patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,365,035 comments by 15,735 users - MolotovCocktail, TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter online now
« First « Previous Comments 12 - 20 of 20 Search these comments
New Renter
@
2014 Feb 4, 12:10pm
I'd start with drip irrigation and residential gray water for
landscaping.
Check this out, this should be allowed by munincipal water systems, but isn't and could help out a lot.
Smart toilet system that uses shower water for flushing
http://freshome.com/2009/02/06/smart-toilet-system-that-uses-shower-water-for-flushing/
Intriguing but this will require pumps to pull the water into the reservoir and it doesn't look like it can store many gallons at a time.
Intriguing but this will require pumps to pull the water into the reservoir
and it doesn't look like it can store many gallons at a time.
I've been to the company's website before and I THINK(really not totally sure)that the system can be adjusted to account for the number of people that is in the household.
Even if there was 100% use in every house in the whole state, the added electrical demands could be offset easily by conservation and other means. It sure beats having no water though.
Too bad the plumbing codes and/or munincipalities won't allow it's use.
New Renter
@
2014 Feb 4, 12:17pm
California already had a great plan how to bring water to the SoCal area - and it didn't work out so well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Lake
What are you talking about? - this has worked out great! For LA that is.
Yes that sucked.
That said I'll' counter your example with these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_dams_in_the_world
New Renter
@
2014 Feb 4, 12:20pm
Intriguing but this will require pumps to pull the water into the reservoir
and it doesn't look like it can store many gallons at a time.
I've been to the company's website before and I THINK(really not totally sure)that the system can be adjusted to account for the number of people that is in the household.
Even if there was 100% use in every house in the whole state, the added electrical demands could be offset easily by conservation and other means. It sure beats having no water though.
Too bad the plumbing codes and/or munincipalities won't allow it's use.
Here's one that uses sink wastewater:
http://inhabitat.com/sloans-innovative-aqus-grey-water-toilet-system-makes-every-drop-count/
'when a region starts flooding... Just turn on the pumps'
AND... we could make the floodprones pay for the whole project...it would keep down their insurance rates too....win win. Forget the hi speed rail Jerry...go for this...win next Presidential election maybe even.
Here's one that uses sink wastewater:
That's a pretty good idea, but I wonder if there needs to be some type of backflow preventer so as to not contaminate clean water by siphon from the grey water. That seems to be the issue overall is the potential contamination by siphoning used water back into pipes, and that's the sticking point with the plumbing codes.
We have an Incinolet brand toilet at our cabin that works pretty well, but for overall mass household daily use the energy factor makes it unfeasible.
Agriculture uses 80-85% of the water in California, while cities use 10% or so. It's nice talking about pipelines and limited use of water in urban areas. Even if you miraculously save 50% more water, that's now 15% of the total.
I'm not down with my taxes increasing because agribusiness is getting even MORE corporate welfare. Agriculture either has to pony up more for water, or stop using so much. It's that simple.
Heraclitusstudent
@
2014 Feb 4, 1:44pm
Agriculture either has to pony up more for water, or stop using so much. It's that simple.
You either have to pay for it, or stop eating the stuff they grow.
Agriculture either has to pony up more for water, or stop using so much. It's that simple.
You either have to pay for it, or stop eating the stuff they grow.
I do pay for it...in the prices of fruits and vegetables. I don't want to both pay for it and have my taxes raised to support some farmer's business. Why do we not question taxpayers subsidizing businesses?
Reduce their watering, or charge more at the store. At least I would have a choice.
« First « Previous Comments 12 - 20 of 20 Search these comments
Every couple of years we see stories of huge flooding in the mississippi river region, or the snake river region, or the missouri river region. Meanwhile dams in the west have extreme low levels of water. Meanwhile, politicians are calling for a pipeline project for jobs. Well, why don't we create a huge water pipeline from someplace like St. Louis to the top of the Colorado river on the west side of the Rockies? Smaller regional pipelines could feed to St louis, then when a region starts flooding... Just turn on the pumps.. If we really got our act together we could have a 500 mile long portable deployable pipeline able to be trucked in with 48 hours notice to pipe water to a regional pumping station.
Yes it would cost billions, but it would save billions more in flood damage and also assist with western state droughts. Any idea why no one talks about this kind of thing?