18 October 2011

Speed blogging

  • An interesting document [PDF] from San Diego that compares the cost of water from different sources (desalination, recycling, imports, etc.)

  • A ten minute interview [9MB MP3] with me on KOGO radio -- San Diego's right-wing radio station. I was quite disappointed to hear the host -- after the interview -- turn my message (higher prices will help conserve water) into a baseless polemic on "we're doing what we can" (per capita consumption is 165 gallons/day, or 625 liters/day, so not really) and how the REAL problem are those damned regulations preventing water exports to Southern California. I now have even less respect for talk radio (if that's possible).

  • The SD Union Tribune, on the other hand, published my op/ed: "Southern California’s real water problem – pricing"

  • The End of Abundance RIGHT NOW: "on the island of Nukulaelae, there were only 16 gallons of fresh water remaining Tuesday for the 350 residents... the combination of rising water levels and low rainfall mean makes life on the islands look increasingly precarious."

  • A California court has ruled that tiered prices and water budgets do not violate Prop 218 BUT that tiers need to be proportionate to cost of service, so one district is revising two years of water bills [PDF]. Sounds a lot more complicated (consultant fees! lawyers!) than uniform rates for all customers.

  • Read this paper [PDF]! "International water rights do not address threats to the availability of clean water – pollution, depletion, monopoly, corruption, conflict of interest and mismanagement – and could even exacerbate them. The dark irony of international water rights is that they could frustrate the very objectives they are intended to achieve."
H/Ts to Anon, BF and DL

8 comments:

Eric said...

Ten minute interview

Oh, come on, David. You got on the radio and were heard by people who would not have heard you otherwise. That is a win. If the interviewer were less than optimal, who cares?

As to dissing all of talk radio based on a few words by some guy that strikes me as a broad brush approach that you are trying to flush out of the water debates to be replaced by careful thought and policies that are appropriate to each case.

It seems that progress in water rights is being made, although slowly.

David Zetland said...

@Eric -- not sure I agree. I got on and said "blue." She -- the host -- said "so you can see how Red it is." There was no conversation (the 10 min doesn't include her disinformation).

I'd love to support all talk radio (even some talk radio), but most of it is boring, shallow, and/or polemic.

I'm willing to have a 5, 10 or 40 min conversation on air, but not with people like that (so that's the talk radio I am dissing -- not "a radio show" on which people talk...)

Oh, and it wasn't about water rights :-\

Eric said...

My main point is that you got your voice and some of your thoughts out to radio listeners who would not have heard of you otherwise. So, in spite of the interviewer, you win.

It is the water rights folk and 'Zetland is cool' folks in the audience who count, not the interviewer.

David Zetland said...

@Eric -- yes, you're right :)

Gary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Eric said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Zetland said...

I deleted Gary's comment (not the first time) because it is off-topic spam. He can email me directly if he wants to promote his idea on this blog.

Eric said...

No point replying to a nonexistent comment. :)

Also, sometimes the word verification on comments does not work until you do it a few times. FYI