Is global warming causing Lake Mead to run dry, and other water shortages?

Question

The American Southwest has been in a protracted drought for nearly a decade, with sinking water levels in lakes and rivers and decreasing snowpack in the mountains. And now a prominent scientist from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, says that Lake Mead, which supplies water to 22 million people throughout the region, could be bone dry in just 13 years.

Barnett, lead author of a paper titled "When Will Lake Mead Go Dry?" which will appear in the peer-reviewed journal Water Resources Research, published by the American Geophysical Union, says human demand and human-induced climate change are creating a net deficit of nearly 1 million acre-feet of water per year from the Colorado River system, which includes Lake Mead and Lake Powell.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/110958?g=1

What do you think - valid scientific conclusion or are the darn scientists just trying to blame everything on global warming?

Answer 1

I would say southern California never has had enough water and has piped it  in from Northern California for years. That and the population growth in those states. It has passed naturally sustainable years ago.

You want to blame GW fine but keep in mind these areas have been drought stricken in the past, enough to cause previous cultures in the area to pick up move or change their living arrangements.

Answer 2

A careful reading of the article indicates that climate change would have a negative impact on the water availability in the area.

In our imaginary alternate universe, where humans were only able to use renewable energy (our control)... the lake may still have gotten pretty d**n close to empty do to the demand from humans. Why don't you email the study's authors and:

1. read their full report

2. find out the actual litres that climate change would steal from the lake.

3. find out the model that they have used to estimate the answer to 2. above.

Answer 3

I think global warming is the cause of most of our negative climate changes. But in my personal opinion, over population is the base of global warming. Too many people means too much producing. And we cut down a lot of trees to make things for everyday use. Hence, the polluted air cannot be filtered as well. I'm just assuming... I don't KNOW!!! But I would imagine that that's the cause... that didn't even answer your question... LoL

The answer is yes. warmer climates mean less rain and more evaporation...

Answer 4

Using more water than nature can replenish, even in non-drought time, is foolish, yet that's what is being done in many desert areas.  Many seem to have a sense of entitlement to resources:  "If it possible to change my environment, I have a right to do so, regardless of the impact.  I can have water fountains spewing thousands of gallons into the air to evaporate.  I can put in Magnolia trees because I like them.  I can have water elements in my tropical flower garden.  Are you telling me I should not?  You must be a communist."

Global warming is a symptom of the same sense of entitlement and a result of the same displaced consequences.  Any consequence in finance or environmental disaster has been delayed to another generation or to another community, so the cost is dismissed as irrelevant.  

We as a culture have to learn to respect the environment.  How many Earth Days have we been through, yet everyday ordinary people still think a house has to have a Saint Augustine lawn and water loving bedding plants to make the desert look like suburban Virginia or the house isn't marketable. Only in the last year or so have I seen "native plantings in landscape" and "xeriscape gardens" touted as features, and then on only two or three of the houses for sale here.  As another poster suggests, it's only going to be when the price of a water guzzling house drops because people see that they will be pouring their paycheck right out onto the lawn will the situation change.

Answer 5

Totally valid! It's too bad we had to get to this point. I don't think the 'deniers' are going to cope very well with this info. That report said that there would no usable water in just 6 years!  Combined with the drought in the S.E.,and there is a climate disaster for sure.  I think that the govt. knows this,and is keeping the public in the dark to try to prevent a widespread panic!  I've said for years that weather was the most censored news! 20 years ago,I moved to the Pac. N.W. because I feel it will be safer than ANYWHERE else. We don't get tornadoes,or huge blizzards. The water supply is a bit more dependable as well. My heart goes out to all the unsuspecting citizens of LA and Las Vegas,they are in for a rough ride.

Answer 6

Colorado River water rights were allocated during an unusual high precipitation period.  Droughts of 20 years have occured there in the past.

It doesn't matter however what has caused the past 10 years.  The prognosis is bleak due to the affect of climate change on Rocky Mountain snowpack.

Here's what Steven Chu, a Nobel laureate and the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has to say about it:

"Chu noted that even the most optimistic climate models for the second half of this century suggest that 30 to 70 percent of the snowpack will disappear. 'There’s a two-thirds chance there will be a disaster,' Chu said, 'and that’s in the best scenario.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/magazi...

So regardless of the cause of the most recent dry years, we're in for some hard times in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona and California.

What I haven't seen discussed is what the Southwest will do for power when Hoover Dam stops producing.  Remember the brownouts in California a few years ago due to inadequate supplies of power?  Apparently the whole Western States grid is pretty shaky and can go down when power supply and demand aren't well balanced.  What percentage of Western power does hydro represent?

Answer 7

Did Global Warming cause the Dust Bowl in the Thirties?  I say what you stated, some are trying to pin all blame on a single problem.  It has way more to do with human demand than just climate change.

Answer 8

I know what the deniers of AGW will say. "Just a hole in the lake and evaporation".

Answer 9

I think every place has droughts one time or another. This is indicative of what? I get tired of Fema pushing flood insurance,on any place that's located near a cow pond.They fell on their face and now everyone is paying for it.Where were they when all the flooding was occurring?Now that's indicative of a bureaucracy.

Answer 10

No, continuing to irrigate the desert with the Colorado river is the cause.

Answer 11

It must be those darn scientists again.  Deniers ought to send a strong message and vote with their wallets by moving to Arizona and buying up real estate.  Since 1998 was the hottest year on record according to the deniers, the decade long drought is part of a natural cycle that reversed itself 10 years ago.  Prices can only go up.  You can count on green lawns, swimming pools and cheap gas forever.  Don't waste you money on water saving plumbing because the government will tax it.  The government will also try and use the science to raise new taxes for water infrastructure.  If enough deniers move to Arizona, they can vote down any new tax for water infrastructure that clearly won't be needed.

Taken in isolation, the water situation in the SW US has no more meaning than the weather.  Georgia is an isolated incident.  Southern Europe is an isolated incident.  Sudan is an isolated incident.  Australia is an isolated incident.  Don't worry deniers, every incident is an isolated incident.  Therefore those darn pesky scientists with inconvenient facts will never have a trend. ;->

Answer 12

Yes, I believe so ,I also think it is the cause of most of our important world problems.