On 5/24/2015 12:43 PM, cshenk wrote:
> Ophelia wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>>
>>
>> "Cabrito del Bosque" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 5/24/2015 4:32 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>> I have noticed several people here mention California. We have
>>>> had a lot of stuff on tv about the lack of water there. We were
>>>> shown the huge reservoirs with very little water in them. They
>>>> were showing how people with lush grass and full swimming pools
>>>> were being demonised.
>>>>
>>>> Is anyone here affected? It sounds very frightening!
>>>>
>>>
>>> The worst thing imaginable is IF this becomes part of the predicted
>>> megadrought in the Western US.
>>>
>>> http://www.fastcoexist.com/3044538/w...s/5-things-cal
>>> ifornia-can-do-to-survive-a-megadrought
>>>
>>> 1. SAY GOODBYE TO THE LAWN
>>>
>>> 2. REDESIGN CITIES AS SPONGES
>>>
>>> 3. RETHINK THE ALMOND
>>>
>>> 4. FIX THE PIPES
>>>
>>> 5. SMARTER DESALINATION
>>>
>>>
>>> They'll need to move quickly on all of the above.
>>>
>>> And we'll all need to get used to buying more produce from Mexico.
>>
>> Oh dear
>
> Ophelia, relax. He's massively overestimated the food issues for
> example.
I have?
When?
> It could be people in *California* (southern part) might get
> more food from south of them but the only real effect will be the big
> wine industry, yet most grapes are pretty tolerant of drought,
> producing simply less grapes.
That's a bit of a red herring.
> California does have the biggest ticket sales but that is becsause they
> export most of it as in fancy stuff you might find on your shelves.
> It's not an never has been a breadbasket of the USA. Not a single
> product grown there in any quantity hits our top 10 food exports for
> example.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...t_without.html
California produces a sizable majority of many American fruits,
vegetables, and nuts: 99 percent of artichokes, 99 percent of walnuts,
97 percent of kiwis, 97 percent of plums, 95 percent of celery, 95
percent of garlic, 89 percent of cauliflower, 71 percent of spinach, and
69 percent of carrots (and the list goes on and on). Some of this is due
to climate and soil. No other state, or even a combination of states,
can match California’s output per acre. Lemon yields in California, for
example, are more than 50 percent higher than in Arizona. California
spinach yield per acre is 60 percent higher than the national average.
Without California, supply of all these products in the United States
and abroad would dip, and in the first few years, a few might be nearly
impossible to find. Orchard-based products in particular, such as nuts
and some fruits, would take many years to spring back.
Price surges would eventually become the larger issue. Rising prices
would force Americans to consume more grains, which are locked in a
complicated price-dependent relationship with fresh fruits, vegetables,
and meats. When the price of produce increases, people eat more grain.
When the price of grain drops, people eat more fruits and vegetables.
(In fact, in some parts of the world, wheat and rice are the only proven
“Giffen goods”—a product in which decreasing prices lead to decreasing
demand.) Young people and the poor in America, more than others, eat
less fresh food when prices rise.
The loss of California’s output would create a dire situation for at
least a decade. History suggests, however, that we’d eventually find a
way to cope.
> I'm not saying it isnt serious, but neither they nor we will go hungry
> over California's drought.
> Carol
I guess that depends on what one consumes.
It will, if unabated, ripple through the entire US food supply chain.
This is undeniable.