Conservation is by far the least expensive of the available options, in large part because newer technology hasn't been implemented on a widespread scale. This could easily be the difference.
+ = P( 
ϵ (LA, SF) ) > 0.5
A crime in Arizona too, and New Mexico.
It's region specific. But for Arizona, I think it has to do with the fact that Scottsdale needs its golf courses.
that gets my goat as well.
it is region specific.
Interesting to note. In AZ, if I bought land on top of the aquifer and drilled a well, according to the real estate agent i spoke with, that well and the water i collect from it is mine. But if I collect it from droplets in the sky, it's AZ property.
Usage due to outdated infrastructure; spray irrigation instead of drop irrigation as a prime example.Here's the type of reporting that "rustles muh jimmies":
In agriculture-intense India, where studies show some aquifers are being depleted at the world's fastest rates, the shortfall has been forecast at 50 percent or even higher. Climate change is expected to make the situation worse, as higher temperatures and more erratic weather patterns could disrupt rainfall.
No qualification for that latter statement? It is not axiomatic, either, so how do they make such links? Using the same logic one can equally say Climate change is expected to make the situation better, as non-causal relationships in the atmospheric physics could prove themselves to be beneficial in maintaining environments with lower variance in thermal swings, thereby regulating evaporation & precipitation rates more predictably.
Fuck it...I'm going to the well-source .
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/loginarea/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/wwdr/2015-water-for-a-sustainable-world/
The report begins by describing a world in the not-so-distant future in which water resources and water-related services are managed in such a way that the benefits derived from water and[sic] maximized and shared equitably throughout the world.
This vision is not merely a fictional utopian outlook; it is a future that is entirely achievable, a future in which water is recognized and managed as the fundamental resource that supports all aspects of sustainable development. This vision represents a new and innovative approach to the WWDR, prompting readers to reflect on how our world could be, provided appropriate changes are made to the way water resources are perceived and managed.
If they have to preface it with something like that, my concern level goes up about possible quality issues of such a "report".
Pay special attention to note 4 on pg. 67 (in chapter 10 on "climate change"). I'm glad to see some honesty interwoven between the threads of spook, in that they admit more ignorance than knowledge. However, that doesn't stop them from attempting a bamboozle. I'm sure it will be effective on someone who has already bought the AGW spiel.
Nevertheless, that's just my critique of the MSM attempt to link it too readily to unproven human effects on atmospheric physics with appeals to authority. I have no opinion on the rest of the report, yet.
As for usage and distribution, yes, that is a problem in my estimation for lower latitude, densely populated, technologically-poor areas. Did California ever fix that leaking pipe? How's that desalination plant in Carlsbad doing?
http://www.ibtimes.com/california-water-shortage-1-billion-plant-will-make-seawater-drinkable-end-2015-1795834
With the Carlsbad project almost complete, Poseidon is already planning to build another desalination plant in Huntington Beach, California. In fact, a total of 13 to 15 desalination plants have been proposed from Los Angeles to San Francisco, according to Lisa Lien-Mager, communications director for the Association of California Water Agencies.
I'm a little confused by what you mean with "least expensive". Are you talking about accounting costs, economic costs, energy costs...? If you just mean in terms of water usage itself, then sure, but what are the largest sinks attributable to waste? Infrastructure or usage?
Maybe that UN report has an answer?
It truly doesn't. I saw a VICE News capsule IIRC recently discussing Brazil's "water container" industry, and the positive economic effects from it, but focusing on the drought issues.
Yes, colorado has prosecuted.
That's fn crazy! God damn communists.
I'm not even taking about moving it so much as being more value from what's already being made available.