| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
OT California
On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:22:46 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque
> wrote: > Because, much like the pecan, they're water hogs - 8 gallons per nut. Almonds only need a little more than a gallon per nut and there are worse water hogs, like broccoli. http://www.businessinsider.com/amoun...-tomato-2015-4 Some farmers are turning to "dry farming" with good results. http://agwaterstewards.org/index.php...s/dry_farming/ -- sf |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 1:43 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Janet B" > wrote in message > ... >> On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:37:58 -0700, sf > wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:39:10 +0100, "Ophelia" > >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message >>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >>>>> ... >>>>>> 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! >>>>> >>>>> Everyone in CA is affected. And since CA grows half the country's >>>>> food, >>>>> half the country is affected as well. My town is ordering a 35% >>>>> cutback >>>>> on water use with fines for offenders. NASA says this is the last >>>>> year we >>>>> will have water in the reservoirs. So next year we should be in full >>>>> anarchy mode I expect. Fox News blames it on illegal immigrants. >>>>> >>>> >>>> So if there will be no water in the reservoirs, where will your water >>>> come >>>> from? >>> >>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>> water gets none. >> >> who were you wanting to take the water from? > > > Time to invade Canada. We will be greeted as liberators and the cost of the > war will pay for itself with water revenues. > The last time we tried that they remodeled the White House! |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 2:01 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "taxed and spent" > wrote in message > ... >> >> > wrote in message >> ... >>> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 7:50:14 AM UTC-7, taxed and spent wrote: >>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message >>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >>>>> ... >>>>>> 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! >>>>> >>>>> Everyone in CA is affected. And since CA grows half the country's >>>>> food, >>>>> half the country is affected as well. My town is ordering a 35% >>>>> cutback >>>>> on water use with fines for offenders. NASA says this is the last >>>>> year we >>>>> will have water in the reservoirs. So next year we should be in full >>>>> anarchy mode I expect. Fox News blames it on illegal immigrants. >>>>> >>>> >>>> But I still have not heard any talk about adding storage capacity or >>>> groundwater replenishment basins, for the times we do have rain. >>> >>> Similarly, I haven't heard my wife talking about buying a safe for the >>> jewelry she expects to buy after she wins the lottery. >> >> That is a bit different, isn't it. Years with heavy rains are quite >> frequent. We need to be putting more away for those non-rainy days. > > > That would take tax money. > > We have enough damns and reservoirs., What do you think has kept us going? > This is year 4 of extreme drought. Just how much capacity can you plan for? Ask Carlsbad, they built a desalination plant. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 24/05/2015 3:14 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:42:27 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 10:58 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: >>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>>> water gets none. >>>> >>> >>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a >>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea. >> >> >> Shatner thinks so. >> >> Seattle may differ. > > I'm thinking Great Lakes region, Canada... places with plenty of water > that are willing to exchange it for money. Just like oil is now. > No we are NOT! Graham -- |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 4:50:31 PM UTC-4, Ophelia wrote:
> "Roy" > wrote in message > ... > > On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 12:23:25 PM UTC-6, graham wrote: > >> On 24/05/2015 10:40 AM, Cheri wrote: > >> > > >> > "William" > wrote in message > >> > news 
> >> >> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:32:35 +0100, "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! > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> They may need to build massive desalinization plants on the California > >> >> coast to supply water for human consumption or shut California down. > >> >> Can you imagine "the water police" from the People's Republic of > >> >> California timing your shower not to exceed two (2) minutes? > >> >> > >> >> William > >> > > >> > You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since > >> > CA > >> > supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can > >> > imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers > >> > already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, > >> > rinse > >> > off. > >> > > >> > Cheri > >> > > >> > > >> 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! > >> Save water - Shower with a friend! > >> Graham > >> -- > > > > I tried that shower with a friend thing but my GF kept getting all the > > water > > and I was too distracted to worry about it. > > lol > > -- > http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/ Thanks for contributing to the conversation again ****. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 24/05/2015 1:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
> > "graham" > wrote in message > ... >> On 24/05/2015 10:40 AM, Cheri wrote: >>> >>> "William" > wrote in message >>> news
