On 15/09/15 22:32, Milos Rancic wrote:
For the last few years I am thinking about this issue,
and as I didn't see
anybody talking about that, I think we should start a kind of low level
discussion, as it doesn't require immediate action.
From what I read, Bay Area is not particularly endangered (although it
could be in the future). Even so, I am sure all WMF employees have enough
money to buy bottled water. I know, of course, they are not in the same
position as Google or Facebook employees, but I think the whole story is
not about water safety of our headquarters.
It's about responsibility. WMF shouldn't spend resources unreasonably if it
doesn't have to. And it's not just about possible "fund for water",
which
could become a standard for every Bay Area employer, but also about the
environmental harm of the attitude of keeping yourself in hostile place if
not necessary.
California is not a "hostile place" in terms of water resources. And
according to [1], no long-term trend is evident in the historical
record, and preciptation is forecast to drop by only 10% through to
the late 21st century.
California has by far the cleanest power in the US, and could easily
afford to desalinate its way out of a drought if it chose to do so.
Although it may be more efficient to use groundwater recharge as a
multi-year reservoir instead of allowing farmers to make unrestricted
withdrawals as is currently the case.
-- Tim Starling
[1] Our Changing Climate 2012 Vulnerability & Adaptation to the
Increasing Risks from Climate Change in California - Brochure
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2012publications/CEC-500-2012-007/CEC-500-2012-007…