look how water is allocated and who is using most of it in the west. Look at the insane things our systems of water law have incentivized. Look at the lawmakers who refuse to change the systems of incentives. Look at the ranchers and farmers (most of them) who refuse to do the most basic water efficiency changes because they've got the private property rights, and their traditions. It's the biggest piece, by far.
[deleted] t1_iuecp1e wrote
[removed]
ATribeOfAfricans t1_iuef937 wrote
This is the societal demand man and lack of regulation, farmer just doing what they gotta do to make money. Tragedy of the commons
dumnezero t1_iuejzns wrote
Tragedy of the privates in this case, as it's happening on privatized lands with privatized wells.
ATribeOfAfricans t1_iugbsa6 wrote
Some states have water rights, but they are set up incredibly short sighted and unrealistic.
In places like Texas though, where I live, it's a free for all and you can use as much as you want so the incentive becomes use as much if the water before your neighbor does
dumnezero t1_iugvt5c wrote
And is this based on owning private land with water underneath?
ATribeOfAfricans t1_iuiwrz0 wrote
No. There are plenty of wells pulling water from public lands. What are you even trying to force dude?
We aren't properly rationing water, which requires better regulation. Simple as that. We're not to mad max water control just yet
[deleted] t1_iufa7uo wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iudkmiy wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iue4f9t wrote
[deleted]
Cliffe_Turkey t1_iufb883 wrote
I would disagree here. Tons of measures of biodiversity have been in free fall for a long time. Unregulated groundwater use has dried up springs and driven species to extinction without most folks even noticing. The west was always fragile, and what we see now is a pale imitation of nature due to 12,000+ years of depredation and degradation. Though certainly things have accelerated in the last 150 yrs.
jtaustin64 t1_iud8ff0 wrote
My family farms in the South. We have made the comment for the last decade that the weather patterns in the South seem to be shifting to more of a rainy season and dry season like they have in the tropics. It floods when we plant, doesn't rain at all during the growing season, and then floods during harvest.
[deleted] t1_iuerxkq wrote
Everyone loves a nice loaf of moldy bread.
Rice_Auroni t1_iug8lg5 wrote
almost like the climate is changing in some way.
sure wish we had scientists around to warn us if some such thing would happen
[deleted] t1_iuk88uu wrote
[removed]
TheLastForestOnEarth t1_iufhmpe wrote
What crops do you grow, and which ones are you considering as replacements, for the coming monsoon climate?
[deleted] t1_iufkrci wrote
[removed]
peasant_python t1_iud8mhs wrote
And now science found out that if you pump water out of the ground everywhere and use it in industry it is not wet anymore. Astounding.
Wagamaga OP t1_iucscpy wrote
For millennia, communities throughout North America have adapted to the ebb and flow of waterways. Water infrastructure provides reservoirs for times of drought and flood control for instances of deluge.
Drought is a way of life in some parts of the United States, said Jeffrey Mount, a geomorphologist and senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. “What you worry about is whether you’re picking up a trend.” Long-term shifts in streamflow could signal a fundamental change in climate that scientists believe the country’s infrastructure is not designed to endure.
Unfortunately, such a trend is emerging. In the first comprehensive picture of streamflow in the United States, scientists reported that streams in the South and West have gotten drier in the past 70 years. Though unsurprising to many, the result is worrisome. The finding was published in the journal Water Resources Research.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2022WR031930
_pooch t1_iudx8c1 wrote
Just wait... The supreme court is about to legalize the destruction of wetlands
fkenned1 t1_iue02ml wrote
In addition to reservoirs down by about 3 feet and all our grass dying, I noticed large patches of forest in my area with trees turning brown and dropping all their leaves in the middle of summer. Not a good sign.
[deleted] t1_iues1w6 wrote
And then the beetles attack them and the trees die forever.
TheLastForestOnEarth t1_iufaurv wrote
Not just for a while, forever
windythought34 t1_iudaidl wrote
Many places are dependent on snow to get water - and people don't understand it. Climate change will kill off agriculture in these areas. You can't save enough rain to support agriculture.
[deleted] t1_iudmkyt wrote
[removed]
bmy1point6 t1_iudg59w wrote
Some part of this is due to an increase in impervious area resulting in stormwater reaching streams more quickly via overland runoff instead of infiltrating downward :(
Push_Citizen t1_iudsp1y wrote
and that can cause stream temperatures to spike pretty high right after a rain
uh_buh t1_iud7v5r wrote
Why did no one warn us this would happen?
Zisx t1_iuf36cd wrote
Some probably did, then labeled overly crazy & worry wort type
Even today most people tend to have the "don't worry so much, we can can fix it before it's too late eventually &/or at last minute" not realizing these problems Will continue being exponentially worse over time, and compound on each other
HulktheHitmanSavage t1_iue2hpt wrote
Wetlands are important yo
Va1crist t1_iuerr3o wrote
Rivers , lakes , creeks etc everything is drying up so what do we do ? Cut down more trees , poison the environment more , watering areas that shouldn’t watered and buy EVs and tell ourselves we’re making a difference
[deleted] t1_iudt0ss wrote
Put sprawling parking lots everywhere and then wonder where all the water went.
