Love how 49 of those inches goes straight to avocados/almonds.
Love how 49 of those inches goes straight to avocados/almonds.
So is the Oroville dam. Gunna have to use the emergency spill for the first time ever soon
Don't forget wine. Really though a lot thru the state has gone back to refilling reservoirs... now they full though so it's just getting dumped into rivers and out to sea
i live in one of the 2 counties in state that remain in extreme drought rip in peace
Its okay your vote didn't really matter anyway.
My nuke bros are going to be sad when Cali hydro electric production ramps back up and starts to hide the explosion of natural gas electricity since they closed San Onofre.
To be clear, it's not really climate change that's a root cause (to coastal erosion); it certainly isn't. But it's also increasingly a contributing factor. It's more the oil & gas industry's massive footprint, but I'll spare further details and factors at play here.
Suffice to say the problems in Louisiana will be a lot more than no big deal over the next 80 years. I want to remain hopeful that what we witness (along LA's coastline and elsewhere) will help cultivate more meaningful changes. But Stanhope-like cynicism is also there.
For the first time since WWII, (maybe ever) coal was not the #1 source of electricity in the US.
Final 2016 US EIA stats are in:
Natural Gas 34%
Coal 30%
Nuclear 20%
Hydro 7%
Wind 6%
Solar 1%
Wood/Bio/Waste/Geothermal Less than 1% each
Coal was 49% of the grid as recently as 2007.
In my lab meeting, we did a rough calculation about how much energy is being released by the overflow from the Oroville dam. We worked it out to be about 1 small nuke every 3 hours. Most of the energy is lost to friction and fluid motion, but it's still pretty nutty.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.e96d76bd0490
Looks to me like a near-complete massacre of any discretionary funds going to the EPA.
Here is the EPA's Budget over time, normalized by the January Consume Price Index of each year (to account for inflation) and their workforce (to account for the legislated expansion of the agency's role over time):
Here is the workforce:
Here are the dollar values adjusted by May CPI (which I now realize maybe makes more sense, although the month doesn't particularly matter):
So you can see for yourself, as they mention in the article, that the EPA's budget (and, as a lagging indicator, workforce) has been pretty thoroughly ravaged already. It's hard to make prevention and maintenance sexy (including for the environment), but making smart long-term decisions for society that aren't immediately sexy is supposed to be WHY. WE. HAVE. GOVERNMENT. Republicans are mouthbreathing idiots. What annoys me the most about this is that Donaldo's Wall (at least 21bil) or the military spending increase that probably won't help (54bil) both absolutely dwarf the EPA's current budget (8bil) and the proposed cuts (2bil? 1bil?)
I fear that this is just foreplay. They'll fund it at levels low enough that it can't do its job and then kill it when some environmental disaster hits.
Meanwhile, Antarctica had it's highest recorded temperature ever in March 2015. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/antarcti...in-new-report/
Pruitt: "I would not agree that (carbon dioxide) is a primary contributor to the global warming"
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/03...-cause-warming
The lawyer doesn't agree that CO2 causes climate change. Case closed.
As long as he feels that it doesn't cause global warming.
It was particularly warm out today and when I went outside I certainly didn't see any CO2.
Can't explain that.
It is damn hot. Went from 85 inches of rain in January and February to mid/high 70's now. The roads are destroyed and landslides everywhere but at least I can still get to the beach that is closed.
Snow in March, Global Cooling confirmed.
With the polar caps melting, it may be methane that is the leading cause now. Also, cows.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/14/politi...n-agency-cuts/
A 25% reduction in budget, the most severe scenario that the EPA was preparing for, might actually be on the low side of what is going to be proposed.
I know some people in the EPA who voted for Trump that are going to be soooooooooo salty.