On 5/24/2015 2:34 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 3:32:44 AM UTC-7, 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!
>>>>
>>>> While people want to demonize the almond, the water it takes to grow
>>>> one is the same as what's used to flush away a wee.
>>>
>>> I love almonds. I am not sure why anyone would demonise them?
>>>
>>
>> When it takes 20 gallons of water to grow one and you are in the
>> middle (or beginning) of an epic droiught it makes for an easy target.
>
> Ok!
>
But not, a lie actually:

http://www.latimes.com/local/abcaria...17-column.html

It's not clear exactly when almonds became the scapegoat for the
California drought.

Maybe it was last August, when the Atlantic posted "The Dark Side of
Almond Use," implicating the tasty little nut in every environmental
crisis from bee colony collapse disorder to the struggles of the state's
Chinook salmon population.

Or maybe it was in February, when a headline in Mother Jones blared, "It
takes how much water to grow an almond?!" (Profoundly misleading answer:
1.1 gallons per nut.)

Since then, the almond's culpability for you name it — our depleting
aquifers, our sinking topsoil, the heartbreak of psoriasis — has become
an article of faith among finger-wagging pundits and environmental
activists.