
Satellite study reveals parched U.S. West using up underground water - T-A
http://news.agu.org/press-release/satellite-study-reveals-parched-u-s-west-using-up-underground-water/
======
ISL
I'd just like to point out that the satellite mission in question gets this
measurement by comparatively _weighing_ parts of the Earth through gravity
gradients. It's hard to do well, and GRACE and GOCE have done a great job.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Recovery_and_Climate_Ex...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Recovery_and_Climate_Experiment)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Field_and_Steady-
State_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Field_and_Steady-
State_Ocean_Circulation_Explorer)

------
mullingitover
We could eliminate most of the current water issues if we reduced our meat
intake. According to the USGS, a single 1/3lb hamburger patty requires
_4,000-18,000 gallons_. How much of this irrigation is being used to grow
cattle feed?

(I say this with a heavy heart as an avid carnivore)

~~~
anigbrowl
Yeah, but that's over the lifetime of the cow, plus while there is a fair bit
of beef and other livestock farming in CA it's a fairly small proportion of
California's overall agricultural output. I haven't been able to find exact
breakdowns of water usage per sector per year, but throwing random big numbers
around isn't really informative either - eg the figures in the top post and
the first reply differ by an order of magnitude (I think the EPA # of ~1800
gal/lb is the correct one).

~~~
Xorlev
The west is larger than California.

~~~
anigbrowl
Sure, but I don't think beef production is the largest part of western
agriculture either. The west could produce a lot less beef without the dietary
habits of the nation changing too significantly, as other parts of the country
could pick up the slack. Of course, I'm largely guessing here, but using the
beef industry's stats as a jumping-off point:
[http://www.beefusa.org/beefindustrystatistics.aspx](http://www.beefusa.org/beefindustrystatistics.aspx)

------
genwin
I reckon we're 20 years away from the overpopulation problem reaching the same
level of media attention as the consequent global warming problem does now.
The former is still a taboo topic. In the meantime expect things to get way
worse.

There's plenty of river water available in the US West for a lesser
population, which can be attained through attrition.

Downvotes predictable, tech solves everything, more people is always better,
there's nothing to see here, please move along.

~~~
cscurmudgeon
Would you rather scores of others die than give up on irrational habits like
eating beef?

Would you rather be counted amount the attrition?

~~~
Spooky23
Beef isn't irrational. Ranching in Nevada probably is.

It's a market problem. Because of the way water rights were allocated, it's
cheap to do wacky things like farm the desert. You can very easily farm beef
cattle in places where water is abundant... Places like New York, Kentucky,
etc, just not at the scale as on massive plots of empty land.

~~~
cscurmudgeon
Pasting mmanfrin's comment:

It's specifically Beef that is the massive drain. Chicken/Pork/other meats are
magnitudes of orders more water-conscious per calorie. (Pork uses 75% less,
and is yet the most wasteful of water outside of cows/bovine)[1]. Beef is
astoundingly wasteful of water. You could take an hour-long shower and it
would use about the same amount of water needed for a pound of beef. [2] and
[3]. [1] [http://gracelinks.org/blog/1143/beef-the-king-of-the-big-
wat...](http://gracelinks.org/blog/1143/beef-the-king-of-the-big-wat..). [2]
[http://www.wsscwater.com/home/jsp/content/water-
usagechart.f...](http://www.wsscwater.com/home/jsp/content/water-
usagechart.f..). [3] [http://blog.epa.gov/healthywaters/2012/03/virtual-water-
real...](http://blog.epa.gov/healthywaters/2012/03/virtual-water-real..).

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8117761](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8117761)

~~~
Spooky23
Beef used to be more expensive as compared to chicken. It's cheap now because
you can buy near worthless land and turn it into feedlots and ranches.

Those scale that you can operate on with modern, subsidized agriculture is
unstoppable. A farm in upstate NY is 50-500 acres. A ranch in the high desert
may be 50 miles^2. Also, the land isn't empty in the east, and people won't
put up with the smell of thousands of cattle.

Stop giving away water to desert farmers. Prices will rise, and demand will
shift to places where water is plentiful.

------
scythe
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination#Economics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination#Economics)

Just for context. It's expensive, yes, but it's not the end of the freakin'
world, people! Stop talking about crazy things like "attrition". Nobody is
getting attritioned.

------
bicknergseng
Are we able to put a timeline on future US water use? Something in the vein of
Saudi Arabia greatly cutting wheat production because of their drained
aquifers [1]?

[1] [http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2011/04/26/the-middle-east-
drie...](http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2011/04/26/the-middle-east-dries-
up%E2%80%94another-case-study-in-the-water-energy-food-nexus/)

