EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Obama Did It For the Money
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
Popular content
Today's Top News
Adapting to Water Woes
The southwestern United States is moving headlong toward an environmental catastrophe of apocalyptic proportions.
The dry, cracked Lake Mead lake-bed near Las Vegas is shown in this 2005 file photo. The severe drought since 2000 has seen the Lake Powell and Lake Mead reservoirs, which hold water for human needs downstream, shrink to 50% or less of normal. (Aaron Mayes, Las Vegas Sun/AP) The already drought-prone region is almost entirely dependent on a shrinking snowpack and sparse rain in the Colorado River Basin. As the planet's climate changes, an already overtaxed and volatile water supply is expected to get even more unstable.
"A lot of people say that in global warming there will be winners and losers. In the Southwest, we'll be in the losers' category," University of Arizona climatologist Jonathan Overpeck said at a symposium on global warming's effect on the Southwest.
Overpeck discussed the latest scientific consensus on climate change at the Feb. 19 symposium, hosted by the Urban Land Institute at the Palms.
He was joined by Southern Nevada Water Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy, who discussed what can be done on a local, national and international scale to head off disaster.
The problem of climate change in the Southwest is fairly complex, but can be summed up in one word: water.
The Southwest is the most persistent hot spot on the globe and has a history of severe drought.
As a region, we depend almost entirely on the Colorado River Basin for our water, and all climate change projections estimate that the basin will be among the most heavily hit by drought as the world warms. Most projections say the region will warm by about 7 degrees by 2050 and 10 degrees by the end of the century.
There is a 10 percent chance the warming in this region could be double that - about 20 degrees warmer by 2100.
At the same time, the region will experience its typical drought pattern. That means it will be hotter and dryer from the mountaintops to the valley floors and we'll have a lot less water available to deal with it.
The most up-to-date climate models available show that if humans reduce carbon emissions significantly starting now, water flow in the Colorado River Basin will be reduced by 5 percent to 40 percent over the next few decades.
If we do nothing, it will be worse, Overpeck said.
"We've had low rain and low snow for many years; there's no doubt we're already in a drought," he said. "The thing is, with climate change, we may never come out of the drought."
The global scientific community agrees that climate change is occurring and is caused by the activities of humans, mostly from deforestation and growing greenhouse gas emissions.
"We need to adapt to drought and climate change because whether we cause it through global warming or Mother Nature causes it or both, we're still going to suffer," Overpeck said.
Much of the responsibility for reversing the emission trend falls on Americans, who create about 25 percent of the carbon being spewed into the atmosphere each year.
"The United States is a voracious consumer of natural resources," Mulroy said. "Those days are over. We can't afford to use natural resources at the rate we're currently using them."
Much also must be done to halt growing production of polluting fossil fuel-fired power plants in China and India and to fund retrofits or replacement of polluting power plants in poorer nations around the world.
That change has to start at home, Mulroy stressed.
"We need to be part of the solution," she said. "We can't be in the eye of the storm and not look at our carbon footprint and energy sources."
To start, she suggests massive regionwide management and conservation of water resources. This includes regulation of the agriculture industry, indicating what crops can be grown in drought-prone areas, decreases in water consumption by residents and industry, widespread wastewater recycling and more efficient management of snowmelt and rainfall through underground catchment basins.
She also said it's essential to tap into alternative water sources for urban areas such as Las Vegas.
"The most daunting thing is adaptation, and adaptation has to happen at all levels from large institutional changes to individual behavioral levels," Mulroy said.
That includes urban and suburban developers.
Mulroy said tomorrow's neighborhoods need to be more condensed, more sustainable and more community oriented. That means smaller or no yards and no more brick walls, but shared recreation areas are necessary.
Not only would such a design be more efficient, it would also help rebuild a sense of community in places such as Las Vegas.
"We've built a community of people who share borders - that's it," she said.
She also urged Nevada builders and architects to put pressure on the Green Building Counsel to take a more regional approach to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certifications.
Specifically, she wants to see the end of LEED points for gray-water systems in Las Vegas to be replaced by points for sending the water down the drain, where 100 percent of it is recycled and sent back to Lake Mead.
This could encourage other municipalities to recycle wastewater as well.
"Gray-water systems won't generate a single drop of new water," she said. "You're simply replacing a municipal water recycling program with an individual water recycling program."
The region also needs to take advantage of the opportunity to turn renewable resources into electricity, both speakers
said.
