But, that’s not the only problem. Marc Reisner’s magnum opus, “Cadillac Desert,” isn’t all about agriculture, and the part that is about agriculture, which is the major part, true, isn’t all about agriculture in Southern California. It’s not even all about agriculture west of the Rockies.
More specifically, a lot of the book is about water impoundment and water rights; another large chunk of it is about the politics of western water; a third chunk is about bureaucratic infighting between Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers; a fair amount of it is not about agriculture at all. O’Hare knows that too, if he’s actually read the book.
So, in saying “Cadillac Desert is not a Bible ,” Michael O’Hare is setting up at least a bit of a straw man if not more than a bit.
And, agricultural use of water isn’t SoCal’s problem anyway; O’Hare is either focusing narrowly on refuting both some misconceptions about “Cadillac Desert” and his straw man version thereof, so narrowly that he won’t tackle the real issue, or else he’s ignorant of the margin of severity of the real issue.
As for other specific straw man claims of theirs, I, for one, whether commenting to Drum’s blog or posting here, have never claimed that agriculture uses 80 percent of California water, or that it is ridiculous to grow certain crops in the desert.
I HAVE claimed that agriculture, at least off Reclamation projects, gets its water at subsidized rates, though I have never actually used the phrase “next to nothing.”
Given that he lumps “energy” and “environment” under one tag, and the paucity of water-related postings under that tag , I’ll assume ignorance.
First, as I’ve blogged before, Lake Mead could be DEAD in a dozen years or so. Along with that, the whole Colorado River could wind up looking like the Amu Darya or Syr Darya in Kazakhstan.
Second, I think O’Hare sets up a straw man version of “Cadillac Desert,” as noted above.
Third, to combine No. 1 and No. 2, doesn’t matter WHO uses the most water if, er…
Lake Mead is dead!
Fourth, there’s this dam, called Hoover Dam, that produces electricity for SoCal and Vegas. Umm, if Lake Mead is dead, Kevin, you ain’t getting any electricity from Hoover Dam for OC. For SoCal, more than Vegas (or Phoenix), this is a serious problem in its own right.
Remember, Der Governator has pledged to get more electricity only from environmentally-friendly sources. Well, at some point in the not-too-distant future, he or a successor may have to REPLACE some electricity that’s CO2 friendly, if not necessarily environmentally friendly in the larger sense.
Fifth, after criticizing David Zetland, O’Hare is wrong himself on his “market-forces” idea of what drives water costs.
What the cost of water represents is the economic resources needed to get it to where someone wants to use it, mostly pumping and for urban water, cleaning and purifying. To get it to agricultural land is much, much cheaper than to get it to your tap pure enough to drink.
As anybody in the West can tell you, who controls water/water rights/water access is a major determinant, whether it’s used for ag or runs out of a city tap. In California, despite sales of water rights to cities (and the issue of whether or not water rights created for agriculture should be fungible or not is an issue O’Hare simply ignores), that is still a consideration, depending on the source of the water.
Other factors that the post ignores is the crop toll of salinized water, the cost to desalinate when farmers finally have to bite the bullet and more.
Sixth, on the enviro costs of Big Ag, O’Hare undercuts himself in his own post.
Seventh, the only reason CD is less relevant is because Reisner died in his mid-50s before he could do a third edition. I have no doubt he would have factored global warming into that third edition.
But, let's get back to the big picture, which is what both O'Hare and Reynolds, his linkee, miss.
To talk about narrow-based water-pricing issues without talking about water-supply issues, is like talking about someone throwing a lit cigarette out a car window in SoCal in August without talking about Santa Ana winds. Or like arguing about whether the lantern Mrs. O’Leary’s cow kicked over was fueled by kerosene or white gas while ignoring high winds as contributory to the Chicago fire. Or, it would be, as you’ll understand, like blogging about Peak Oil by only writing about oil in Oklahoma.
In other words, O’Hare AND Reynolds are straining at gnats when there’s much bigger fish to fry.
Finally, I've got a bitchfest comment about their blog. Right now, at least, TypeKey won't let me post there and Haloscan won't let me trackback. I suspect it's a problem with their blog, not either service.
Shouldn't the "Reality Based Community" be better at allowing and promoting discussion?
No comments:
Post a Comment