Comments on: First the stock market, now water http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/12/first-the-stock-market-now-water/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/12/first-the-stock-market-now-water/#comment-9995 Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:16:44 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2431#comment-9995 Ray, have you been closely monitoring the free market the past 6 months. Even the most respected investors say they are seeing consumer behavior and commodity relationships never before experienced. I would try another analogy.

Perhaps you should also loose your free market religion and rely upon reason. We are experiencing rapid glacial retreat around the planet. Geologic history tells us if the current trend of glacial melt continues we potentially could enter another life extinction of considerable proportions. Now for clarity’s sake, are you suggesting the free market is capable of mitigating mass extinctions?

]]>
By: bbateman http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/12/first-the-stock-market-now-water/#comment-9841 Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:11:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2431#comment-9841 One does not “Design” an aquifer and giving the reason that an aquifer cannot be recharged is not a legitimate excuse for depleting it, regardless of its so-called designation. I also tend to agree that the Colorado River states, NE, CA, and AZ in particular, have unreasonable expectations about their water supply. The population explosion that these areas have experienced, in relation to the overall water supply, is obviously unsustainable. Period. As far as the free market approach to water management, recent history has shown that the free market will sell off the remaining water to the highest bidder until it is gone and ask then ask for a bailout.

]]>
By: Ray Walker http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/12/first-the-stock-market-now-water/#comment-9785 Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:11:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2431#comment-9785 At least Jonas is no longer deputy director of the California Department of Water Resources.

Jonas seems to know very little about western water rights or western water law.

Jonas should not have come to bat, but since he did:

STRIKE 1 The Ogallala aquifer is a designated ground water basin that is DESIGNED to be mined and depleted because it cannot be recharged with surface water. For the most part, it is designated by law to be depleted in 100 years. Withdrawals are based on the number of acres overlying the aquifer with a 1% withdrawal rate per year.

STRIKE 2 The seven signatory states to the Colorado River Compact are quite aware of their entitlements and expectations based on supply. Administration is based on a 10 year moving average. The Bureau of Reclamation properly administers the Colorado River without any unreasonable expectations !

STRIKE 3 California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona and Colorado may eventually verify and investigate a truely new non-tributary fresh water Source that can yield a million acre feet a year and BE ACCUMULATED IN STORAGE to keep Lake Mead reasonably FULL and generating 2000 megawatts of renewable energy with its 28.5 million acre feet of which is already built, bought and paid for !

Jonas struck out ! Water recycling does not take into consideration PRIONS ( look it up … ever heard of Mad Cow Disease ?, etc. )

Conservation is always appropriate, but it too will stall because those who are expected to drastically cut their usage will not do so for long if the savings are simply translated into more growth. The market place, like the credit & housing markets, will solve the water shortage dilemmas if the free enterprise system is allowed to breathe !

Ray Walker (Retired Water Rights Analyst ) waterrdw@yahoo.com

]]>