This week’s LA Times interview with our new Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu reinforced the question I was wondering about late last week.

We have four major cities in the US Southwest: Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego and Los Angeles. We also have some of the most productive agricultural land in the world (in what would be the deserts of Imperial Cty, Calif.).

By 2050, will we even get to choose to have one of these things? What about by century’s end?

The Tribune Co.’s writer Jim Tankersley (along with Joseph Romm from the Center for American Progress) elucidated on the science on KCRW‘s To The Point (scroll down to “Reporter’s Notebook”).

Now, Takersley’s posted a large excerpt of the interview on the LA Times Greenspace blog.

Q: So you’re looking at a scenario of permanent water rationing?

CHU: No, you’re looking at a scenario where there’s no more agriculture in California. When you lose 70 percent of your water in the mountains, I don’t see how agriculture can continue. California produces 20 percent of the agriculture in the United States. I don’t actually see how they can keep their cities going.

This is not only true of California, this is true for all the Western states …

He is talking about a worst case scenario here, but even the worst cases, I’m finding, don’t take many unknowns into account.

And it’s at this point of unknown where things really start worrying me.


a death in the forest, by outrageous images, on flickr.

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)