>>>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:32:35 +0100, "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! >>>> >>>> >>>> They may need to build massive desalinization plants on the California >>>> coast to supply water for human consumption or shut California down. >>>> Can you imagine "the water police" from the People's Republic of >>>> California timing your shower not to exceed two (2) minutes? >>>> >>>> William >>> >>> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since CA >>> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can >>> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers >>> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, rinse >>> off. >>> >>> Cheri >>> >>> >> 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! >> Save water - Shower with a friend! >> Graham > > I assume you can shave your legs and armpits in that time as well? I can > do all that in five. LOL > > Cheri You don't need to shave! Graham -- |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 2:03 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> > 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. > > Mosty of the nuts are sold to China. http://www.almonds.com/sites/default...13_almanac.pdf http://giannini.ucop.edu/ResearchRep...34-Almonds.pdf http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...112-story.html About 40% of the company's almonds are sold to major food companies such as Kellogg's for use in products including cereal. Some of the nuts are also sold to China, where annual consumption of California almonds has more than doubled in the last five years to 208 million pounds, making it the top foreign destination for the California crop. What bodes well for the industry is that almond demand is also expanding in Europe and the U.S., shielding it from dips in consumption in any one place, said Halliburton Barber of Rabobank. > Most of the nut farms are owned by Wall Street investment companies. Oh horrors! > So Wall Street is exacerbating the > problem by planing thousand sof new acres with nut trees to increase their > profits. It's all that nasty Wall Street, eh Marxist? **** you! Learn to buy some stock and take back dividends, you idiot. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 2:06 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "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. When would that be? I thought it was 8, looks a lot lower. Looks like you were just caught LYING again, asshole! 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. http://www.almonds.com/blog/water/al...-water-numbers Over the past two decades, almond growers have reduced the amount of water they use per pound of almonds by 33%.4 Key strategies, for example, have included the wide adaptation of micro-drip irrigation instead of traditional sprinklers, soil maps, and soil monitoring systems that allow for demand-based irrigation instead of scheduled irrigation. While it’s true that more acres of California farmland are being used to grow almonds, that doesn’t tell the full story. That shift toward almonds – and other perennial crops like other nuts and olives – has not led to an increase in water used for farming overall in the state. In fact, from 2000 to 2010, the state’s agricultural water use held steady.5 By the way, so did urban and environmental use. Some reports have overstated agriculture’s share of water use in California. Agriculture accounts for about 40 percent of the state’s developed water usage in an average year. Fifty percent is comprised by environmental water use, including water in rivers, streams, wetlands and water needed to maintain water quality for agricultural and urban use, and 10 percent is used in urban areas.6 All these types of usage are important for California. It takes water to grow almonds. It also takes water to raise all other animal- and plant-based food, as well as to make your make your car, jeans and cell phone. Estimating exactly how much water any particular item takes to produce is extremely difficult, but for a broader perspective, you may appreciate this useful online tool from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey. Many people don’t know that almond trees produce two crops with the water they use. One is almonds, and the other is their hulls, which are used for livestock feed. A useful by-product includes shells, which are used in co-generation of energy and as livestock bedding. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 2:32 PM, Michel Boucher wrote:
> wrote in > : > >>>> 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. >> >> It takes one gallon of water to grow an almond, but 3.3 >> gallons of water to grow a tomato. Almonds sell at a premium >> compared to tomatoes. > > That is cracker economics at its most risible. Bullshit lie! http://www.almonds.com/blog/water/al...-water-numbers Over the past two decades, almond growers have reduced the amount of water they use per pound of almonds by 33%.4 Key strategies, for example, have included the wide adaptation of micro-drip irrigation instead of traditional sprinklers, soil maps, and soil monitoring systems that allow for demand-based irrigation instead of scheduled irrigation. While it’s true that more acres of California farmland are being used to grow almonds, that doesn’t tell the full story. That shift toward almonds – and other perennial crops like other nuts and olives – has not led to an increase in water used for farming overall in the state. In fact, from 2000 to 2010, the state’s agricultural water use held steady.5 By the way, so did urban and environmental use. Some reports have overstated agriculture’s share of water use in California. Agriculture accounts for about 40 percent of the state’s developed water usage in an average year. Fifty percent is comprised by environmental water use, including water in rivers, streams, wetlands and water needed to maintain water quality for agricultural and urban use, and 10 percent is used in urban areas.6 All these types of usage are important for California. It takes water to grow almonds. It also takes water to raise all other animal- and plant-based food, as well as to make your make your car, jeans and cell phone. Estimating exactly how much water any particular item takes to produce is extremely difficult, but for a broader perspective, you may appreciate this useful online tool from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey. Many people don’t know that almond trees produce two crops with the water they use. One is almonds, and the other is their hulls, which are used for livestock feed. A useful by-product includes shells, which are used in co-generation of energy and as livestock bedding. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
