Re:Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving wa...
by tzs on Monday August 01, 2022 @09:59AM
(#32306032)
He's overlooking that the amount of water used to grow a plant is much more than the amount of water that ends up in the plant. For alfalfa 0.005% of the water used to grow it ends up in the product. The remaining 99.995% ends up mostly in the atmosphere around where the plants are grown, either by transpiration from the plants or by evaporation from the soil around the plants.
Re:Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving wa...
by pfranz on Monday August 01, 2022 @11:28AM
(#32307420)
I've heard "exporting water" used as shorthand for the issue quite often. Sure, the water is still there, but it is still taking a large amount of potable water and making it non-potable. You're still diverting that water from the natural ecosystem even if it still end up "back in the environment."
Re:Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving wa...
by mcculley on Monday August 01, 2022 @06:33AM
(#32304110)
It would not be economically viable without the market distortion caused by the subsidization.
See https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/25/california-w...
Sorry I might be ignorant but this sounds ridiculous. How could that ever be economically viable? If you wanted to import water, there are plenty of places (less populated than California) closer to the Arabic peninsula (not on the other side of the world) where water is more plentiful.