• Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If I understand correctly from the article, it sounds like they’re caught in a loop (sans Abattis family) and need something to change in order to further cut water usage (sans Abattis; because it sounds like they just don’t give a fuck).

    Basically if I got this right:

    They grow a combination of food for humans and feedstock for animals; and most of the water is being consumed by feedstock.

    They (sans Abattis family) are aware that they use a shitton of water and have been trying to take steps to reduce their water consumption, but doing so is expensive because of the equipment that’s required.

    They’re able to grow feedstock because water is cheap enough for feedstock to be profitable, which is necessary to reduce their water consumption because growing food alone isn’t as profitable enough.

    Food isn’t profitable enough because apparently the wholesale market value of food is so low that it’s hard to make ends meet on food alone, which is why they also grow feedstock using cheap water.

    However doing so means they consume a lot more water than they need to, which means they need better ways of getting water for their crops, which is something they’re aware of and trying to address, but they need money for that, which comes from feedstock grown using cheap water, which means they consume a lot more water than they need to, and so on.

    Then you have the Abattis family who appear to use significantly more water than the rest of the major families and just don’t care.


    Note: I’m not trying to excuse or justify their excessive water usage, but the article makes it sound like it’s more complicated than “just cut their water access”.

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, factor in why the water became cheap and/or free. The Department of Reclamation ran around the west over the last century building dams and selling cheap water. These are now generations of family later doing what they have always done. Not apologizing for the behavior of the families, but the US government built this house of cards, they even knew as early as the 1950s that the water wasn’t going to support the growth rate, and basically decided, “Eh, that’s 50 years from now’s problem.” Even earlier on they realized the estimation for average Colorado River flow was incorrect. Capitalist “let’s just worry about this quarter” mentality led to where we are now, thanks government!

      Some arbitrary “fun” facts throughout these learnings:

      • There was actually a plan to build a series of 6 nuclear reactors and a pipeline from the Mississippi River to New Mexico to supplant their water usage.
      • The Ogallala Aquifer that spans from the Dakotas to CO/NM/TX was predicted to run out in a similar 50 year timeframe. Many wells in NM now pump brine instead of water, because spoiler alert: it’s tapped.
      • The Great Salt Lake’s water level has dropped so low now, that they have heavy metal dust storms. Unfortunately, this does not sound as good as it sounds.
    • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wish we could just grow food and sell at-cost while we all pitched in to subsidize the wages of those involved, but I guess wasting more water than some states use just to make a profit is a good alternative system.

    • Smokeydope@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I bet we will see more and more farmers turn to pot and hemp as the industry grows. I bet that the wholesale margins on good pot are a lot better than that of food