If fossil fuel-fired power plants were reduced and renewable energy were dedicated to charging electric cars, the country could significantly reduce its carbon footprint and slow climate change.
The key is to start working on these solutions now, Mulroy and Overpeck said.
"The Southwest needs a plan to adapt," Overpeck said. "The longer we wait, the worse it will be and for a very long time."
Stephanie Tavares covers utilities and law for In Business Las Vegas and its sister publication, the Las Vegas Sun.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

19 Comments so far
Show AllOnce again, the most important factor's left out, namely - too many people consuming too many resources. As long as we have growth in human numbers, all other efforts will not resolve the many resource problems we face, including water, of course.
Conservation and reduction of our resource use is great - but without reducing our numbers, we'll be fighting a losing battle against nature.
...... and how do you propose we do that in a timely manner?
Whatever fixes we make will be canceled by overpopulation.
Whatever overpopulation we make will be fixed by nature.
good one fast Eddie.
Eating meat will soon become a luxury we can not afford. On the other hand it will probably be handled like everything else: The rich will continue to eat steak while more and more of the world's poor suffer from waterborne diseases.
Soylent Green is just around the corner.
Mmm soylent green.
As Homer Simpson said.
To paraphrase that famous moron, James Carville:
IT'S THE WATER, STUPID!
Hundreds of millions of people will die for lack of fresh water over the next decade, and we worry about electric cars and lawns in the fantasyland of Las Vegas. We're in denial -- a totally unconscious civilization.
Soylent green?
Nah. Eat the Rich
Too much fat on the males; too much plastic in the females.
New York City had the foresight to build reservoirs in the Delaware and Hudson river watersheds many years ago, and that area of the country only has occasional droughts.
Shell has asked for water rights to build a reservoir in the upper Colorado watershed. (It plans on using the water for shale oil extraction.) Is it possible to build more reservoirs (hopefully not intefering with salmon or other fish)?
Things don't look good for the southwest (or even the Dakotas, Siggi).
Water for shale oil extraction is suicidal, and should never be permitted. For a preview of the controversy that will cause, look into the Alberta tar sands development, where water is actually being lost to the hydrological cycle as the environment is destroyed for the sake of auto-mobility.
Large scale dams do tremendous environmental damage, especially in the destruction of wetlands and fisheries. And they silt up after 50 years or so. They are considered to be bad practice now for both water management and power generation.
There's no escape for Las Vegas (hmmm ... was that a movie title?)
The following article provides some related information, but lacks links to related resources. It's also global in scope, instead of only the U.S.A., and I'll include a link to the article from the source website for the videos.
"Catastrophic Fall in 2009 Global Food Production",
by Eric deCarbonnel, Market Oracle, Feb 10 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12252
QUOTE:
After reading about the droughts in two major agricultural countries, China and Argentina, I decided to research the extent other food producing nations were also experiencing droughts. This project ended up taking a lot longer than I thought. 2009 looks to be a humanitarian disaster around much of the world
To understand the depth of the food Catastrophe that faces the world this year, consider the graphic below depicting countries by USD value of their agricultural output, as of 2006.
... (the graphic)
Now, consider the same graphic with the countries experiencing droughts highlighted.
... (the second graphic)
The countries that make up two thirds of the world's agricultural output are experiencing drought conditions. Whether you watch a video of the drought in China, Australia, Africa, South America, or the US, the scene will be the same: misery, ruined crop, and dying cattle.
END QUOTE
The article continues and the last quoted paragraph, above, has 'video' hyperlinked to the following article, which I guess is the website for Market Oracle (?). It's a page with several videos, one per country experiencing severe drought; although in the case of the U.S., it's a separate video for each of three or four states. I won't provide the link for the drought in California, for the video is mostly not about the drought and is around six minutes.
"Videos Of Droughts Around The World",
by Eric deCarbonnel, Feb 6 2009
http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/02/videos-of-droughts-around-world.html
Texas: For the video about Texas, "Central Texas drought worst in country", it seems we have to view through the above webpage. It's not a youtube.com video, so I didn't get a direct link for it.
Actually, using the source for the above webpage I got the original article the video was provided in and it's the following.
"Central Texas drought worst in country
Drought conditions getting worse by
the day"
Jan 30 2009
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/central_texas_drought_worst_in_country
QUOTE: "AUSTIN (KXAN) - Drought conditions in the Austin area are getting worse by the day, and new data out Thursday night shows the drought in Central Texas is the worst in the country. It is damaging livestock, crops and lake recreation".
