Ain’t California Great? (Page 2): LoL...

mwalsh Loc: Houston

The Aardvark Is Ready wrote:

I heard DeSantis wanted to fly a planeload of immigrants to California and they all said hell nah, we just fled a c*******t dictatorship with no water or electricity.

LoL

redlegfrog

Texcaster wrote:

Be fair, it's rumored that the Cal-GOPers want to bring back backyard incinerators for the LA basin.

Crazy is crazy it doesn't matter side they are on.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

JRiepe wrote:

Not starving is more important than not bathing.

Water is required for survival. At least two liters a day. And NOT for bathing!

You can:
Live without food for five weeks.
Live without water for five days.
Live without air for five minutes.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

BobHartung wrote:

And later on they can artfully stack up the EV Batteries which no one has figured out how to recycle. Or maybe they plan on shipping them to another state.

Ship them back to China.

Pollute THEIR country.

lbrande

California will ban the sale of natural-gas heaters by 2030. Another win for CA.
Cost of electricity is high right now. Adding the costs to replace water heaters, Ovens and stoves, and cloths driers will cost thousands, and increase the cost per month for the use of electricity.

anotherview Loc: California

We could limit household consumption of water to cooking, washing, and drinking. Doing so, however, would contribute only a tiny fraction overall to water conservation expressed as a cut in use.

Farmers in the State of California consume about 85 percent of the available water. So, a lesser use, say, 80 percent, would ease water cuts to others:
households, government, military, industrial, and commercial.

Lawmakers and policymakers could work with farmers to reduce their use of available water.

Wyantry wrote:

Water is required for survival. At least two liters a day. And NOT for bathing!

You can:
Live without food for five weeks.
Live without water for five days.
Live without air for five minutes.

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

Or we could ban all private swimming pools which would be a significant reduction in water usage and also save the lives of 995 children per year who drown. But the left doesn't care about saving children unless it is by infringing on the rights of honest citizens so that will never happen. But over 10 million residential pools times 19,000 gallons is a lot of water for other uses and that doesn't count millions more apartment and subdivision pools among others.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

LDB415 wrote:

Or we could ban all private swimming pools which would be a significant reduction in water usage and also save the lives of 995 children per year who drown. But the left doesn't care about saving children unless it is by infringing on the rights of honest citizens so that will never happen. But over 10 million residential pools times 19,000 gallons is a lot of water for other uses and that doesn't count millions more apartment and subdivision pools among others.

Or even better: We could ban all those water-wasting GOLF COURSES!

”. . . An average 18-hole golf facility in the Southwest region uses an average of 4 acre-feet of water per irrigated acre per year.” — https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Water%20Resource%20Center/how-much-water-does-golf-use.pdf

”One acre-foot of water is the amount of water covering a one-acre area - roughly one football field - to a depth of one foot, which is equal to 325,851 gallons.” — https://www.usga.org/course-care/water-resource-center/how-much-water-golf-courses-need.html

1,303,404 GALLONS per year for an 18 hole course.

(One Million Three Hundred Thousand (plus) gallons!)

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

Wyantry wrote:

b Or even better: We could ban all those water-w... (show quote)

Take a stick and hit a ball as far away as you possibly can just to go chase after it. But all the politicians play golf so they'll never do anything about that.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

anotherview wrote:

We could limit household consumption of water to c... (show quote)

Are you familiar with just how much water is required to produce food? If you are, and farmers could do great with a twenty percent reduction of water, then great. If you aren't (I know I'm not) I would tread lightly on messing with the water allocation to farmers.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

LDB415 wrote:

Or we could ban all private swimming pools which would be a significant reduction in water usage and also save the lives of 995 children per year who drown. But the left doesn't care about saving children unless it is by infringing on the rights of honest citizens so that will never happen. But over 10 million residential pools times 19,000 gallons is a lot of water for other uses and that doesn't count millions more apartment and subdivision pools among others.

I don't care how much water a pool holds. Much more important would be how much water it uses in a year. Are you claiming that the average pool uses 19,000 gallons of water a year? Wouldn't the additional 995 children each year wipe out wh**ever savings could otherwise be counted? I'm not unaffected by that many deaths each year, but aren't there better ways to protect them?

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Haenzel wrote:

There are companies that can recycle up to 95% of used Lithium-Ion batteries. If you can tell me where this pile of EV batteries is located, I'll come over to buy the lot....

My brother-in-law owns a Honda Dealership and they are preparing for the introduction of EVs next year. So far Honda has made no mention of any recycling plans.

In addition, the batteries weigh 3000 lbs. The attached map shows recycling centers, not all of which recover materials, some repurpose the batteries as long as they are not damaged.

If a Semi trailer has a load capacity of 45,000 lbs the means it can carry 15 batteries. We will not have enough trucks, drivers, or charging stations to move the number of batteries even a 50% uptake of EVs would entail.

The real answer in my opinion, is to continue development of alternative battery technology while building reliable (read Nuclear) electric generation capabilities and improving the Grid; and then begin the t***sition to EVs.

The sanctimonious pushers of "Green" technology like Gavin Newsom have the cart before the horse and the citizens of this country are going to pay the price, just like Europe is paying now.

Source: https://blog.ucsusa.org/jessica-dunn/are-ev-batteries-recyclable/
Source: https://blog.ucsusa.org/jessica-dunn/are-...

(Download)

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

thom w wrote:

I don't care how much water a pool holds. Much more important would be how much water it uses in a year. Are you claiming that the average pool uses 19,000 gallons of water a year? Wouldn't the additional 995 children each year wipe out wh**ever savings could otherwise be counted? I'm not unaffected by that many deaths each year, but aren't there better ways to protect them?

I believe they use around 120 gallons per week. So you would be against banning pools. Does that mean you also are against banning guns and using better methods to protect the children then as well?

redlegfrog

thom w wrote:

I don't care how much water a pool holds. Much more important would be how much water it uses in a year. Are you claiming that the average pool uses 19,000 gallons of water a year? Wouldn't the additional 995 children each year wipe out wh**ever savings could otherwise be counted? I'm not unaffected by that many deaths each year, but aren't there better ways to protect them?

We did the math on pools and water consumption some time ago. A pool evaporation will use less water than a lawn. It looks like in my neck of the woods soon we will have neither.