Monday, March 05, 2012

H2O Continues To Be More Important Than CO2


A few years ago as I viewed the devastation that was California agriculture, I wrote the following:

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 05, 2009H2O Worries A Real Worry
As I drove through wine country north of San Francisco yesterday, I could see that conditions were much better due to the very wet 2011.  Regardless, there is still a water war waging in California and it seems to be the GOP taking the side of agriculture and the Democratic Party taking the side of the smelt. Why?  Because California can't extract enough water from the ground for its needs and it can't depend on wet years to supply enough reserve for the dry years [image from SFGate].

I'm not sure why anyone from California would want to suppress one of their great economic engines by restricting needed water from agriculture.  Just as the Democrats are happy to advise coal-burning states to clean up their act or mandate new technology for automotive manufacturers, why don't they mandate that water for California cities comes after water for agriculture and smelt... and don't offer an alternative.  That would be a far more effective way of driving out humans from those concrete heat sinks.

Perhaps they can just buy their water from Israel which has figured out how to make their desert nation a water exporter.  Better yet, simply follow the example of Israel.

From Reuters:
Desalination plant could make Israel water exporter
Hey California, bite the bullet and make cities pay the real cost of their water. Just like the rest of America has to pay the real cost of clean air mandates spearheaded by California.  Quit exporting your water costs to other states... and save your agriculture in the process.

Of course, why force technology on California cities?  Isn't it cheaper to do other things... like take water from agriculture or those darling little smelt?

But as Peter Gleick said in 2006, “Desalination will be part of California’s water future, but the future’s not here yet,” said Dr. Peter Gleick, President of the Pacific Institute. “Most California communities can find additional water, quicker and for less money, by improving efficiency and management.”

Say, isn't that the same ethically-challenged Dr. Gleick that stole documents and made up communications supposedly from the Heartland Institute trying to discredit is as a source of climate research?  

Kind of makes you wonder what his agenda here was.  Was that "efficiency and management" simply diverting water from agriculture?  Or was it more about restricting human presence in California than being honest about alternatives?  You know, herd all of the humans into the cities and let the agricultural efforts literally dry up?

Nah, that would be something a radical environmental organization might try to do.

Hey, if California is so willing to force their ideas of desirable technology on the rest of the nation, isn't it time for California to dance to its own tunes?

Conservationists Push Back Against Desalination in California  Of course....

2012 IS HERE


Can"t Find It?

Use the SEARCH BLOG feature at the upper left. For example, try "Global Warming".

You can also use the "LABELS" below or at the end of each post to find related posts.

Blog Archive

Cost of Gasoline - Enter Your Zipcode or Click on Map

CO2 Cap and Trade

There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956)
“The Divine Afflatus,” A Mencken Chrestomathy, chapter 25, p. 443 (1949)
... and one could add "not all human problems really are."
It was beautiful and simple, as truly great swindles are.
- O. Henry
... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.
The Independent (UK)

Tracking Interest Rates

Tracking Interest Rates


SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006
Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!
August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.
December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.
March 28, 2007
The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.
The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007 My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.
August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.
September 11, 2007 It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.
September 18, 2007 I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.
October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."
"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."

December 11, 2007 Somehow the Fed misses the obvious.
[Image from:]
December 13, 2007 [from The Christian Science Monitor]
"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]
January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.
January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.
January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]
“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.
January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:
The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.
Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

My photo
Michigan, United States
Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades. Education: B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German) M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)