"Global Water Challenge and the Atlanta Drought" (2:59)
posted by TeamGWC, Dec 1 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuTsVC8rfUE
Australia and South American countries:
"Extreme Drought in Australia: BBC Science" (2:42)
posted by BBCWorldwide, Dec 20 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9s_A0G7oUU
Seems BBC does some okay reporting now and then, after all.
"Argentina issues agricultural emergency due to drought" (2:00),
posted by AFP (another regular propaganda-based-on-lies news media, like BBC, but also like BBC, not always), Jan 28 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbMJ2tWdwqw
"Drought woes spread in Bolivia: 10 Dec 08" (1:56)
posted by AlJazeeraEnglish, Dec 9 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-mCDxWe76M
"Brazil and Argentina, of drought" (a whopping 0:11)
posted by ("generous") jinnder123, Jan 20 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaibyGB62lI
Other countries for which videos are provided in the marketskeptics webpage are badly hit, variably, I suppose, but bad enough.
As for Portugal; it's also badly hit, but the video, for which the title doesn't specify Portugal, instead saying Europe, tells viewers that the problem is different. It doesn't seem to be so much about climate as it is about [bad] farming techniques; like too much deep tilling and too much use of damn asinine synthetic chemical fertilizers, as examples specified in the video. But it still is causing drought or at least very much drought-like conditions; very bad anyway.
"Desert of Europe" (1:43), posted by youriscom, Apr 10 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuutTBpfYag
The graphics in the article at globalresearch.ca linked at the top of this post show that Canada and Europe are considerably safe, but bad farming techniques are used in these regions and can perhaps not cause droughts, per se, but still come to cause sort-of droughts due to bad farming techniques extremely depleting soil quality. The synthetics and the deep tilling can work apparently or seemingly okay for a while, but if we carefully [think] about Nature, then we should be able to realise that these are [not] long-term sustainable methods or "solutions". Instead, they're [destructive], as well as poisonous.
And that's a very minor or little commencement on the latter topic of bad agricultural techniques.
Climate change and bad agri. techniques don't counter-act each other, they compound. Good, healthy farming techniques can indeed help to counter-act climate changes that are unfavourable for agriculture.
Wise man once said, "Prepare for the unexpected"; BUT too many don't listen!
The article opens with, "The southwestern United States is moving headlong toward an environmental catastrophe of apocalyptic proportions".
The article at globalresearch.ca linked in my first post in this CD page depicts much if not all of the U.S. in "historic drought". I guess this is with some variation, but the graphic in the article shows like the whole U.S. in historic drought. Then the article then provides brief but some specific information regarding California, Texas, the "Augusta Region (Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina)", and Florida. It also speaks of the following:
"La Niña likely to make matters worse
Enough water a couple of degrees cooler than normal has accumulated in the eastern part of the Pacific to create a La Niña, a weather pattern expected to linger until at least the spring. La Niña generally means dry weather for Southern states, which is exactly what the US doesn't need right now. "
I've seen very little mention of drought at CD in articles and reader posts and therefore guess much of the U.S. is not very badly affected; but is the fact that people speak or write little about this due to the absence of news media coverage, say, or the U.S. not being mostly or nationally hit with drought? I don't know and southeastern Quebec, a half-hour drive north of Newport, Vt, is not suffering from drought so far. There've been some drought periods over the past ... years, whatever number of years it is, but nothing seeming to be particularly severe; I think. If that's accurate enough, then I don't see why this region would be much different from most or even all of New England, in which case the rather whole northeast would be faring okay.
Nonetheless, some parts of the U.S. evidently are very seriously hit; very severely in Texas, according to the video (see my first post). The Georgia area also seems seriously hit, but the video only covered Ga or a part of it, I believe. I viewed the videos a few weeks ago and don't recall all of the details, but think the video about Georgia concerns the Atlanta area.
The following is an article I forgot to link to in my first post in this page.
"In dry state, Central Texas has it worst
More than 70 percent of Texas sees drought conditions",
by Stephanie Wang, Statesman (U.S.), Jan 23 2009
http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/01/23/0123drought.html
QUOTE:
In an enduring dry spell some are calling the worst in recent state history, more than 73 percent of Texas is experiencing drought conditions, according to a U.S. Drought Monitor map released Thursday.
