Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Calirofrnia has about 1 years worth of water left

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 13
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 template Next
  • #91
    Originally posted by C0ckney View Post
    no greenhouse gas emissions? 1/3 of carbon emissions come from agriculture, to say nothing of all the methane that farm animals produce. climate change is happening we are seeing its effects; we will see a lot more in years to come. it will require us to change the way we live and it's better to start that process and move towards a sustainable future than spending vast amounts of resources on maintaining activities that will, in the long run, kill us all.
    It is unrealistic, that is all - short of WWIII will that be fixed, not even then I'd guess, it is only that at that time it will be too late.

    While it may be better in theory, in practice it is impossible, it is more likely that we will colonise the Moon and make it into a tropical oasis first.
    Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
    GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

    Comment

    • #92
      Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
      No, scientists have not even reached conclusions about how much global warming will affect the temperature, but just about everyone is in agreement that Canada will for instance be warmer, which means more time above freezing, which means longer growing seasons.
      Clearly it doesn't matter if some of our most productive food producing lands become barren dustbowls, because we can just relocate all those farms and farmers to completely new land (regardless of soil conditions/national boundaries/land ownership etc etc etc etc etc) and do so in time to prevent famines spreading.

      You ****ing ******.

      Comment

      • #93
        Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post


        The average household pays $15 to $45 a month for water!




        Yeah, that's basically 0. Particularly when you consider how many people have lawn sprinklers. I know our water bill. It's similar to that. Like 95% of it is the sprinkler.
        Aww bless, the little rich kid can't even contemplate how a $15 a month rise could cause a low income family serious issues, especially when those rises are expected to continue. How cute.

        Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
        Just how ****ing poor do you think america is that they're gonna die of thirst if you make the price go up, rather than just, I don't know, use a little less of their domestic appliances? Restaurants give you a glass of water for free, public water fountains are available for free, that's all you need to know.
        It's not about dying of thirst in America you moron, its about the price of a necessary commodity rising to levels where its difficult for poor families to maintain their utilities at the same time as things like paying rent and buying food. And no it's not about ****ing lawn sprinklers, it's about things like families being able to bathe and clean their children's clothes, activities that take a surprisingly large amount of water.

        Comment

        • #94
          Originally posted by C0ckney View Post
          some of the arguments in this thread are ridiculous, to the point where HC is the one making the most sense here. the problem is a lack of water - this cannot be solved by keeping water cheap!

          the solution is obviously not subsidising unsustainable and frankly ruinous activities. the solution is to cut wasteful domestic consumption (through incentives and also price increases), to capture as much rainwater as possible and to reuse grey water. it takes 4 litres of water to produce a single almond; it takes 15,500 litres of water to produce 1kg of beef. the solution is to change the way we do agriculture, to change what is produced to match the climatic conditions, to eat less meat, to move away from water intensive monocultues etc.
          That's lovely, shall we all hold hands and sing a quick round of kumbaya too while we optimistically wait for the entire human race to change their behaviour before hundreds of millions of people starve to death?

          Jesus ****ing christ, you're as bad as the Kuci twins sometimes with your pie in the sky hippy bull****.

          Comment

          • #95
            Originally posted by kentonio View Post
            It's not about dying of thirst in America you moron, its about the price of a necessary commodity rising to levels where its difficult for poor families to maintain their utilities at the same time as things like paying rent and buying food. And no it's not about ****ing lawn sprinklers, it's about things like families being able to bathe and clean their children's clothes, activities that take a surprisingly large amount of water.
            You'll have the filthy rich ... and the filthy poor. Why do you hate equality so much?

            Comment

            • #96
              Originally posted by kentonio View Post
              That's lovely, shall we all hold hands and sing a quick round of kumbaya too while we optimistically wait for the entire human race to change their behaviour before hundreds of millions of people starve to death?

              Jesus ****ing christ, you're as bad as the Kuci twins sometimes with your pie in the sky hippy bull****.
              so no argument with what i said, but rather straight to your usual fare of 'i am the arbiter of reasonableness and what you say isn't reasonable'
              "The Christian way has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found to be hard and left untried" - GK Chesterton.

              "The most obvious predicition about the future is that it will be mostly like the past" - Alain de Botton

              Comment

              • #97
                Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave View Post
                It is unrealistic, that is all - short of WWIII will that be fixed, not even then I'd guess, it is only that at that time it will be too late.