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. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 2:44 PM, Roy wrote:
> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 12:23:25 PM UTC-6, graham wrote: >> On 24/05/2015 10:40 AM, Cheri wrote: >>> >>> "William" > wrote in message >>> news
>>>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:32:35 +0100, "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! >>>> >>>> >>>> They may need to build massive desalinization plants on the California >>>> coast to supply water for human consumption or shut California down. >>>> Can you imagine "the water police" from the People's Republic of >>>> California timing your shower not to exceed two (2) minutes? >>>> >>>> William >>> >>> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since CA >>> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can >>> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers >>> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, rinse >>> off. >>> >>> Cheri >>> >>> >> 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! >> Save water - Shower with a friend! >> Graham >> -- > > I tried that shower with a friend thing but my GF kept getting all the water > and I was too distracted to worry about it. > Wait, you showered with a weasel? ;-) |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:12 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:25:22 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: >> >> >> Ever read the Colorado River Compact? > > No. But I'm not claiming it's a good thing either. The premise was reasonable, they just needed to have an annual precipitation adjustment factor. Oh well, climatology back then was perhaps less a science than now. >> >> Colorado is obligated to deliver as are the other western states >> signatory to it. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact >> > People shouldn't be living in the desert and expecting to live as if > they were still in the NE/NW sections of the country. 100% agree! No lawns, recycle gray water, etc. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
Cheri wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> > "Ophelia" > wrote in message > ... > > > > > >"cshenk" > wrote in message > ... > > > 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. 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. > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > I'm not saying it isnt serious, but neither they nor we will go > > > hungry over California's drought. > > > > It sounds pretty serious to me  > > It is, but not to people who don't live here. It all depends on whose > ox is getting gored in these cases. > > Cheri I didnt ay it isnt serious for you folks. I said it is bogus that it will cause wild famine in the USA. The product from California are largly luxury items or produced in near the same amounts elsewhere in the USA. -- |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:14 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:42:27 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 10:58 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: >>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>>> water gets none. >>>> >>> >>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a >>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea. >> >> >> Shatner thinks so. >> >> Seattle may differ. > > I'm thinking Great Lakes region, Canada... places with plenty of water > that are willing to exchange it for money. Just like oil is now. > One fly in that ointment, we've already got water bottlers in line ahead exporting some of that water. And Canada told us once to go pound sand. There are actually plans to capture and to icebergs to China for water, no kidding. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:15 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:11:47 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 12:42 PM, sf wrote: >>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:58:06 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote: >>> >>>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>>>> water gets none. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a >>>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea. >>> >>> Who needs a reasonable distance? >> >> Investors? >> >>> If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada >>> to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too. >> >> Bbbbbbut...Keystone XL was denied! >> >> > A water leak won't contaminate the aquifer beneath it! > Heh, no but it will cause untold miles of excavation, or an unsightly above ground installation. Your point is taken, water can be piped quite easily, save for the expense of the utilities to run the pumping stations. