• theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    We could. It’s a totally solvable problem - until it isn’t. If an aquifer is dry and you’re already rationing the water, what can you do? Presumably ship in enough water to keep people alive, if not to sustain commercial needs too

    Which is going to drain water from somewhere else, and what if they’re having the same issue? Take it from further. Salt lake City was looking into the idea of building a pipeline from the Mississippi, and I’m sure someone is looking into building a fleet of water tankers and checking if there’s profit to be had

    Now, where’s the part in all this where we take back water rights? Where’s the part where we start to fix the problem?

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Realistically the rubber will need to meet the road at some point, and the wasteful alfalfa and almond farmers need to be cut off straight up, because there’s no way a handful of wealthy farmers is going to be prioritized over a city of hundreds of thousands if that city is seriously considering trucking in water.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s like the Irish potato famine - Ireland had the output to support themselves. You’d think capitalism would bow to survival - but it doesn’t

        Will we cut off exports to keep people alive? The people with money won’t.

        The rubber has met the road. Physics has caught up with creative accounting. If we don’t act now, will we act when people start dying?