Yep, very frustrating.
I hate defending government or semi-government (Water Boards can be strange creatures) agencies.
But their costs don't decrease in proportion to the decrease in usage.
Future water acquisition is getting harder and harder as more people increase demand.
We're drying up the aquifers and have reached near-maximum usage of surface water. Add drought conditions (whether you believe in man-made climate change or not), solutions go beyond conservation
Dingy Dangy, I gots to quit the coffee rants
![]()
Yes, we need to send more water to California and put a closed out of water sign at the border.
No more water, no more residential development.
They build them and then it rains so much that the dams break and they quit using them and they fall into disrepair. Repeat.
They also then have a salt problem. Dumping the salt back into ocean can upset the delicate ecosystem, don't ya' know.
Liberals never met a slippery slope they didn't grease.
-Me
I wish technology solved people issues. It seems to just reveal them.
-Also Me
If I had to pick a cause, I'd pass on Carbon dioxide, and really focus on water. All these water based "green" products might have to switch back to VOC's. Much of the foods that are healthy need much water. But nothing makes me crazier than a city that pours water into the streets. I've noticed much of the metro, especially Aurora, taking out sand or brick mediums to put in trees and flowers. Some of these trees are going to make left hand turns a leap of faith once they get bigger. Add to that the dually water trucks that block traffic while a city servant waters the plants. Usually a two person job. Federal has similar landscaping, but with a ton of irrigation. I know a bit of a rant. Huff post has a good article on water per pound of food. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/...n_5952862.html