> Have you done ten seconds of research about this yet? You should find time for that. Would clear up a lot of things for you.
Point me to whatever source you think supports your argument that it can't be done.
> Short version: we are far, far too late to start building infrastructure now and make up for a Colorado River's worth of water,
We're going to need water forever. It's never too late.
> and desalination tech right now uses a LOT of energy. Which exacerbates all the climate issues that are causing this to begin with.
So build power plants that don't release carbon. If you want to get really particular, sell the water at a price that lets you build 2x as many power plants as you need, so even after considering construction costs you're reducing the net CO2 output.
But also, what are you talking about when you say it's not solvable or buildable? Adding 50% more water to the residential supply would be 3 million acre-feet, which would take 15-30 terawatt hours of power each year. California already uses 260TWh. That's very obviously feasible.
Point me to whatever source you think supports your argument that it can't be done.
> Short version: we are far, far too late to start building infrastructure now and make up for a Colorado River's worth of water,
We're going to need water forever. It's never too late.
> and desalination tech right now uses a LOT of energy. Which exacerbates all the climate issues that are causing this to begin with.
So build power plants that don't release carbon. If you want to get really particular, sell the water at a price that lets you build 2x as many power plants as you need, so even after considering construction costs you're reducing the net CO2 output.
But also, what are you talking about when you say it's not solvable or buildable? Adding 50% more water to the residential supply would be 3 million acre-feet, which would take 15-30 terawatt hours of power each year. California already uses 260TWh. That's very obviously feasible.