Aquafornia Discussion Forum: Recent Posts

Aquafornia Discussion Forum: Recent Posts http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Join the discussion! en Sun, 21 Mar 2010 10:35:28 +0000 susanbell84 on "How To Write A Dissertation – Classical Structure" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=27#post-53 Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:29:11 +0000 susanbell84 53@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Dissertation writing is no doubt an exhausting task for almost all students. But then there is nothing impossible in the world, only if you want it to be possible as the word impossible itself says I M Possible. Students can get dissertation help from various resources. The thing is dissertation help is available to you in different types, depending on what you are searching. If you need just advice regarding your dissertation, than you can take it from various educational websites. And if you know how to write a dissertation or about the structure of dissertation than I guess you don’t need to search anymore as you have come to the right place. <a href="http://www.dissertation-help.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">http://www.dissertation-help.co.uk/</a> Here is the classical structure of a dissertation •Title page •Acknowledgements •Contents page: chapters, appendices, tables, figures, illustrations •Abstract Summary and outline of main findings •Introduction of dissertation Outline scope of study and what background material will be discussed. Define abstract concepts in the context Explain complex or technical words Describe how study conducted – data collection methods used. Outline and explain order of material. State major findings. Summarise conclusion. •Literature Survey Put your own work into context. Move from general background/standard theoretical works to more precise, recent work relevant to your topic. Cover range of positions – not just those you agree with. Show how existing theories/research findings illuminate your work. •Methodology Explain approach taken and why particular methods and techniques were used. Describe procedures, size of samples, methods of selection, choice of variables and controls, any tests of measurement, etc. Mention deficiencies in methods. •Results Present findings clearly. Use tables, charts, diagrams etc. in your dissertations, if appropriate. Highlight significant aspects of findings in text. Avoid interpretation/conclusions •Discussion Interpret findings. Construct a logical, consistent argument based on findings. •Conclusion Summarise main points and state any conclusions which can be drawn. Indicate how firm the conclusion is Make any recommendations •References •Bibliography - background reading but not cited •Appendices - e.g. blank questionnaire, transcript of interview, extended case studies, letter of invitation. More detail visit site: <a href="http://www.dissertation-help.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">http://www.dissertation-help.co.uk/</a> lamontpage82 on "Lipitor memory loss" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=26#post-52 Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:28:50 +0000 lamontpage82 52@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ This medicate is an HMG-CoA enzyme inhibitor also known as a "statin" used <a href="http://www.playlist.com/blog/entry/12627759875">lipitor side effect</a> in combining with a low-cholesterin and low-fat diet to lower cholesterol and triglyceride levels and to erect no bad <a href="http://www.playlist.com/blog/entry/12627759875">buy lipitor</a> cholesterol HDL stages in your blood. It may also be applied in sure adolescent <a href="http://www.playlist.com/blog/entry/12627759875">lipitor memory loss</a> patients, age 10 to 17 years, who have a genetically did cholesterol problem. lamontpage82 on "Strattera anxiety" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=25#post-51 Sat, 12 Dec 2009 13:46:24 +0000 lamontpage82 51@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ In some kids, Strattera gains the risk of suicidal <a href="http://blogcastrepository.com/forums/t/94591.aspx">strattera anxiety</a> thoughts. A fused analysis of 12 kids of Strattera showed that in children, 4 out of every 1000 patients trained suicidal <a href="http://blogcastrepository.com/forums/t/94591.aspx">strattera anxiety</a> thoughts, although no suicides occurred. A similar analysis in adults treated with Strattera did <a href="http://blogcastrepository.com/forums/t/94591.aspx">strattera anxiety</a> not reveal an increased risk of suicidal thoughts. solarfactory on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-50 Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:47:03 +0000 solarfactory 50@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ In THEORY based on 2 MILLION POOLS (if anyone knows the exact number of AG+IG pools in CA please reply in comments) Here is the formula: Length * Width * Average Depth * Multiplier = Gallons Determine the Multiplier: Rectangle, square, or free-form pool:multiplier = 7.5. Round or Oval pool: multiplier = 5.9 So if in theory there were 2 million pools in CA and we average the aboveground and inground multiplier to 6.5; then average the pool size to say 12x26 and a depth of 5 feet (just a guess but probably realistic); then using the FORMULA: 12x26x5x6.5 = ~ 10,000 gallons of water per pool rounded down for easy calculation. Now 2 million pools times 10 thousand gallons completely evaporating each year as a <a href="http://www.grow.arizona.edu/Grow--GrowResources.php?ResourceId=208">rate of pool water evaporation</a> equals: 20,000,000,000 gallons of water is evaporating in CA alone...that's 20 BILLION GALLONS of preventable waste! If a city water tank capacity is 3.5 million gallons then there are ~5,715 city water tanks being wasted in CA each and every year by uncovered swimming pools. Now then, water savings via the use of inexpensive buoyant pool covers is easy to calculate given the evaporation rates in inches published by the National Weather Bureau. (<a href="http://www.grow.arizona.edu/Grow--GrowResources.php?ResourceId=208">http://www.grow.arizona.edu/Grow--GrowResources.php?ResourceId=208</a>). Once the problem with removal and handling these inexpensive covers has been solve (i.e. managing the covers in sections like pieces of a puzzle for odd-shaped pools) it is not equitable to neighbors without pools to watch their lawns dry up while neighbors with pools continue to waste water that could be prevented through use of pool covers. Taxing those pools with a $50/year tax however provides some equity and those pool owners can recoup their costs via lower water and chemical costs, and the tax revenues can be used to hold down water rate hikes on the average user without pools. Comments encouraged !! Anonymous on "Re: California's Solar Powered Delta-Mendota Canal" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=20#post-49 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:19:00 +0000 Anonymous 49@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ We here at P4P Energy think this is a great idea! We are currently engineering patented cable truss structures to