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:17 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:37:55 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 10:37 AM, sf wrote: >>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:39:10 +0100, "Ophelia" > >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message >>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >>>>> ... >>>>>> 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! >>>>> >>>>> Everyone in CA is affected. And since CA grows half the country's food, >>>>> half the country is affected as well. My town is ordering a 35% cutback >>>>> on water use with fines for offenders. NASA says this is the last year we >>>>> will have water in the reservoirs. So next year we should be in full >>>>> anarchy mode I expect. Fox News blames it on illegal immigrants. >>>>> >>>> >>>> So if there will be no water in the reservoirs, where will your water come >>>> from? >>> >>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>> water gets none. >>> >> >> Um, ekshually: >> >> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/william-...to-california/ >> >> William Shatner to launch $30 billion Kickstarter campaign for water >> pipeline to California >> >> William Shatner wants to turn to crowdfunding to build a water pipeline >> from Seattle to Nevada's Lake Mead to fix California's drought. >> >> Shatner, 84, revealed the news in a Yahoo! interview, saying, "So I'm >> starting a Kickstarter campaign. I want $30 billion...to build a >> pipeline like the Alaska pipeline. Say, from Seattle -- a place where >> there's a lot of water. There's too much water. How bad would it be to >> get a large, 4-foot pipeline, keep it aboveground -- because if it >> leaks, you're irrigating!" > > Why pick Seattle? I wouldn't pick such a populated area. > I just don't know what Captain Kirk was thinking %-) His decision making since Leonard Nimoy passed hasn't been as sound... |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:19 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:26:02 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 12:52 PM, Janet B wrote: >>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:37:58 -0700, sf > wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:39:10 +0100, "Ophelia" > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message >>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >>>>>> ... >>>>>>> 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! >>>>>> >>>>>> Everyone in CA is affected. And since CA grows half the country's food, >>>>>> half the country is affected as well. My town is ordering a 35% cutback >>>>>> on water use with fines for offenders. NASA says this is the last year we >>>>>> will have water in the reservoirs. So next year we should be in full >>>>>> anarchy mode I expect. Fox News blames it on illegal immigrants. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So if there will be no water in the reservoirs, where will your water come >>>>> from? >>>> >>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>>> water gets none. >>> >>> who were you wanting to take the water from? >>> Janet US >>> >> >> Shatner says Seattle. > > Odd choice. > I think he had some notion of following I-5 or something. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:20 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:43:58 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" > > wrote: >> >> >> Time to invade Canada. We will be greeted as liberators and the cost of the >> war will pay for itself with water revenues. >> > Nestlé can build the water pipeline. > And you just know they'd be all over that! |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:24 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:34:45 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> On 5/24/2015 10:32 AM, notbob wrote: >>> On 2015-05-24, William > wrote: >>> >>>> They may need to build massive desalinization plants on the California >>> >>> Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you. >>> >>> nb >>> >> http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0N601V20150415 > > Why not use the desalinized water for agriculture? > That's not a bad move, the cost could be more easily distributed to the end users. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 2015-05-24 2:23 PM, graham wrote:
>> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since CA >> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can >> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers >> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, rinse >> off. >> >> Cheri >> >> > 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! > Save water - Shower with a friend! Even three is luxurious. I can do it in less than a minute. It helps to have a hand held shower so you don't get a blast of cold water. I get into the tub and turn the water on hot and use the cold water to wet the soap and get lather up as the water is warming up. By the time I have hot water I am ready to rinse. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:34 PM, taxed and spent wrote:
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message > ... >> >> "taxed and spent" > wrote in message >> ... >>> >>> > wrote in message >>> ... >>>> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 7:50:14 AM UTC-7, taxed and spent wrote: >>>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message >>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >>>>>> ... >>>>>>> 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! >>>>>> >>>>>> Everyone in CA is affected. And since CA grows half the country's >>>>>> food, >>>>>> half the country is affected as well. My town is ordering a 35% >>>>>> cutback >>>>>> on water use with fines for offenders. NASA says this is the last >>>>>> year we >>>>>> will have water in the reservoirs. So next year we should be in full >>>>>> anarchy mode I expect. Fox News blames it on illegal immigrants. