Slashdot Mirror
California Fights Drought With Data and Psychology, Yielding 5% Usage Reduction
dcblogs writes with an article about hackers using technology to mitigate the effects of drought. From the article: "California is facing its worst drought in more than 100 years, and one with no end in sight. But it is offering Silicon Valley opportunities. In one project, the East Bay Municipal Utility District in Oakland used customized usage reports .... that [compare] a customer's water use against average use for similar sized households. It uses a form of peer pressure to change behavior. A ... year-long pilot showed a 5% reduction in water usage. The utility said the reporting system could 'go a long way' toward helping the state meet its goal of a reducing water usage by 20% per capita statewide. In other tech related activities, the organizer of a water-tech focused hackathon, Hack the Drought is hoping this effort leads to new water conserving approaches. Overall, water tech supporters are working to bring more investor attention to this market. Imagine H2O, a non-profit, holds annual water tech contests and then helps with access to venture funding. The effort is focused on 'trying to address the market failure in the water sector,' Scott Bryan, the chief operating officer of Imagine H2O."
So, how long before they start redefining "average" down below the actual average so as to make even more people feel bad about themselves?
After all, it's pretty much just a line of code to reduce the value displayed under "average use" to be, well, whatever the coder wants it to be.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Stop trying to farm and build huge cities in the desert. When you fuss about not being able to find enough water in the desert I just want to sit in my muddy, humid, rainy state... and watch you die of thirst.
so a group of peope had the brilliant idea of building massive cities and huge agricultural farmlands in a desert, made possible by unsustainable draining of acquifers and importation of water from other states.
and now they have a "drought"?
can't raise enough moisture for a tear over here....
Why not simply lower the water pressure by 10% to curb water usage?
The real use is farming for out-of-state sales. Industry is second. Home use is a grotesquely distant and minor third.
Getting the home user panicked and guilty and whipped up was a knowing, admitted strategy to try to get legislation passed. Mathematically pointless limit discs are part of this.
Save a few percent -- put off the need for growth a year or two.
Ya wanna do something useful? Make it legal for people who develop alternate sources to preen and waste water luxuriously, sans limit discs and with 200 gallon toilet tanks.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
There is merely a shortage of raw materials (H2O) for big agriculture.
Agriculture consumes 80% of the water in California and contributes 5% of the economy. There is sufficient water in California to supply the cities 5 times over.
But before you fly-over states get all self-righteous, think about this the next time you buy fresh salad greens in January.
Like when someone brings a breathalyzer to a party. You'd think reasonable people would make sure they didn't drink too much. Nope. It becomes a contest to see who can blow the highest reading.
Hey Californians. I live on the other coast and I have a hole in my back yard where I can pump all the water out I could ever want - for free.
:wq
Did the usage reports really result in a 5% drop in water usage, or is it the fact that for the past 4 months, you can't watch the news without hearing all about the drought conditions and how people have to stop flushing their toilets so much. Meanwhile, residential use accounts for only 10 - 15% of California's water use, so even if everyone cut their use by 20%, it really wouldn't solve the problem.
You're right, we should let the free market sort it out. That way the water manufacturers will receive incentive to build more waters when the price of water rises to the level the oil companies are willing to pay to pump it into the ground to get $110 barrels of oil out.
Enjoy your bath at bottled-water prices.
In Denver we suffered through a drought that lasted a few years. There was a big campaign to get people to reduce their water usage - and it worked! People significantly reduced their water usage - so much that the water board was no longer getting the revenue that it said it needed. So, the rates went up.
Funny how the rates didn't go back down when the drought was over.
Also, not surprisingly, the golf courses got all the water they wanted.
I find residential usage citations vary from 5-13% of total California water usage. Let's say it's 10%. I'm having a hard time figuring out how cutting my usage by, say, a big 25% along with every other California resident is going to solve the problem when that represents maybe 2.5% of total water usage. Don't get me wrong, I see no reason to waste water unnecessarily, but I just don't get all the emphasis on residential usage when it's a drop in the bucket. What am I missing?
Water saving measures have drained funds from water taxes that are used to maintain the infrastructure...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com...
Meanwhile billions of gallons of water from California are, essentially, being exported to China.
NB: I apologize if the article is paywalled. The first look is free.
Proverbs 21:19
The funny thing is they could use a sand filter to 100% stop the fish being killed
and transfer the water thru the sand into the system.
Sand filter is old tech and requires zero power.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
Do you think everyone should dig up all the grass and use astro turf?
Actually in a lot of New Mexico (can't speak for elsewhere), digging under your grass and "zeroscaping" is fairly popular. Looks good and takes almost no water. Of course, you might need grass out back if you want to play on your Slip-n-Slide.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
I will take this seriously when they cease watering golf courses. Until then, it is just theater.
"...each course each day in Palm Springs consumes as much water as an American family of four uses in four years. "
http://www.npr.org/templates/s...
I see 3 outlandish replies without anything to back them up.
X gallons per person at minimal cost. Above that is a sliding cost. It works for income tax - and is used for water in the desert where I live with very good effect. Want to know what happened? People replace their lawns with xerescape and new houses re-purpose 90% of water (soap/food is mostly separate and flushed) from showers, dish washers, and clothing washers to instead water their back yard and feed the canal systems. Also, front loading clothing washer sales increased because they use 30% less water. Cost effectiveness works.
As far as competitiveness goes, water is a basic utility that is managed as a controlled monopoly - just like electricity, streets, etc.
Government is best at setting standards. Industry is best at efficiently meeting them.
First, are you in the area effected by the drought?
Second, are you in an area that is very cold without snow?