support PV deployment over aqueducts (and other locations as well) for all of the reasons mentioned above. Please refer to our website <a href="http://www.p4penergy.com" rel="nofollow">www.p4penergy.com</a> for an idea of what we can do. Anonymous on "Free Screening of Blue Gold: World Water Wars" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=24#post-48 Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:33:53 +0000 Anonymous 48@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Newport Beach Film Festival And The Studio at Sage Hill Launch Cinema Sage Hill, A Free Monthly Film Series Inaugural Event to Feature Environmental Film Blue Gold: World Water Wars Followed by Conversation with Orange County Film Director Sam Bozzo Cinema Sage Hill Wednesday, October 21 at 7:30pm. Blue Gold: World Water Wars (2008, Documentary, 90 minutes) Based on the ground-breaking book by Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke, Blue Gold: World Water Wars explores the perils of the world’s imminent water shortage. Wars of the future will be fought over water, as they are today over oil, as the source of all life enters the global marketplace and political arena. Corporate giants, private investors, and corrupt governments vie for control of our dwindling fresh water supply, prompting protests, lawsuits, and revolutions from citizens fighting for the right to survive. Past civilizations have collapsed from poor water management. Blue Gold: World Water Wars won the prestigious Jury Award for Best Documentary at the 2009 Newport Beach Film Festival. An interactive Q&A session with the film’s director and Orange County resident Sam Bozzo will follow the screening. Visit <a href="http://www.NewportBeachFilmFest.com" rel="nofollow">www.NewportBeachFilmFest.com</a> for information. The Studio at Sage Hill School 20402 Newport Coast Drive Newport Coast, CA. <a href="http://www.sagehillschool.org/studioatsagehill" rel="nofollow">www.sagehillschool.org/studioatsagehill</a> Anonymous on "Regional Water Planning and California's Water Crises" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=22#post-46 Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:59:49 +0000 Anonymous 46@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ We can begin to grasp the distinction and significance in formulating regional planning processes as the foundation for a Green political position in regards to water that can be presented in issues work and candidate campaigns. A Green position needs, on the one hand, to promote a sound decision-making process that assures grassroots democracy while representing the needs and concerns of our voters and supporters in defining and supporting policies to implement our state Green Party Platforms. Structural reforms in our political entities are a fundamental focus in accomplishing both goals. Prioritizing regional allocations should be a reserved right for the regions that are impacted by such decisions. Transfers and diversions have become the convenient (but expensive) alternative in California to placate the most vocal and influential users. Briefly put, what are political decisions are made into administrative matters through the State Legislature. Water wars are structured around agricultural vs. urban demands. No surprise there. Population increases, increased agricultural land use, dedicated surface water inflow increases, aquifer depletions and transfers from one region to another have become a juggling act. Politicians at the state level juggling these conflicting uses never define common goals or processes where the needs and concerns of local communities are an integral component of the decision-making process. Instead, it’s “all-or-nothing” debates where winners take all. The state is simply acting as a water company moving the water from one place to the next. Take note of the consequences of governmental control of allocations in this context. Existing governmental institutions and processes make Federal domination of water flows inherently divorced from regional users. In California, most of the decisions on water take place, not in the communities impacted but in a State Legislature where urban legislators confront rural legislators in diversion debates. As a result the distinct needs of the wide range of rural, urban and agricultural communities never become the focal point of water supply issues. The plethora of advocacy groups of users, environmentalists, hydrologists and various interests on all sides battle each other and form coalitions based on the prioritization of allocations. It's the real essence of water politics in the state. Rarely are local people somewhere in their own communities looking at the situation and working together in making the hard decisions. Instead partisan politics pervade and conflicts are fostered pitting one community against another. Instead of management and administration, what results is just plain old-fashioned power politics through the Governor and the State Legislature. What are lacking are institutions that merge stakeholders, the environment and the science in a regional holistic process. What is lacking is a view of the regional demands and supplies of water in one comprehensive analysis that can point the way forward in a 50 year plan. Choices do need to be made; priorities do need to be established. Consensus does need to be reached in regards to numerous aspects of water that range from monitoring and measurement to urban and rural conservation to efficient uses and re-uses of water to new sources for supply to reduction of evaporation losses to water quality concerns to ecological restoration. Parceling these issues into separate components leads to bureaucracies that are removed from those impacted by the decisions. It dissects regional matters and apportions them to a multitude of agencies and obscures the “how” and the “why” of decisions. And it removes those impacted the most from the decision-making processes. Beginning with a state plan is little help in addressing the multitude of regional concerns. They do not have the ability to distinguish regional variances in supply and demand or quality and measurement and are simply general proposals that fundamentally lack substance. The preferred sequence would be regional plans, upstream-downstream integrations and then a state body to address conflicts through Water Court and a secondary adaptive governance institution of stakeholders, the environment and the science of hydrology. Anonymous on "environmental water transfers, tradeoff, etc." http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=21#post-45 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:08:55 +0000 Anonymous 45@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Coming from outside of California, that anyone could possibly describe a water transfer as "environmental". let's empower regions to rely on their own water supplies and instream flows through water budgets and prioritizing uses through regional Public Welfare staements formulated by stakeholders, the science and the environment. Anonymous on "environmental water transfers, tradeoff, etc." http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=21#post-44 Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:56:37 +0000 Anonymous 44@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Hey everybody, I am starting to write my thesis about water transfers, particularly between two environmental sites, agricultural districts, as well as between agr. and env. Does anybody happen to know if there was any water transfer ever between two environmental sites, e.g. water originally allocated to sustain fish habitat was diverted to wetlands in order to preserve it or something in a similar sense? Or am I talking here strictly in theoretical terms? Another question, let`s assume such a transfer is going to happen. What would you suggest to take into account as evaluation factors? In other words what would be the tradeoff based on? Ecosystem services?? what else? Anonymous on "Re: California's Solar Powered Delta-Mendota Canal" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=20#post-43 Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:20:00 +0000 Anonymous 43@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Water Education Foundation WEF Board Of Directors William R. Mills President September 21, 2009 Dear President Mills, WEF Board Of Directors, Members & Staff, Thank you for your many good works. Your strong environmental stand is much appreciated. California's greatest problems revolve around power and water. Therefore, we have developed the following concept: covering the Central Valley's Delta-Mendota Canal with a photovoltaic canopy that generates clean, renewable, electricity while protecting the water in the Canal. The multiple advantages are listed below: (1) Location. The canal runs through desert-like conditions, there is no need to obtain new land, the canal adjoins a major transmission line corridor, and the water pumping stations will use the bulk of the electricity produced. (2) Timing. The California Aqueduct system is outdated and unprepared for drought, flood and earthquake emergencies. (3) Water. With reduced evaporation, the Canal will deliver more water to its destination, the San Joaquin River. The water will arrive cleaner and cooler, aiding farmers and fisheries and helping to prevent blooms of toxic algae. (4) Photovoltaics. Photovoltaic- generated electricity consumes no water and produces no greenhouse gas. (5) Responsibility. Providing a safe water infrastructure to future generations while helping to reduce emissions of harmful gas. Here are some facts about the Delta-Mendota Canal, followed by a more detailed analysis of the five points listed above: The Canal is part of The Governor Edmund G. Brown California Aqueduct system that collects water from the Sierra Nevada Mountains and the valleys of Northern and Central California and conveys it to Southern California. The Delta-Mendota Canal conveys water southward from the Delta and delivers most of it into the Mendota Pond, located 30 miles west of Fresno. This water is used to replenish the San Joaquin River. Construction period: 1946-1951 Length: 117 miles Typical section: Bottom width: 100 feet Side slope: 3:01 Water depth: 14.3 feet The Delta-Mendota Canal is mostly concrete-lined and is operated by the United States Bureau of Reclamation and the Delta-Mendota Water Authority. Aerial Photo: Delta-Mendota Canal <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/amenfoto/3285100067/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/amenfoto/3285100067/</a> Aerial Photo: Delta Mendota Canal with windmills in the Diablo Foothills. <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/amenfoto/3285469699/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/amenfoto/3285469699/</a> (1) Location. The 117 mile Delta-Mendota Canal is ideally situated in a sunny desert-like environment. Because of its proximity to the existing power grid, little or no new land is required to connect the Delta-Mendota Canal to the Path 15 transmission line corridor. By generating its own power, the water system will draw less power from the grid, especially during peak hours, and provide backup power to the grid if needed. Proximity to the grid means that less electricity is lost during transmission. In addition to losing tremendous amounts of electricity, long transmission lines are vulnerable to a host of climactic problems including lightening, year round forest fires as well as wind and ice storms. (2) Timing. The California Aqueduct system is outdated and unprepared for drought, flood and earthquake emergencies. As the water system is being overhauled, it is the appropriate time to cover long sections of the Delta-Mendota Canal with a photovoltaic canopy. The current state of affairs is described in the article below: Interior Chief Says California Water System Outdated Samantha Young - Capital Press 4/15/09 RANCHO CORDOVA, Calif. (AP) - Interior Secretary Ken Salazar urged California to modernize its antiquated water system. He told reporters that California's massive system of reservoirs, pumps and canals was outdated, built a half century ago and designed for a population half the size of today's 37.7 million people. He pledged that the federal government was ready to help California overhaul its system and deal with its drought. "It is time to modernize, it is time to make hard choices, and it's time for the federal government to re-engage in a full partnership with a 21st century water system for the state of California," Interior Secretary Salazar said. In addition, a major effort is underway to restore the salmon fisheries of the San Joaquin River and protect the Delta habitats. (3) Water. With reduced evaporation, the Canal will deliver more water to its destination, the San Joaquin River. The water will arrive cleaner and cooler, aiding farmers and fisheries and helping to prevent blooms of toxic algae. As the water flows southward, there is loss to evaporation. A photovoltaic canopy placed over long segments of the Delta-Mendota canal can be designed to minimize these losses. Besides saving water, the photovoltaic canopy will keep the water cooler. The water that re-enters the river system will also be "softer" because of less salt, chemical and mineral buildup due to evaporation. This canopy will help to block airborne particles, such as sand, soil, soot and agricultural chemicals from entering the Canal. With our hot, dry summers and increasing likelihood of drought, California's water supply is vulnerable to over-growths of toxic blue-green algae. Keeping the water cool and shaded will help to prevent dangerous algae blooms. The cleaner, colder water will benefit the fish and other aquatic wildlife as it returns to the Delta. This will help the current attempt to restore the salmon population of the San Joaquin River. (4) Photovoltaics. Photovoltaic-generated electricity consumes no water and produces no greenhouse gas. America's coal fired, oil fired, natural gas and nuclear power plants use more than 136 billion gallons of fresh water daily in the generation of greenhouse gas producing electricity. Only agriculture uses more water. Energy Department officials have stated a goal of achieving a 50 percent reduction in fresh water usage by electrical power plant by the year 2015. Photovoltaics use no water in the