Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | Youtube |
Published | 2023/10/31 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
Beau breaks down the Colorado River deal as a temporary fix, urging states to work on long-term solutions during this respite.
Environmental activists, policymakers
The full transcript provides a detailed analysis of the challenges surrounding the Colorado River and the temporary band-aid solution proposed, urging a focus on developing sustainable long-term strategies for water management.
#ColoradoRiver #WaterUse #ClimateChange #Sustainability #EnvironmentalPolicy
Well, howdy there internet people, it's Bo again.
So today we are going to talk about the Colorado River
and water use and the deal that it appears
the federal government has kind of blessed.
So we have an idea of what's going on
and we're gonna kind of run through
all of the particulars on it.
If you have no idea what any of this is about,
it's something that we've been covering on the channel
for quite some time.
The Colorado River, it's being overused, is basically what it boils down to.
It supplies water to about 40 million people, however, due to the climate changing, the
drought, the need to keep water levels at certain points for power generation.
Short version is there had to be cuts, and there's a number of states involved and they
had to work out some kind of agreement. Otherwise the feds were going to step in
and do it for them and nobody wanted that. It's like having your parents come
in when you and your brother are arguing. Okay, so what's the deal? Three million
acre feet will be cut from use by 2026. Half of that is supposed to occur by the
end of next year. For like normal people an acre foot is roughly 326,000 gallons
of water, a little bit less. Now California, Arizona, and Nevada have
decided to to kind of step up and take these cuts and take the cut. In exchange
the feds are going to provide 1.2 billion in funding to help mitigate any
of the issues. So this deal, it looks like this is going to be the deal. The
immediate question is this a solution? No, it's not. It's a band-aid. It's a band-aid
that's going to be good for a couple of years but it's still a band-aid. There
there's going to be more people in these areas. There's this is not a solution. It
it solves the immediate concerns when you're talking about power generation is
what it really boils down to. When you're talking about having the right
levels at Powell and Mead. It does that and it basically buys the states a couple
more years to work out some kind of comprehensive plan. They can use that
time to actually work out a plan or they can kick the can down the road and in a
a couple of years when this topic is going to inevitably come up again, they may be right
back to where they're at.
If this time that is bought is used well, this is a good thing.
If this is treated as a solution, it's not a good thing.
That's really what it boils down to, is whether or not the various states involved continue
to work on this issue during this period when it's not urgent, but and we have no
idea what's gonna happen there. I tend to not have a lot of faith in this
particular topic because it's not like people weren't told that this was gonna
happen over the course of years. The governments were aware of the situation,
the state governments were aware, and then it just, it got to a point where it
couldn't be put off anymore. And they have, they have a Band-Aid. They bought
themselves some time. If they use that time to develop some comprehensive, it's
good, but we don't know they're gonna do that. Anyway, it's just a thought. Y'all
have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}