Federal officials have projected that, as soon as July, the level in Lake Powell could fall to the point where the hydroelectric plant inside the Glen Canyon Dam could no longer produce power, and then keep falling so that it would become impossible to deliver the quantities of water that Southwest states rely on. Water managers say such a “dead pool” is also possible on Lake Mead within two years.
Archived. Unrelated to the article itself, but something that stood out for me looking at the archived version was exactly how chopped up the story was. One sentence, link to other story, one...
Unrelated to the article itself, but something that stood out for me looking at the archived version was exactly how chopped up the story was. One sentence, link to other story, one sentence, link to other story, one sentence, ad, four sentences, ad, and so on. There's an actual piece of news in there, but you have to deal with a dozen distractions interspersed with it.
To the point of the article: It's disappointing that the federal government isn't stepping in faster to help deal with this issue, but given that they're trying to make their authority to do so very clearly laid out before they try, it's probably for the best. Better one year to make sure they can do it on the first try than trying to butt in now and then having it tied up in court for a decade until some other administration drops the issue because "climate change isn't real."
Seems like if it's delayed long enough, the court case won't matter because water gets cut off sometimes and the government starts taking actions on an emergency basis.
Seems like if it's delayed long enough, the court case won't matter because water gets cut off sometimes and the government starts taking actions on an emergency basis.
Right, but having a legal basis for their emergency actions is valuable. Just look at the Danish mink scandal to see how people will happily make hay over issues even if the mistake was made in...
Right, but having a legal basis for their emergency actions is valuable. Just look at the Danish mink scandal to see how people will happily make hay over issues even if the mistake was made in good faith.
From the article:
Archived.
Unrelated to the article itself, but something that stood out for me looking at the archived version was exactly how chopped up the story was. One sentence, link to other story, one sentence, link to other story, one sentence, ad, four sentences, ad, and so on. There's an actual piece of news in there, but you have to deal with a dozen distractions interspersed with it.
To the point of the article: It's disappointing that the federal government isn't stepping in faster to help deal with this issue, but given that they're trying to make their authority to do so very clearly laid out before they try, it's probably for the best. Better one year to make sure they can do it on the first try than trying to butt in now and then having it tied up in court for a decade until some other administration drops the issue because "climate change isn't real."
Seems like if it's delayed long enough, the court case won't matter because water gets cut off sometimes and the government starts taking actions on an emergency basis.
Right, but having a legal basis for their emergency actions is valuable. Just look at the Danish mink scandal to see how people will happily make hay over issues even if the mistake was made in good faith.