                While it may be better in theory, in practice it is impossible, it is more likely that we will colonise the Moon and make it into a tropical oasis first.
                it reminds me of the quote that all revolutions are impossible until they become inevitable. it's like the situation in são paulo, people may not want to save water, they may not want to believe it's happening, but when the water stops coming out of the tap, they'll have to change their behaviour through sheer necessity. i hope that we, as a whole, can change, before pressing need forces us to.
                "The Christian way has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found to be hard and left untried" - GK Chesterton.

                "The most obvious predicition about the future is that it will be mostly like the past" - Alain de Botton

                Comment

                • #98
                  Originally posted by C0ckney View Post
                  so no argument with what i said, but rather straight to your usual fare of 'i am the arbiter of reasonableness and what you say isn't reasonable'
                  Expecting the entire Western world to change its consumption habits in a shorter timescale than climate change is likely to cause mass problems is not reasonable. I'm open to an explanation however of exactly how you expect this to be possible.

                  Comment

                  • #99
                    Originally posted by kentonio View Post
                    Expecting the entire Western world to change its consumption habits in a shorter timescale than climate change is likely to cause mass problems is not reasonable. I'm open to an explanation however of exactly how you expect this to be possible.
                    Hope is fine, but it is in principle unreasonable. More likely is a central action of some sort in the right direction (desalination plant for example) which will alleviate this particular issue, culture change is downright impossible without some catastrophe.

                    However the most likely outcome both in Brazil and the US is that nothing is done, water runs out, the rich to leave the area, local economy to collapse (even in a multi million city/area) and chaos to ensue. Not enough to cause WWIII or something on a global scale, but large destruction locally - this one is a near certainty, ie Detroit but in Brazilian environment, and possibly even worse as you still have basic amenities there, just not the jobs. Once water runs out the hit will be much harder than "just" no local jobs.

                    This is reality, given the general poor governance and mass media hypnosis, it is an outcome with 99%+ chance of the outcome. In some other country they could pre-empt, but there may be a dozen countries in the world which are governed well enough to do so. Neither US or Brazil are one of those.
                    Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
                    GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

                    Comment

                    • #100
                      Originally posted by kentonio View Post
                      Clearly it doesn't matter if some of our most productive food producing lands become barren dustbowls, because we can just relocate all those farms and farmers to completely new land (regardless of soil conditions/national boundaries/land ownership etc etc etc etc etc) and do so in time to prevent famines spreading.

                      You ****ing ******.
                      They won't become barren dustbowls, and anyone claiming to predict what particular weather patterns will look like when the temperature is higher by some number of degrees is either an idiot or a liar. So is anyone claiming that we'll see drastic changes on short timescales. So is anyone claiming that any specific, local environmental phenomena we're observing right now is due to global warming.

                      One thing we can say for certain is that higher temperatures (to a point) and higher carbon dioxide concentration, in isolation, both improve growth of crops.

                      Comment

                      • #101
                        Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                        So is anyone claiming that we'll see drastic changes on short timescales.

                        You are an idiot.

                        JM
                        Jon Miller-
                        I AM.CANADIAN
                        GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                        Comment

                        • #102
                          Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                          You're both unbelievably retarded. The price would rise and more people would enter the water business. If you leave the price unchanged, that actually would encourage draining the whole aquifer, and there would be less water for everyone. Lonestar, you have the situation entirely backwards. Donegeal, you're accusing me of being "horrible" when in fact the Kentonio Krew are the ones proposing ****ing the poor, despite being too unintelligent to recognize it.
                          HC, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. None what so ever. Further more it is clear as day that you have no idea how water rights work west of the Mississippi (with the exception of New Mexico).

                          Hint: The real world isn't going to work the way you think.
                          Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                          Comment

                          • #103
                            Originally posted by Dinner View Post
                            HC, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. None what so ever. Further more it is clear as day that you have no idea how water rights work west of the Mississippi (with the exception of New Mexico).

                            Hint: The real world isn't going to work the way you think.
                            No, no, you see, if the price rises, more people will enter the business, planting new water trees and building new water factories.
                            Indifference is Bliss

                            Comment

                            • #104

                              Comment

                              • #105
                                We were just discussing desalination plants.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 template Next
                                Working...
                                X