generation of electricity. In addition, they have no moving parts, make no noise, cause no chemical reactions or emissions and are virtually maintenance free. Calculating the true cost of electrical generation, factoring in the value of the water consumed, both now and in future, we conclude that water saving photovoltaic technology is the sensible solution. (5) Responsibility. Providing a safe water infrastructure to future generations while helping to reduce emissions of harmful materials. The emissions generated using conventional methods accelerate global warming. This, in turn, is responsible for the accelerated melting of the snow pack on California's mountaintops, which is the major source and reservoir of our fresh drinking and irrigation water. Water is life! California's Central Valley consumes about a fifth of the electricity used in the state. This electricity is primarily used to power water pumping stations. It's necessary for the Valley to be more responsible for its vast carbon footprint. Conclusion: After three years of less-than-normal rainfall and shrinking snow packs in the state, California officials have made revamping the state's aging water infrastructure one of their top issues. The Delta-Mendota photovoltaic canopy project can be seen as a "pilot" concept for application to other portions of the canal system. It would also act as a "stimulus" to California's scientific and engineering community, providing an opportunity to apply new technologies. Finally, this project is unique among alternative energy projects because it is designed to protect California's dwindling water resources while delivering clean, renewable electricity. Harvey Sherback & David Cohn Anonymous on "Delta Water to the South" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=18#post-41 Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:24:50 +0000 Anonymous 41@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ As a resident of Fresno, formerly born and raised in Stockton, I am witnessing here a very strong movement to redirect more water from the Delta to an area called the Westlands Water District, west of Fresno. This area, 50 years ago was a wasteland that was made a subsidized cotton growing region from water redirected from the Delta through the CVP. Most of the farming in this area is mechanized (cotton, almonds, pistachios, etc.) however the small towns in the areas are mainly inhabited by farmworkers. Led by a career politician, Senator Devin Nunes, whos constituents are 1000 acre+ growers and highly subsidized dairy farmers, the message is being spread that this battle over water is an environmental battle pitting 'fish versus farmers'. There is little dialogue being put out there on how growers in the Delta Region feel about more water going to arid areas in the state jeopardizing the quality of water needed for local ag interests. For years the Westlands area has played the card that they 'feed the world' and are critical to the world food supply, even though I'm not sure why anyone would eat cotton.... This propaganda has been pressed further by a local ex disc-jockey that has a daily talk show, and is constantly playing the part of the Robin Hood of water (he's a fool). Many growers outside of the Westlands hear nothing but the Westlands version of why they can't get more Delta Water, so the movement gains momentum with growers that would otherwise be a little more rational on what is happening. Nunes has taken this to Congress under the heading of several bills, several times. People need to be very vigilant to this scam that Nunes is trying to push through Congress with other politicians like Jim Costa and Rodanovich. The tactic is extremely sleezy, but is working, and is going to pit farmer versus farmer, because most of the farmers down here don't really know the truth. They see this as an environmental issue rather than seeing the facts that the Delta cannot be the well for every ag development in this state, as well as the drinking fountain for LA and SD County. A better slogan for the gowers in the Westlands should be 'Subsidized Cotton versus Fish'. Be wary of the card that Nunes is trying to play, before more water gets sent to an area where farming never should have been started in the first place. Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-40 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:42:44 +0000 Anonymous 40@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Every year swimming pools are wasting billions of gallons of water that can be saved. In areas suffering from water shortages, "It takes only 200 pools using covers to save an entire 3.5 million gallon tank of city drinking water." It's well known that pool bubble covers are inexpensive and pay for themselves by lowering your water bill and chemical costs, so why aren't more pools using pool covers? Water Loss Calculation without Pool Covers Let's calculate the number of wasted tanks of drinking water through evaporation by pools. Sacramento: Using an average evaporation rate of 17,500 gallons/pool annually, it takes only 200 pools to waste an entire city tank of water. If Sacramento has over 50,000 pools, then Sacramento alone wastes 250 tanks of city water every year (or) 2,125,000,000 (that's BILLION) gallons of water every year! What's that make you think about when they start rationing water and your lawn's going brown, while your bill's going up? The 17,500 gallon/annual evaporation figure is probably conservative (other reports site 1.5"/week). In Australia one study by Sealed Air Corporation states over 86,000 liters per year, or over 22,700 gallons annually evaporates from the pool. In Las Vegas, the average is 100 inches per year, yet all evaporation rates vary depending on a number of conditions. Water Conservation Programs & Rebates Current water shortages in parts of the nation, especially in western U.S. regions like Las Vegas, are requiring communities to be on year round water restrictions and may potentially drive the increased demand and expansion of the pool cover market. Programs such as Water Smart in the Las Vegas area, and Water Sense sponsored by the EPA are dedicated to conservation. Additional programs by agencies offer pool cover rebates at participating dealers. To do it's part in the fight for water conservation nationwide, the half pool cover distribution model will greatly assist in supplying stores everywhere with just-in-time stock on hand. In this way over time we will be helping to save billions of gallons of wasted water nationwide, by facilitating the distribution of pool covers in a much needed and better way. Again, only 200 pools using a cover can save an entire city tank of water because a pool left unchecked for a year can completely evaporate...and that's a lot of wasted water! Anonymous on "Wastewater reuse" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-37 Mon, 25 May 2009 06:14:14 +0000 Anonymous 37@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Once freshwater has been used for an economic or beneficial purpose, it is generally discarded as waste. In many countries, these wastewaters are discharged, either as untreated waste or as treated effluent, into natural watercourses, from