Central Texas had the highest rating of "exceptional" drought intensity. ...
...
With little rainfall since the summer, dry pockets are steadily expanding under a stronger-than-expected La Niña weather pattern, he said. ...
"Producers are saying they haven't seen conditions like this since the 1950s drought," Fuchs said.
END QUOTE
The video embedded in the marketskeptics page linked in my first post shows cattle ranchers or raisers in Texas losing cattle to drought.
Bolivia's very severely hit, but Argentina also is.
Cattle looking skeletal and dropping dead in what used to be pastures of grasses, but no longer.
Growing crops instead of animals could help, if the correct farming techniques are employed. Combine some clay in the soil for moisture retention during dry periods, given clay is good for retaining moisture, and add companion crops (harvestable for consumption, or not) for retaining moisture (as well as other beneficial uses), and then a crop farmer can fare well while others see their farms decline in front of their eyes. Stop the damn deep tilling or tilling altogether and you up your chances of faring well. Primitive, simple, and effective are such methods; proven over ages.
Animal ranching's okay to some extent, but it's been taken much too far, and even dairy shouldn't be with farms of many cows. A cow or two is one thing, but large numbers?! From what I recently read, Europeans very much use goat instead of cow milk and while goats still require a considerable amount of water, it'd surely be much less than with cows; and I'd guess also much less than with hogs, given hogs grow up to 300 to 400 pounds, when not more. You ain't get'in no goats anywhere near such sizes even if you give them superman booster feed.
No, I'm not saying we use hog milk.
The overall farming industry has definitely become very screwed up and reversing this would surely be helpful for dealing with drought periods. It would not be a guarantee against all possible problems of natural kind, but would surely help, if farmers and ranchers finally woke up and worked according to how Nature [is]; to work [with] it, instead of ways that it can't really support. When Nature can't support our ways, then we are immediately heading to problems that [we] are the cause of. Instead, eliminate the problems we cause in order to need to deal with strictly natural problems, which humans come to understand how to deal with. A lot of that sort of progress has been achieved, but is far too much under-utilised or practiced.
"drholmquist February 27th, 2009 7:13 pm
Water for shale oil extraction is suicidal, ..."
While I haven't read the article yet, drholmquist, who's clearly no dr, clearly also hasn't read the article, for it makes no mention at all of either shale or oil!
EDIT: Correction: The article mentions fossil fuels. Otoh, the article does not say that these fossil fuels are significantly from Canada. And on another hand, I read over the past week that Canadian oil is actually a significant amount of the oil the U.S. imports. So ...?.
I'm against the hellish crap going on in Alberta, but wouldn't blame this for the [worldwide] droughts that are occurring today. See my first post in this page at CD. The droughts are severe and [global].
If a city out there put into effect built into their communities all of these changes and practices, then the ball will begin to roll down hill. Just making a few small changes here and there, will not do anything to give people of this country an idea of what conservation looks like on a real and necessary scale. We need one or a few cities to really transform. THat's a start. Most people do not realize the extent of change we need to make in our every day lives.
I'm a NM native. I've heard everything in the above article many, many times before. The so-called water experts are usually municipal/developer types closely associated with home builders, realtors and the local chamber of commerce. They use water conversation to make everyone feel good but the purpose is to free up more water to continue development. In the SW the way you conserve water is to impose building/development moratoriums. But like overpopulation that too is a taboo subject.
Having seriously depleted the local aquifers Albuquerque is already taking surface water off the Rio Grande and other municipalities are already looking at relatively pristine aquifers several hundred miles away upsetting a lot of rural folks. The water battle has always raged here in the SW, especially with AZ who have already ruined their state, but it's about to get nastier.
FYI, it hasn't rained in central NM for two months and that was only about a tenth inch. The last "soaker" was Oct. Snow pack is below average in the north, almost non-existent in the south part. I have a pretty good catchment system on my house (4 100gal tanks)but every one is bone dry. Guess what - if it don't rain there's nothing to cache.
T weather has been the same now as it was 3000 years ago and most liekly a lot longer. it is nothing new.
Stop building those damn golf courses that use huge amounts of water,fertilizer and fuel to maintain for old farts to run around and chase little balls. Maybe tear up and and plant some of the existing ones with trees.
America's hero, Tiger Woods, might lead off this action since he had already made more bags of money he could possibly spend and without him that stupid sport would continue to wither and die.