Sillyvanya t1_iue5v3g wrote
We definitely need to keep pumping entire lakes of water into Las Vegas
River_Pigeon t1_iugv413 wrote
Don’t forget Los Angeles and so cal
drromancer t1_iuel2tj wrote
Ban lawns...its such a waste of water...and golf courses...
tinacat933 t1_iuf2wtb wrote
If there’s no snow on the mountains there’s no water in the ground
redditdeigy t1_iue26wy wrote
There is as much lawn acreage in the US as land devoted to agriculture. Not only is a lot irrigated with drinking water but the environmental cost of fertilizer and fuel consumed and air and noise pollution mowing all that acreage is significant.
ProfessionalPack7205 t1_iufms4b wrote
I can tell from the time i was a little boy and now as an adult its changed alot. Im also only 25.
Scott4370 t1_iufrycu wrote
Try 60 and seeing how much things have changed. I remember Lake Mead being pretty much full when I first saw it as a six year old. I remember not seeing so many dead trees, especially around swamps. We’re definitely on the downward spiral.
iamamuttonhead t1_iufy0id wrote
They appear to be drying up in New England as well.
Vern95673 t1_iug7w0y wrote
I see irrigation systems flooding streets, and apartment parking lots. The streets is due to broken sprinkler heads and overwatering the plants between opposite lanes of city traffic. The apartments I talked to on site management, the water company that provides it, and the county over a year later nothing has changed. These are vast amounts of water going right into the storm drains. It’s a shame when we are told to conserve and this is the worst drought in a thousand years. Then you report gross waste and nothing is done at all and from unassociated entities.
AutoModerator t1_iucs9xg wrote
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[deleted] t1_iudnrdj wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iuduq13 wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_iue331b wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iuec2xy wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iuekevl wrote
[removed]
Ockius t1_iuf8kb1 wrote
Need to build ponds and swales to refill the aquifers when it rains
[deleted] t1_iuf8raz wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iufwt0q wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iufwz2k wrote
[removed]
Environmental-Use-77 t1_iug2bjd wrote
The idiots won't listen to science because it infringes upon their income, humans only act out of necessity not warning, unfortunately for humans our reaction will be long after the too late to act moment.
Nosrok t1_iug9ef8 wrote
If it's not coastal flooding, it's inland flooding from heavy rainfall or droughts or "crazy" storms both summer and winter or fires or heat waves and whatever mother nature can cook up. No area is safe from climate change.
[deleted] t1_iuggmcq wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iugjqxp wrote
[removed]
Sajolly908 t1_iugktlu wrote
If we were to transition to a no till farm system this would not be a situation. Please watch kiss the ground. We can fix this if we work together to make this happen. Plus with no till farming not just more water is saved but the food grown is so much better.
OldestFetus t1_iugq8l5 wrote
The Rio Grande has been dried by greedy water grabs for agro corporates in CO & NM, before it even reaches TX and Mexico, for a almost a century.
[deleted] t1_iueaeyk wrote
[deleted]
HarryPFlashman t1_iuewpsg wrote
I love all the people solving these problems through making people do things they want:
No golf, vegan lifestyle, no more lawns…salt water plants,….
Numismatists t1_iue2n2k wrote
More intense... especially since 2020.
The drop in Aerosols has let more of the Sun's radiation deeper into the atmosphere.
Expect the rivers, lakes and ponds to continue drying up as our aerosol pollution continue to decrease.
Edit; Checking what sub I'm in. We are actually allowed to talk about Science here, right?
TheLastForestOnEarth t1_iufb7sc wrote
Do you have a source for the claim that reducing pollution is increasing drought?
DefenestrateThemAll t1_iuf4fbs wrote
Since water does not enter or leave the earth's atmosphere, it never loses or gains amounts. There is no shortage of water. People hell bent on living in deserts redistribute water yes, but it is physically impossible to "waste" water. Because it is constantly recycled.
crazydavebacon1 t1_iufm4sb wrote
The Grand Canyon used to be a river also, it dried up, has nothing to do with humans. It happens. The world will survive, with our without humans.
tommy_b_777 t1_iugs49d wrote
The Grand Canyon was cut by the river currently still flowing through it - The Colorado. Go check a map - you can see the river clearly labeled…
crazydavebacon1 t1_iuh4tjf wrote
You know it’s tiny right? Dried up is still true, you see how deep it used to be?
tommy_b_777 t1_iui4ktu wrote
ETA OK I sound like an asshole - Nicer this time
It CUT the Grand Canyon dude - it wasn’t that huge, it CUT THE CANYON OVER TIME. Read a geology textbook. The plateau is sandstone, which you can cut with running water in days or weeks in some places. The river starts out in hard rock then hits soft sandstone and Cut the deep canyon you see over lots and lots of years. I live at the headwaters of the CO river, my friends guide on it…The GC was not full of water like lake powell once was...
8to24 t1_iucye1m wrote
For a generation officials have just tried to wait out droughts. Put mild water restrictions in place while waiting for a rainy year or heavy snow pack to come. Little has been done to improve local infrastructure. Praying for rain isn't good governance.
Over 70 percent of the planet is water. not just that but all water is recycled. Having useable water should be one of the easiest problems to solve. We've just committed ourselves to wasteful practices.
For starters we need to cultivate more crops that can tolerate saltwater. Edible plants like Marsh Samphire, Sea Peas, Sea Parsley, seaweed, sea fennel, Kelp, etc. These can be eaten like other veggies or dried and turned into flours that could fortify other food products (chips, cereal, bread, pasta, etc). While heavier minerals exist in these plants little effort has been made to tackle that challenge. Maize became corn and apples are cloned. A lot of the veggies and grains we eat have been modified.