which they are abstracted for further use after undergoing "self-purification" within the stream. johnrocks <a href="http://www.fastrealestate.net"> realestate</a> Anonymous on "Water for firefighting" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=15#post-36 Thu, 21 May 2009 15:25:44 +0000 Anonymous 36@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ I can't quote any actual codes, but I'm sure the idea is not to damage the soils and vegetation with saltwater. Anonymous on "Wastewater reuse" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-35 Thu, 21 May 2009 15:24:03 +0000 Anonymous 35@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Not true WaterDrinker, unless said municipality's source water is not the same as the water it is discharging to, which is typically only the case if there is a lot of good groundwater there, and even then the case can be made that the source water they conserve ends up in the downstream. Also, think about New Orleans. They have been setting the standard on using treated wastewater for drinking water for decades! Anonymous on "Water for firefighting" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=15#post-34 Sat, 09 May 2009 09:24:01 +0000 Anonymous 34@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Regarding the firefighting in Santa Barbara's Jesusita fire, I read that the water drops from the air are using fresh water from a local reservoir. Does anybody know why they can't use the seawater which is conveniently located right there? Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-33 Sun, 03 May 2009 20:01:20 +0000 Anonymous 33@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ First thing to do is raise the price. Without a price rise, most people simply will not stop wasting the stuff: hosing down driveways, watering lawns, filling pools, irrigating cotton... Anonymous on "Public works projects recommended for action now" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=14#post-32 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:02:12 +0000 Anonymous 32@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ America needed to make work for its unemployed and broke citizens in the 1930's and some of the biggest make work projects of all in those days were those humungous dams on the Colorado River. These dams improved the morale of America by showing that America was really so big that it could tame the formerly unconquerable Colorado River, a force of nature; and the damming provided immense amounts of electric power which was needed for heavy industry and to do atomic power research and to quickly militarize in order to beat down the japs, krauts and commies, which has now been accomplished; plus damming and diverting the river enabled the west to grow in population, which has now been accomplished. Damming the river really did make work for lots of men but now the time has come for us to re-open the Colorado River. 2009 - Now there is a new depression. No one has any money. Millions have lost jobs in many big baloney and other industries. Now even many of the ones recently known as "fat cats" are in skinny city having lost all their wealth on worthless works. These circumstances provide us our opportunity to once again establish massive public works projects, as follows: 1. Since the new USA president is a true muslim (submits to God; avoids God's prohibitions; does good deeds for others and has faith in God's munificence), and since "Israel", our main puppet master which has been getting us into wars with Islamic countries has recently exposed itself as a war criminal nation and therefore as not actually being the chosen ones of God so we can finally cut those freeloaders off of all the money we have been giving them and we can make them disgorge and give back to the USA all the Madoff and other money caches they have established at our expense, and we are therefore finally reduce our armed forces expenditures to zero all of which leaves beaucoup bucks for public works; and 2. One important public work will be to pay women incentive amounts of money and pensions, etc.to get married and stay married and have children and to not return to the work force, and we return the concept of "fault" to divorce; and 3. We hire millions of men and pay them living wages and provide each one with hammer and chisel to TEAR DOWN ALL THOSE GOD DAMNED DAMS.I'm sick of the Colorado being sucked dry aren't you? Think of the hydrologic cycle too! Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-31 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:22:57 +0000 Anonymous 31@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ in regards to consolidation and its affect on water conservation, what is the opinion out there on the impending SBVWCD consolidation with MUNI? Do you think it will have a positive or negative impact on services? Anonymous on "SBVWCD Consolidation" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=13#post-30 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:15:59 +0000 Anonymous 30@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Hello?? Is there anyone out there who can offer feedback in regards to this topic? Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-29 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:46:34 +0000 Anonymous 29@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Ocean Floor Desalination which uses Zero energy for desalination and conveyance to shore. It is automatable, repeatable, reliable constant supply of water. This new way of effeciantly desalinating water will hopefully end our water supply issues. (www.NaturalDesalination.org) Anonymous on "SBVWCD Consolidation" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=13#post-28 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:40:20 +0000 Anonymous 28@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Does anyone know if the SBVWCD consolidation with MUNI is actually gonna happen? Have other agencies out here tried this before and did it work? Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-27 Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:50:04 +0000 Anonymous 27@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ What we are already seeing here on Bethel Island, BEFORE any new "conveyances is the following: Our harbors have begun silting up to the point that we will be on mud within 18 months if fresh water is not allowed to "flush" the system. Our fish populations have crashed drastically, including baitfish not mentioned in any newspaper article, bluegills. They are a food source for all the other species in the river system. Only saw a handfull last year around our docks. In years prior they were everywhere. Our island depends on fishing, boating and all water recreational activities for our livlihoods. Most of us use well water for our households and yards. Our wells are now becoming saltier, already, before the new "conveyance" systems are in. The last time a levee failed due to an earthquake was around 1908. So we are relatively certain that ours are just fine and dandy. Do we live in a floodplain? Yep, a calculated risk we all pay insurance for. The mismanagement of CALFED and the new BDCP is just the same guys, different name, has caused our system to crash in a big way the past four years. We have seals living around our island full time. Why? Because they CAN. Jellyfish spottings at Sherman Island, flounders as far up as Walnut Grove, and porpoises in Stockton last year. And this canal is supposed to SAVE the Delta? 