I've read that the energy required to run data centers uses more water than that required to cool them but the cooling uses about 1% of California's total water consumption. You've got a lot of stats to show me to convince me that farming is not the overwhelmingly main use of water, like 80%. Also 70% of the almond crop is exported...meaning some portion of that water used in almond production actually leaves the watershed entirely, and then you would have to calculate how much water and energy is needed to ship those tons of almonds to China and elsewhere to get a true almond industry water impact figure. Also it takes the same amount of water to build an electric car as it does a gasoline car and somewhere between 20 and 100 gallons of water just to produce, and that does not count distribution, which means pipelines, tankers, trucks and gas stations and their water impacts, think oil spills and the downstream effects of fracking and toxic seepage, 1 gallon of gasoline. So it is not that meaningful nor persuasive to quote the alarming water use of Green technology while ignoring or leaving mysterious the amount of water used in the current system.
Janine, as I had mentioned at the very end of my article, there is more to come on this topic. It is so big and complex, it's going to take a few rounds.
Yes it certainly is! I think the thing to bear in mind always is the immense amount of propaganda involve in making popular cases, like "renewables can't possibly replace fossil fuels on a reasonable time scale" and "organic agriculture can't possibly produce the amount of food that industrial agriculture produces". Obviously, huge powerful industries have poured money into promoting these ideas for decades. And now we have huge powerful interests trying to spin a fake "Green" narrative and pouring money into that. Any pronouncement about what can and can't be done in these areas of great interlocking complexity depend on MODELLING. And we all know how trustworthy modelling is when powerful interests are involved. We just have to somehow steer an accurate course through all these narratives, and we can't possibly do that on our own, but hopefully we can get there together with good collaborative critical thinking and evidence gathering. Just keeping you on yer toes, Reinette! :-)
this so true and only part of th e agenda to do away with a sovereign nations
I've read that the energy required to run data centers uses more water than that required to cool them but the cooling uses about 1% of California's total water consumption. You've got a lot of stats to show me to convince me that farming is not the overwhelmingly main use of water, like 80%. Also 70% of the almond crop is exported...meaning some portion of that water used in almond production actually leaves the watershed entirely, and then you would have to calculate how much water and energy is needed to ship those tons of almonds to China and elsewhere to get a true almond industry water impact figure. Also it takes the same amount of water to build an electric car as it does a gasoline car and somewhere between 20 and 100 gallons of water just to produce, and that does not count distribution, which means pipelines, tankers, trucks and gas stations and their water impacts, think oil spills and the downstream effects of fracking and toxic seepage, 1 gallon of gasoline. So it is not that meaningful nor persuasive to quote the alarming water use of Green technology while ignoring or leaving mysterious the amount of water used in the current system.
Janine, as I had mentioned at the very end of my article, there is more to come on this topic. It is so big and complex, it's going to take a few rounds.
Yes it certainly is! I think the thing to bear in mind always is the immense amount of propaganda involve in making popular cases, like "renewables can't possibly replace fossil fuels on a reasonable time scale" and "organic agriculture can't possibly produce the amount of food that industrial agriculture produces". Obviously, huge powerful industries have poured money into promoting these ideas for decades. And now we have huge powerful interests trying to spin a fake "Green" narrative and pouring money into that. Any pronouncement about what can and can't be done in these areas of great interlocking complexity depend on MODELLING. And we all know how trustworthy modelling is when powerful interests are involved. We just have to somehow steer an accurate course through all these narratives, and we can't possibly do that on our own, but hopefully we can get there together with good collaborative critical thinking and evidence gathering. Just keeping you on yer toes, Reinette! :-)
And I thank you kindly for that!