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But I still have not heard any talk about adding storage capacity or >>>>> groundwater replenishment basins, for the times we do have rain. >>>> >>>> Similarly, I haven't heard my wife talking about buying a safe for the >>>> jewelry she expects to buy after she wins the lottery. >>> >>> That is a bit different, isn't it. Years with heavy rains are quite >>> frequent. We need to be putting more away for those non-rainy days. >> >> >> That would take tax money. >> >> We have enough damns and reservoirs., What do you think has kept us >> going? This is year 4 of extreme drought. Just how much capacity can you >> plan for? >> > > since a four year drought is pretty common here in California, and we have > tripled our population without adding any more storage capacity, I would say > we need more storage. > > I need to rent "Chinatown" and ponder the perils of Hollis Mulwray. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:43 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:22:46 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> Because, much like the pecan, they're water hogs - 8 gallons per nut. > > Almonds only need a little more than a gallon per nut and there are > worse water hogs, like broccoli. > http://www.businessinsider.com/amoun...-tomato-2015-4 > > Some farmers are turning to "dry farming" with good results. > http://agwaterstewards.org/index.php...s/dry_farming/ > You are right, and my data was bad. http://www.latimes.com/local/abcaria...17-column.html 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.) On the dry farming, one hybrid idea - couple it with focused drip irrigation. That feeds individually, rather than flood or channel irrigation. We've sen that deployed at many of the pecan orchards. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
|
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:55 PM, graham wrote:
> On 24/05/2015 3:14 PM, sf wrote: >> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:42:27 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque >> > wrote: >> >>> On 5/24/2015 10:58 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: >>>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines, >>>>> water gets none. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a >>>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea. >>> >>> >>> Shatner thinks so. >>> >>> Seattle may differ. >> >> I'm thinking Great Lakes region, Canada... places with plenty of water >> that are willing to exchange it for money. Just like oil is now. >> > No we are NOT! > Graham > Oh come on, we'll trade you a Keystone XL approval for some water... |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 3:55 PM, wrote:
> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 4:50:31 PM UTC-4, Ophelia wrote: >> "Roy" > wrote in message >> ... >>> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 12:23:25 PM UTC-6, graham wrote: >>>> On 24/05/2015 10:40 AM, Cheri wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "William" > wrote in message >>>>> news
>>>>>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:32:35 +0100, "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! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> They may need to build massive desalinization plants on the California >>>>>> coast to supply water for human consumption or shut California down. >>>>>> Can you imagine "the water police" from the People's Republic of >>>>>> California timing your shower not to exceed two (2) minutes? >>>>>> >>>>>> William >>>>> >>>>> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since >>>>> CA >>>>> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can >>>>> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers >>>>> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, >>>>> rinse >>>>> off. >>>>> >>>>> Cheri >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! >>>> Save water - Shower with a friend! >>>> Graham >>>> -- >>> >>> I tried that shower with a friend thing but my GF kept getting all the >>> water >>> and I was too distracted to worry about it. >> >> lol >> >> -- >> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/ > > Thanks for contributing to the conversation again ****. > Isn't it about time you performed that Bic pen lobotomy on yourself? |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 4:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-05-24 1:34 PM, wrote: > >>> 1. SAY GOODBYE TO THE LAWN > > That can lead to flooding when there is rain. Nope, there are plenty of Xeric ground covers that are low water use. > As cities get larger and > larger and buildings,roads and parking lots cover more and more of the > ground, there is less ground surface exposed to absorb and hold water. > Then we get people paving their yards instead of having lawns. Honestly...I have not seen anyone here paving their yards. > When the heavy rains come the water just runs downhill, flooding the lower > elevations for a short time, and the water disappears downstream. That's what good storm sewers and drainage are designed for. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 4:23 PM, cshenk wrote:
> Cheri wrote in rec.food.cooking: > >> >> "Ophelia" > wrote in message >> ... >>> >>> >>> "cshenk" > wrote in message >> ... >>>> 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. 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. >>>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> I'm not saying it isnt serious, but neither they nor we will go >>>> hungry over California's drought. >>> >>> It sounds pretty serious to me >> >> It is, but not to people who don't live here. It all depends on whose >> ox is getting gored in these cases. >> >> Cheri > > I didnt ay it isnt serious for you folks. I said it is bogus that it > will cause wild famine in the USA. OK, so who said "famine"? Huh? > The product from California are > largly luxury items or produced in near the same amounts elsewhere in > the USA. Dead wrong, as posted and proved already. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 4:30 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-05-24 2:23 PM, graham wrote: > >>> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since CA >>> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can >>> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers >>> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, rinse >>> off. >>> >>> Cheri >>> >>> >> 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! >> Save water - Shower with a friend! > > Even three is luxurious. I can do it in less than a minute. It helps to > have a hand held shower so you don't get a blast of cold water. I get > into the tub and turn the water on hot and use the cold water to wet the > soap and get lather up as the water is warming up. By the time I have > hot water I am ready to rinse. > Canada has a water problem now? |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:24:58 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque
> wrote: > There are actually plans to capture and to icebergs to China for water, > no kidding. All that was "floated" during the last big one 40 years ago. -- sf |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On Sun, 24 May 2015 18:30:57 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote: > On 2015-05-24 2:23 PM, graham wrote: > > >> You shut CA down, you shoot the rest of the country in the foot since CA > >> supplies a whole lot of food for the rest of the country. Yes, I can > >> imagine it, they are asking people to take military type showers > >> already, no more than 5 minutes start to finish, get wet, soap up, rinse > >> off. > >> > >> Cheri > >> > >> > > 5 minutes is generous. I can shower in 3! > > Save water - Shower with a friend! > > Even three is luxurious. I can do it in less than a minute. It helps to > have a hand held shower so you don't get a blast of cold water. I get > into the tub and turn the water on hot and use the cold water to wet the > soap and get lather up as the water is warming up. By the time I have > hot water I am ready to rinse. It's pretty easy when you're bald and don't shave in the shower. -- sf |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 4:47 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:24:58 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque > > wrote: > >> There are actually plans to capture and to icebergs to China for water, >> no kidding. > > All that was "floated" during the last big one 40 years ago. > Lol. http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...chemes/243364/ Every few years for the past couple centuries, even before the large-scale cultivation of marijuana, this idea occurs to someone: What if we towed an iceberg from the poles, where there are no people, to some dry, populous place and then melted it into freshwater? In some cases, that person has ginned up a company to try to make it happen. In others, they've written reports for the RAND Corporation or turned the idea into the basis for a thriller mass market paperback. Long-distance iceberg towing is one of those ideas that will not die but never really springs to life either. It exists in a kind of technological purgatory, dressed up in whatever technology is fashionable during an epoch and resold to a happily gullible media. This happened again this week when Georges Mougin told the world that newfangled computer models just happened to confirm what he'd long thought: that icebergs could be transported economically to Africa. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 2015-05-24 6:51 PM, sf wrote:
>> Even three is luxurious. I can do it in less than a minute. It helps to >> have a hand held shower so you don't get a blast of cold water. I get >> into the tub and turn the water on hot and use the cold water to wet the >> soap and get lather up as the water is warming up. By the time I have >> hot water I am ready to rinse. > > It's pretty easy when you're bald and don't shave in the shower. > How much more time does it take to shampoo and rinse a hairy male head than a bald one?... I would say it is a matter of seconds. A long haired female might take a few seconds more. I find it hard to believe that it takes 5 minutes or more to shower. I know the hot water feels good, but if you are talking about showering to get clean, it can be done in a minute or two. The biggest waste of water is letting the hot water run while it comes up to temperature at the shower head. I use that cooler water for lathering up. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
On 5/24/2015 5:17 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> The biggest waste of water is letting the hot water run while it comes > up to temperature at the shower head. I use that cooler water for > lathering up. a. Buy a tankless demand water heater. b. Install a recirculating water pump. |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT California
"taxed and spent" > wrote in
: >> That is cracker economics at its most risible. You cannot >> grow a single almond, you have to grow a tree which will >> produce many almonds (I would imagine close to 100 almonds >> per tree if my experience in Andalucia is similar), each if >> them requiring a "gallon" (or more accurately 4 litres) of >> water. You can however grow a few tomatoes instead of a >> hundred. > > WAY more than 100 almonds per tree. In 1967 in Andalucia, a non-commercial tree would not have produced as much...but I was merely showing how ludricous the comparison was. -- "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor " -- Desmond Tutu |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| California | General Cooking | |||
| Why don't we all live in California? | Preserving | |||
| California Quesadillas | Recipes (moderated) | |||
| California winery needs help! | Wine | |||
| California winery needs help! | Sushi | |||
![sf[_9_] is offline](https://www.foodbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