178,000,000 swimming pools PER DAY will no longer reach the South Delta. That figure is based on DWR'S own LOW FLOW predicitons. I am sorry that the Nature Conservancy has bought into this rhetoric. It is an organization I used to support. No longer! The "mitigation" being talked about, the "conservation" being touted by the BDCP is nothing more than creating some swampy areas that will foster West Nile Virus, in counties that do not have the cash to spray right now! We, the citizens, have to fight, to the death, (as I announced at the Clarksburg meeting) ANY form of the same canal we voted down in 1982. We must do whatever possible to preserve one of only TWO SUCH SYTEMS IN THE WORLD, the other being in China. If these systems go in, it is the death of the Delta, and no politician has the right to destroy an ENTIRE ECO SYSTEM for farmer(s) that receive 1.7 MILLION is subsidies to NOT grow! Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-26 Sat, 28 Mar 2009 12:54:01 +0000 Anonymous 26@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Here in California we are faced with water issues, greenhouse gas emissions and energy and energy efficiency all at the same time. A lot of natural gas is consumed in this state to provide heat for buildings, or to heat domestic or process water. Most of the natural gas consumed is wasted and blown up the chimney's as HOT exhaust. This waste energy can be recovered with a Sidel SRU flue gas condenser. This waste energy will get transfered into water that then can be used to heat the building, or it's domestic water or for industry it's process or plant washdown water. At a hotel or university it can also be used to heat the swimming pools. By recovering this waste energuy and utilizing it back in the facility where it was created, the energy efficiency of the natural gas appliance has now been increased to well over 90%. Increased energy efficiency = reduced greenhouse gas emissions. For every decatherm of energy recovered and utilized 118 lbs of CO2 is not emitted into the atmosphere. So far we have now dealt with the energy efficiency issue and the greenhouse gas emissions. There is one more bonus when using this energy saving equipment. The hot exhaust gases have now been cooled off and now cool exhaust is going into the atmosphere. A process happened when we recovered the heat from these hot exhaust gases. As they were cooling, water was being created. This water can now be collected and used to irrigate the lawns and flower beds. Industry can use this water in their facility in a number of different ways. There is no set number as to how much water is being created, but it can be a few gallons to hundreds of gallons per hour. So if a facility just for number sake is creating 350 gallons per hour times a 24 hour day, 360 days a year, this adds up to be 3 million gallons a year. As a single facility this is not much, but how many of these facilities are there in the state? Accumulate all this water, and then realize that this much domestic water was not taken out of our reserves. Now we can say that natural gas energy efficiency has been increased, there is reduced CO2 emissions in the atmosphere and water is being conserved. Not bad for a single piece of equipment. Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-25 Tue, 24 Mar 2009 06:31:51 +0000 Anonymous 25@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Yes water Conservation is very important for South California. There are dozens of little things we can all do to save water and combat the water shortage situation we are facing in Southern California. If you go to <a href="http://www.bewaterwise.com/tips01.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bewaterwise.com/tips01.html</a> you will see a water saving tips page that lists Indoor and Outdoor tips and how much water is saved with each one. Things like turning off the water when you brush your teeth can save 3 gallons per day, taking shorter showers saves 5 gallons a day, and installing a smart sprinkler controller saves 40 gallons per day! Check out all the tips on the site and pass it on to fellow Southern Californians! Anonymous on "Overallocation and Reallocation and Value" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=12#post-24 Sun, 22 Mar 2009 08:09:10 +0000 Anonymous 24@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ If 80 percent of the water used is by agriculture, is 80% of the value from ag? Has agricultural use and the resulting toxification of streams and rivers exceeded water's value to the state? We have dry river bottoms, dead zones in rivers used as agricultural drains, and flushing of sediments is decreasing. Water rights are allocated beyond reasonable annual average availabilities. Surplus water by contract is being expected to cover what should be considered as permanent or long term investments in tree crops which should be avoided. Shouldn't we as a state be reducing the biggest uses that have the smallest values? This requires reasonable government action. Insead we get clamor for more. And this forum seems aimed at conservation and development of new sources rather than seeking solutions by reductions or even reallocation of water. The state government needs some backbone and the reallocation of resources needs to be looked at HARD. Reduction of high water uses of low value must be seen as having the greatest potential for accommodating future water needs and the detoxification of natural areas. The state government's reallocation of resources needs to be looked at HARD. Anonymous on "Wastewater reuse" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-23 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:40:13 +0000 Anonymous 23@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ By the time Colorado River water reaches San Diego, something like 19 municialities have discharged their partially treated wastewater into the river. Basically, if you live downstream of any city, it is likely happenning to you, too. Cities generally discharge their stormwater and treated wastewater to the nearest waterway. Which also brings up another interesting point about recycled water... If a city decides to start recycling their water, it means less water for those downstream who used to use it. Recycling water means less discharge, and less flows downstream. Anonymous on "Wastewater reuse" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-22 Sun, 15 Mar 2009 05:26:21 +0000 Anonymous 22@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ The current debate around the reuse of wastewater (in which California is a year behind Australia but could well take the lead) is largely based on a lack of public education. Most members of the public seem unaware that they have been drinking their own toilet waste (treated and diluted and treated again) all their lives. Aquafornia could do a great educational service by concentrating more on this aspect of the water cycle. Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-21 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:00:10 +0000 Anonymous 21@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ "What do you think is the best option for meeting California's water needs in the future?" Good Question. But hasn't that been the mantra since the latter part of the 19th Century? How to meet water needs? Hasn't the quest to meet ever increasing water needs led to greater levels of consumption? Possibly the more appropriate question is... What 21st Century strategies must now be adopted to enable California residents, industry and businesses to equitably and sustainably share available water supplies? My guess is that California requires leaders willing to take bold actions (based on sound science) to genuinely prepare the state for difficult times ahead. Water resources development and reclamation of the 20th Century opened up the playing field for lots of winners in California and throughout the west. Maybe our sights should not be set so high this Century. Maybe too many water needs have already been met and their simply isn't the capacity to meet much more in the future. But if you really want to know what my best option would be,... definitely increased conservation and water reuse. Anonymous on "California Drought Alleviation Act and the ESA" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=8#post-20 Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:56:33 +0000 Anonymous 20@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ After listening to House Sub-Committee hearings chaired by Radanovich, I don't trust Radanovich on anything having to do with water. He has not had an original thought on the subject since the primal ESA hunter, Richard Pombo was escorted out of Congress. It is easy to make the ESA a scapegoat. Pete Gleick has shown that such draconian actions are not required. And, no matter what we do now, climate change with modify what we need to do for the future but if we continue BAU, we won't know where we went wrong until it is too late. Anonymous on "Government, Planning and the Politics of Water" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=10#post-19 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:34:08 +0000 Anonymous 19@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ In addressing the issue of water in the SouthWest we must be willing to address that prior solutions have not addressed the core problem. Today, we continue to base solutions through increasing supplies. In the past, it has been simply a matter of addressing increased demand for water by increasing the supply combined with conservation. Reservoirs and dams were built with wide surface areas resulting in huge evaporative losses, aquifers were pumped to the maximum, urban water conservation was voluntary and private wells were unmetered. Supply was there. Sometimes new sources, such as Owens Lake in California, or the San Juan /Chama diversion in NM were piped to urban centers to increase supply. Supply solutions are still available. Desalination of ocean waters, dredging reservoirs and deep aquifer drilling are playing a new role in the discussions as the old sources dry up or prove unable to address increased demand. New deep water, low surface area, high altitude reservoirs can be built. Brackish water can still be tapped from deep aquifers and desalinated. Water pumped in rural areas with low demand can still be piped to urban areas. In other words, there remains the capacity to continue to address water management and administration in the same old way. Current droughts in the SouthWest have raised new concerns. Is the drought caused by climate change? Is the drought a periodic historical episode of decreasing regional precipitation? What about the new risks of geological subsidence, ocean water intrusion into the water table and the reduction of groundwater flows to surface waters? These issues raise their raise their heads as aquifers are mined and groundwater levels decline and precipitation decrease. That being said, it is worth our while to compare the current financial crisis with the impending water crisis that has already manifested in many areas of the US. For years, business as usual for urban residents has been to assume that municipal governments and state governments are up to the task. The water budgets of our regions have been overextended based on presumed maintenance of water supply from aquifers and surface water flows. Decisions are made based on short-term supply projections that no longer stand the test of reality. Water users are not included in the decision-making processes. Water planning is often projected as an ancillary process removed from the actual political decisions by governmental entities. In the Middle Rio Grande, there are two of the largest cities in New Mexico, Albuquerque and Rio Rancho. These cities supply over 500,000 people solely from underground water supplies. Combined these cities use 151,000 acre ft. per year. Agriculture getting its supply of water from the Rio Grande River consumes 298,340 acre ft. per year. In the Water Supply Study Phase III prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Interstate Stream Commission it was summarized: “Both Base Case and Sensitivity model results indicate that water demands in the Middle Rio Grande region currently exceed the available renewable water supply by a minimum of 71,000 acre-feet per year (groundwater withdrawals that have not yet impacted the river), and perhaps by as much as 110,600 acre-feet per year. Despite that these results are accompanied by uncertainty as noted above, the analysis suggests that New Mexico faces significant challenges with respect to meeting both water demands in the Middle Rio Grande and Compact obligations in future years.” In the Middle Rio Grande region of New Mexico water planning took on a significant character that was open and inclusive. The Interstate Stream Commission (ISC) approved a 50-year plan worked on for over 9 years by the Middle Rio Grande Water Assembly. The Assembly worked with the regional Water Resources Board of the Middle Region Council of Governments (MR COG) and maintained the direction and intent of the plan. It was approved by the 15 municipalities of the region, the regional water utility authority, the irrigators’ conservancy district and the flood control authorities of the two counties in the region, some with particular caveats included in their memoranda of agreement. Hundreds of individuals from environmental groups, advocacy groups, real estate interests, water managers of utilities, planners, administrators and specialists in hydrology and geo-hydrology have participated and actively engaged the communities in the region for input on recommendations and preferred scenarios. As someone who worked for years with the Water Assembly in developing the regional water plan, the lesson struck me repeatedly that there is no water plan absent political and structural reform. The myriad of political entities, water management bodies, municipal governments, and administrative bodies function in their own worlds. The government of NM and municipalities