So impressive Todd. I only have one question. THEN WHAT?
Loyd,
Assuming we have at least 97 years, there will be future options for us.
Remember when people worried about not having enough grain or corn? How about enough electricity? How about enough bandwidth for the Internet?
Technology has consistently provided advancement and solutions to a growing world.
In 100 years, maybe ocean water can more reasonably be converted to fresh water? Maybe there will be cheap cold fusion energy to convert and pump the water inland?
Who knows???
The point is that we have plenty of water for a long time to come. Let's move our city forward and provide a higher standard of living for its citizens.
You consistently only offer fear mongering. You never enter into a true debt into the issues at hand.
Any reasonable person that reads your posts will see that your true move is not to change "your town" (actual quote), and you care not for the others that suffer as a result.
Ken -- I agree with your techno take. These sunshine boys have stated that there is only a 7-10% KWH cost differential between wet-cool and dry-cool and that is the area that needs the focus of all our efforts. That is not a huge obstacle to overcome. They are only looking for the easy way out. Make dry-cool work and I'm at the front of the team pulling for these projects.
Our power need is a long-term problem requiring a long-term solution -- not a 30-year flash in the pan that lays waste to the one vital element we need for survival here. The water in our aquifers is finite even by ADWR's analysis. There is a solution -- why can't you talk about it rationally?
Loyd.... really, you jest with me. You must be joking.
You are the KING of not having any substantial debate.
Todd wrote paragraphs of fact, opinion, and forecast. You offer nothing, zero, zilch....
Finally!! Loyd has made a prediction... 30 years of water left.
Your turn now Loyd, run the numbers and reasonably prove how there is only 30 years of water left.
Oh and Loyd, while you think that the 7%-10% cost differential isn't all that big of a deal for the energy plant to overcome, I bet you'd scream bloody murder if one of the governments tried to raise your property or sales taxes 7% to 10%.
Oh sure Todd -- Let's compare apples to oranges here. That's why talking to you guys is just a waste of time. You're playing on Field B while the rest of us are on Field A.
7 to 10% in higher costs, is still 7 to 10%. Those are numbers Loyd, apples to apples.
You are demanding that the government insist on raising the cost to the plant 7 to 10%, yet YOU don't want the government to raise any of your costs.
But I can just see you blow a gasket when, say, you get your way and our utility company decides to purchase the more expensive energy from the solar energy providers which then raises your rates 7 to 10%. You've heard of cause and effect right??
Funnier thing still here is that it is entirely more likely that in your lifetime that your energy bill increases 7 to 10% because of government mandates (that you'd support) than it is that Mohave County runs out of water.
And you are not on field A B or wherever. You took your ball and went home.
Todd...he is just hiding in the dugout.
Commenting by HaloScan
