water, water, everywhere - but not a drop to drink

 

Arizona is the second-fastest growing state in the country, with a percent growth of 1.78%. Arizona’s population increased by 129,558 from 7,291,843 in 2019 to 7,421,401 in 2020. Arizona is attractive because of its sunny weather, good job market, affordability, and a wide variety of entertainment options such as festivals, museums, celebrity-owned restaurants, and more. Arizona also has the Grand Canyon. Arizona is considered one of the states with the best weather.

The Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas are seeing an explosion in housing in recent years.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/fastest-growing-states

Not surprisingly, the fastest growing city in the entire country is Buckeye, Arizona, which is a suburb of Phoenix

We live in an area that is close to the western border of Tucson, and new houses are sprouting up like weeds, which leads me to wonder – where is the water coming from to nourish all these new residents?

Contrary to what some pundits believe, global warming is NOT a hoax. Globally, the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 2005, and the hottest year was 2016. All that heat has a strong negative influence on water supply. In Arizona’s case, the bulk of our water comes from the Colorado river, and Lake Mead is now 155 feet below its “full” level of 1229 feet, and the picture below clearly shows the “bath tub ring” that shows the loss of water.

https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.HhgtNCBSokIJo3l3Q6vEXQHaEK?w=333&h=187&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7

Since most of the Southwest is in either exceptional drought or extreme drought conditions, the states in the Colorado river basin area are constantly working on ways to limit water use.

http://mead.uslakes.info/level.asp

 Those efforts are not new.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact

The Colorado River Compact of 1922 was signed by the 7 states in the Colorado river basin, and it divided the watershed area into two areas. The Upper Division includes the states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The Lower Divisions includes Arizona, Nevada, and California.

Colorado was allocated slightly more than 50% of the water in the Upper Division, and California was allocated slightly more than 50% of the water in the Lower Division.

In 1934, Arizona, unhappy with California's decision to dam and divert the river, called out the National Guard and even commissioned a two-boat "navy." The matter was eventually settled in court.

The agreement was controversial even at the time, however. Arizona, for example, was dissatisfied with the lower basin allotment. Led by Fred Colter, the state refused to sign the agreement, and did not do so until two months after Colter's death in 1944. 

 

The specific allotments were disputed by Arizona until the United States Supreme Court upheld the amount in the 1963 decision in Arizona v. California. The agreement ended many years of dispute, clearing the way for the Central Arizona Project, authorized by Congress in 1968 – though the Supreme Court has been asked to readjust Arizona's water allocation a half-dozen times in the interim. Mexico was able to gain some of the river rights, and Arizona took steps as well to protect its water rights and keep California from gaining too large of a share, which ultimately led to the Arizona v. California Supreme Court case. The case lasted 11 years and cost over $5 million, requiring the work product of over 50 lawyers. Based on an assumption that California was using more than its contractually allotted water amount, Arizona set the precedent of SCOTUS using water rights. The case ultimately decided that the Boulder Canyon Provision was correct for the lower states (which are California, Nevada, and Arizona). While the Court ultimately ruled in favor of Arizona, it agreed with California's interpretation that how it received surplus water supplies was correct.

The 7 states in the Colorado river basin have implemented strategies to reduce water usage.

 In April of 2021,  the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the Southern Nevada Water Authority is officially proposing a ban on the continued maintenance of ornamental grass in the desert metropolis, and the entire state, by 2026. The authority estimates that by eliminating unused turf grass spaces outside of businesses and housing developments or in medians that aren’t being used for recreation—the state could cut back its water usage by roughly 12 million gallons annually. The figure was significant enough that on Friday, the state legislature responded by updating Assembly Bill 356 to include the proposal, with the bill now awaiting a full-chamber vote.

Several years ago, the city of Los Angeles passed a law the rewarded homeowners who replaced their lawns with desert landscaping – and my sister took advantage of the new law, which transformed her lush green lawn into desert plants that required little of no water.

Lawns have long been rare in Tucson, and we have gotten so used to seeing gravel instead of grass in years that green lawns, even outside businesses, look bizarre. 

 

Since states in the Midwest are losing population, and since states in the Southwest are gaining, it would seem logical to purchase some of the water from Midwest States, and send it the Southwest using a series of pipelines and canals.

 20% of the world’s fresh water supply is in the Great Lakes, so they would seem to be a logical source of water. However, that overlooks the fact that regulations prevent cities the Great Lakes basin from using those waters.

 https://news.wbfo.org/post/pipe-great-lakes-water-southwest-not-so-fast

The Great Lakes, of course, are not the source of water in the Midwest.

The longest river in America is the Missouri River, which is 2341 miles long. The Mighty Mississippi, though, is not far behind, with a total length of 2202 miles.

 Ten years ago, the Southern Nevada Water Authority proposed a plan to divert excess water from the Mississippi to states further west. The Authority also proposed to build a pipeline 285 miles long to divert water from the Snake River to Las Vegas, which depends heavily on water from the Colorado River.

http://www.earthtimes.org/business/plan-divert-mississippi-flood-waters-west-proposed/1206/

Even before the Nevada board floated its idea, other people have toyed with the idea of send Mississippi water out west, but there are two major problems with either proposal.

One is cost.

A Colorado rancher and engineer named Gary Hausler calculated that it would cost $23 billion to build. Although his idea does have merit, the politicians that he talked with were not enthusiastic.

The other issue is time.

Mr. Hausler estimated that litigation related to the pipeline would last 30 years, creating a bonanza for the attorneys on both sides of the argument, and it would also result in the creation of new construction jobs, similar to what happened on the Alaskan pipeline, when 21,000 jobs were added.

The link below provides a LOT more details on the pipeline, which would be 775 miles long and 144 inches in diameter:

https://www.deseret.com/2012/5/13/20502414/the-fight-for-water-can-the-mighty-mississippi-save-the-west#a-dam-consisting-of-a-sunken-barge-and-sheet-piling-is-seen-under-construction-on-bayou-chene-in-near-amelia-la-monday-may-16-2011-in-an-effort-to-prevent-flooding-from-the-morganza-spillways-opening-in-amelia-and-nearby-morgan-city-tapping-the-excess-water-of-the-mississippi-and-piping-it-to-the-west-is-among-the-suggestions-to-solve-growing-water-needs-in-utah-and-the-western-states.

Since the U.S. Chamber of Commerce likes the idea of an East to West pipeline, it does not mean that it won’t happen. It just means that it’s not likely going to happen anytime in my lifetime - and I’m already 73.