are bound hand and foot to developers and real estate interests. Other states in the West are likewise bound to economic interests. These challenges are the issues of election campaigns, the substance of policy decisions and duties of elected officials. It is within the ability of Green Party candidates to build a new public consensus as an integral component of its election activities. It is within the ability of advocacy groups and non-profits to begin to re-define their political priorities. It is time for Green candidates to address fundamental issues of structural reform of water administration and management and present a public process for regions. It’s time for those who have hooked the future of the resource on candidates of the major parties to do a reality check regarding the fundamental issue of reform. Water planning is not a luxury anymore. It is a requirement to provide consistent policies to guide future allocations and growth and development. There can be change but there lies no security in continuing business as usual. This bubble will also burst. Water is not an infinite resource and every new source has a bottom to it. Sustainable water management means establishing defined parameters for water use and allocations. It means having the science that predicts the consequences of given actions. It means consistency in the implementation of water policies that do not conflict with each other. It means developing pricing mechanisms that improve conservation but continue to provide public access for the aged, young and poor communities. Public Welfare statements need to prioritize regional water uses. Water budgets need to be enforced. And new allocations need to be made in the context of renewable supplies. The age of unlimited growth is over economically and ecologically. We need to balance our water budgets as we need to balance our financial budgets. We need to save our resources, just as we need to save our money, as never before and take each new step cautiously. Pyramid schemes for new supplies will never provide us with the stability we need for the future. Regional water planning provides us with the oversight we need. It provides the transparency in which users have input into the process and “skin” in the game. It empowers the science available to provide parameters to the policies that are being established. It enables representation that is qualified, specialized and reflective of the concerns of users. It begins from the realities we confront and looks to the future that we can create. Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-18 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:56:52 +0000 Anonymous 18@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ Around here, they can't stop building homes fast enough. Well, now they can because nobody is building homes right now, but once the economy gets back together, they'll be back to build on all the lots they have graded for already. The county of LA has just approved a 21,600 home development on the outskirts of town - a whole new city, and their plan is to use groundwater to support that city. Well, groundwater is part of our city's supply, and so they are going to stick a straw in the same aquifer as us. Result - less water for all of us. (Not to mention the traffic impacts that this new city will add to the already crowded freeways in this area.) Now I'm all for conserving, and certainly we all could do a lot better with that down here in Southern California, but at the same time, I don't think they should continue to build new cities where there clearly isn't the water resources to support them, and which will make us all miserable as it further clogs the freeways and fouls our air. Anonymous on "Lead CA to fresh water ...." http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=9#post-17 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:53:41 +0000 Anonymous 17@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ WHO IN CALIFORNIA WANTS MORE WATER ? A million acre feet of non-tributary fresh water for California may be available. Non-tributary water means water that under no circumstances is part of any tributary or groundwater that would drain into or possibly be connected to or eventually ever reach any of California's stream sources or their tributaries OR the Colorado River or it's tributaries in any state. In order to put a plan together to determine costs and distribution of a million acre feet of fresh water EACH YEAR, it is essential that those who want the water request the quantity, location and beneficial use(s) they would like to have in a dry year. Requests for water for environmental concerns can be made as well. If more than a million acre feet are requested, the water may be made available based on the date of the request. If specific requests for a million acre feet of fresh water a year are received, the appropriate governmental agencies will be contacted for coordination and cooperation. The exact Source and all of its aspects/options will be fully disclosed at the appropriate time. There is absolutely no obligation of any kind in simply requesting a share of the available non-tributary fresh water. Together, we can try to solve our water shortage dilemmas, Ray Walker (Retired Water Rights Analyst) <a href="mailto:waterrdw@yahoo.com">waterrdw@yahoo.com</a> Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-16 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:19:05 +0000 Anonymous 16@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ I believe we need to start with conservation, accepting and enforcing dramatic (and even painful) reductions in demand. Enough so that we can meet our short-term needs without creating additional new supply. By first addressing demand, we provide ourselves the "space" (ie, the time and opportunity) we need to explore responsible, long-term solutions for the new water supplies we would like to have. As it happens, I am unabashedly confident we can come up with engineering solutions to our water supply problems. Reuse, recycling, desal, dams, etc. But I am reluctant to embrace them too quickly as engineering solutions for too-rigidly framed problems (like "how to create, store or move water") too often neglect the unintended consequences of their implementations. Historically, not enough analysis and planning is done to evaluate the non-engineering impacts of a project on the rest of society. These days, that is a necessity. We need time to develop "good", long-term solutions to our water crisis, and without addressing demand first, we will not have it. An extra benefit of conservation first is that it furthers the public appreciation of not only our current predicament but also the inherent value of water itself and the worth of the expensive infrastructure which supports it. Anonymous on "How best to meet California's water needs in the future?" http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=7#post-15 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:16:00 +0000 Anonymous 15@http://www.aquafornia.com/bbpress/ A complete lifestyle change...wake up and realize we are living in a semi-arid region, one that currently resembles Oregon with all the green lawns.