Third, the pipes are not always 14' below ground. Your house is probably above ground so there must me a pipe that goes from 14' below ground to at least ground level to get to your house. I bet if you go outside you will find a shut off valve between the water main and your house. I doubt very much that the valve is 14' below ground level. It is that section that might freeze.
And why is it WRONG to stop wasting?
Because at a certain point, you eliminate all waste and start cutting into actual need. That can have a detrimental effect on the economy and well-being of the people. Not flushing the toilet as much as you used to, for example, is a good example of eliminating waste. Dumping all your sewage out into the street rather than flush the toilet at *all*--that's beyond waste and into need.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Tell me more about global warming, please.
Sure thing.
The problem is not a "market failure", it is that the market is distorted. If the true laws of supply and demand were allowed to work on the water market in California, then water would be a lot more expensive right now because of how rare it is due to drought.
If the people are using too much water then raise the price. Define what consitutes a "drought" in strict terms (average rainfall below some amount for X days in a row), and raise the price per gallon of water an extra 50% during these drought conditions. Add in a credit for people below the poverty line so that they don't have issues.
Usage problems will be solved overnight. Charge people more and they will use less. Wallet pressure works a lot better than "peer pressure".
They just need to do what they've done in other western "dry" states and price water on consumption. In my state I pay a normal about $30 a month for the first 7000 gallons, which is enough for most moderately sized households internal uses. But the next 7000 gallons cost me double the $30 and the third set of 7000 costs me triple. In the summer my water bill goes from $30 a month to almost $300. This progressive pricing was introduced during our last big drought and water consumption went down 20% almost immediately and has continued to drop every year. Xeroscaping became very popular.
In fact I'm in the process of ripping up several hundred feet of sod to be replaced with native plants.
That link to 'hackthedrought.org' is blocked because "Suspicious Content. Sites in this category may pose a security threat to network resources or private information, and are blocked by your organization."
Teach them to put the word " |-| @ C | " into their URL! Nasty terrorists!
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
yes but anything that
1 solves the problem permanently
2 does not generate campaign dollars
3 is cheap
4 does not have a PAC bribing behind it
5 is simple to implement
6 can't be used to generate kickbacks for "Friends"
is a non starter in this government
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
...digging under your grass and "zeroscaping" is fairly popular.
Xeriscaping. Sounds about the same, though.
Lake Mead is current at 48% of full pool.
One might say its average movement is toward empty, not towards full.
I think most of the desert cities could do better with conservation, such
as lawns, pools, farming, etc.
A few states are drawing off Lake Mead.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
Charging residents more per gallon then the farmers is a subsidy paid to the farmers.
When the citizen serfs have to pony up huge money so that farmers can get cheap water
to ship Alfalfa to China for fat profits that is fascism.
The farmers need to be paying the same rate as the citizen serfs and this problem would
go away, and the farmers would then find all that groundwater cheap to pump in comparison.
This is merely corporate welfare for corporate farms.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
How are farmers wasting massive amounts of water? Do you know anything about food production and agricultural water use in general? American farmers do export a lot of food, but your food prices are low because of the wealth of food grown right in your backyard. Where are farmers growing food where they shouldn't be? Do you have an alternative? In many places, the best farmland is under cities now, perhaps pushing farmer to more marginal lands. This is an unfortunate consequence of growth. Granted.
Farming is under more pressure than any other industry to use water efficiently and effectively. And farmers are more aware than anyone else how scarce it is and how badly drought can affect them. Especially in California, irrigation is done using the most efficient means possible. Drip irrigation, low-pressure center pivots that put water down close to the plants. Irrigation losses to evaporation during irrigation are about as low as they can get. Current pivots are, depending on the wind, around 85% efficient, which is pretty good. Could we get better? maybe so. In the end, though, it still takes a lot of water to raise vegetables, grains, fruits. All things that, when they are in season, you enjoy, locally sourced.
I heard an astounding sound bite on the news once. A woman was upset about having her city water rationed in Reno, NV, and, I kid you not, said to the interviewer, "Why do farmers need all that water anyway? Why can't they buy their food at a grocery store like everyone else?" Just. Wow.
You have a point, but you're a long way from cutting into actual need.
I live in a country where everybody has access to high quality ground water. Our avarage daily water consumption is per capita less than a third of that of a the US, where you don't have access to high quality water. (our tap water is cleaner than bottled water.)
I was shocked by the disregard for water the first time I visited the US. Just as an example, your toilet bowls are huge lakes of water compared to what I'm used to. Flushing all that water just made me feel guilty.
Fact: The cost of water is TINY even when it is scarce because it's a socialized resource. Bringing in water great distances can be costly initially unless done really poorly it eventually ends up cheap.
The REAL cost of water that you really pay for is the SEWAGE cost. SEWAGE processing is some expensive shit. ;-) They couldn't measure sewage but they could measure the water they also run into your house; also done by the city. Every place that doubled the two services up (almost everywhere with city water) puts the sewage treatment costs into the water costs. It's not precise but if you use a lot of water you are more likely putting out more sewage too. This is why most cities forbid wells once they run city sewer because then people get nearly free sewer service because they don't use the metered water service.
I know somebody who invented a sewage measuring device, but it never got anywhere because they don't want the added cost of requiring it in new developments... plus they'd keep measuring the water too and water meters are cheaper. Averaging out the sewage costs to water usage is a simple cheap accounting solution.
If you really want to cut water use, start making people store their own rain water and subsidize it with the water bills; eventually removing most the city water system. Sewage would also have to be done along with this, obviously. That would require a great deal of changes since sewage is a complex problem nobody thinks about (we just pollute... BTW, modern treatment is only partially effective.) Then you have to ban products being put down the drain... we should have done that already... those flushed drugs end up in the ecosystem and back in us (not to mention the bad kinds of microbiological evolution it promotes.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news