Recent comments in /f/science

vulshu t1_j6sjxmr wrote

Places used to be like this. Why do you think you see so many “Oak st” and “Cedar Ln?” Funny how science and innovation can lead right back where we started

1

OathOfFeanor t1_j6shki5 wrote

In general I agree but on a large scale, the areas that need the most shade also have the least amount of water.

Trees consume an incredible amount of water and that's a big deal in these places where the large shade trees don't grow naturally.

1

randomusername8472 t1_j6shfxh wrote

You are correct, I meant to say growing food for livestock and rearing livestock. Basically, 80% of land is to make meat and dairy and it only produces 20% of our food. The other 20% of our land use is for plants, and that produces 80% of our food.

All other human land use is about 1% of habitable land - a rounding error compared to farming

6

MajinBuuMan t1_j6shf07 wrote

4

goldgrae t1_j6sh5bz wrote

That's an asinine take. 40% of water use in California is agricultural and only 10% is urban (both indoor and outdoor). The other half of water use is environmental.

Water rights and water use incentives in agriculture are awful.

6

bootsforever t1_j6sdwlq wrote

We should do all of these things. We need air conditioned spaces and renewable energy, but if we can reduce the urban heat island effect by increasing vegetation in general (and canopy in particular), then we won't need as much energy to cool those indoor spaces.

2

really_random_user t1_j6sdrfd wrote

2

TalkativeVoyeur t1_j6sdkfp wrote

We really should't get too hand up on this. Street trees apply almost anywhere. And green roofs are fine but just the trees outside to cover the asphalt is already a massive improvement. Trees and some green roofs where possible is totally doable and a massive improvement. Looking for a perfect solution is a great way to do nothing

11

Hour-Watch8988 t1_j6saol3 wrote

Of course. But you could immediately halt all exurban development and also provide plenty housing to ease the housing shortage if we just upzone inner-ring suburbs to medium-sized multifamily buildings.

5

Sine_Habitus t1_j6saeh3 wrote

Farming in general in California uses a lot of water, which is bad because there are also a lot of people in California. If Cali was just farmers it would t be a problem, but it is trying to balance the water needs of everyone that makes it an issue.

−5