[Governor]Arnold Schwarzenegger just declared a state of emergency for California due to the three year drought that we’re in. I heard on the radio that California farmers expect that they won’t have enough water for this year’s growing season, so some are letting their nut and fruit trees die and others are not planting their crops.

The last time California experienced a major drought in the 1990′s, urban areas won over agricultural areas in the battle over the small supply of water. Since then, farmers have lobbied hard for rules that won’t let history repeat itself. It makes sense that California’s agricultural fields should not wither and lie fallow because they provide so much food for our nation. However, that means that water might be rationed in urban areas so that we can decrease our water consumption by 20%.

Farmers and urban dwellers alike should practice water conservation so that no one has to sacrifice. In a world where climate change will bring many future droughts, we need to use technologies that will allow us to deal with these natural disasters. I happened to have done some informal online research for the Union of Concerned Scientists on this topic a few years ago. Who knew that it would be so relevant so soon?

With regard to farmers, their short-term response to drought is to fallow (meaning that crops are not grown) crops that have high water demand such as cotton and alfalfa; irrigate crops less but not to the point of water stress (up to 10% reduction in water use); use groundwater to irrigate (but if too much groundwater is taken, salt water from the ocean will contaminate the drawn-down pools of freshwater underground); and change irrigation schedules and other management so that less water is wasted. In the long-term, farmers can switch to growing crops that use less water and use irrigation technologies that save water, such as drip- and micro-sprinklers, to replace water-wasting irrigation methods such as flooding and furrowing (in which water is flowed down trenches in the crop fields).

“I’m sorry, sir, but they are getting wise to the “have to study it more” approach. I am afraid that data from this new satellite will help them to confirm estimated carbon emissions by site.”

“Then, blow the frikkin’ satellite already.”

“Ja Wohl, Herr Doktor Evil.”

; NASA’s announcement explains the loss in dry terms: “When OCO launched Feb. 24, the payload fairing did not separate as it was supposed to and the mission ended.”

The first satellite designed exclusively to measure atmospheric carbon dioxide from space failed to reach orbit during this morning’s launch, NASA reported. The Orbital Carbon Observatory (O-C-O, an acronym that matches the chemical diagram for carbon dioxide) “did not achieve orbit successfully in a way that we could have a mission,” Nasa launch commentator George Diller announced following the early-morning liftoff. “I am bitterly disappointed about the loss of OCO,” Dr. Paul Palmer, a scientist collaborating on the mission, told BBC News. “My thoughts go out to the science team that have dedicated the past seven years to building and testing the instrument.”

The OCO would have complemented the Japanese satellite Gosat, designed to measure carbon dioxide and methane emissions with an infrared spectrometer and a cloud and aerosol imager. Gosat successfully launched on Friday. The two satellites were designed to work together and cross-check each other’s measurements, with “a common ground validation network to help combine data from the missions.”

Satellite measurement of CO2 emissions is needed to complete scientists’ understanding of the carbon cycle. Scientific American’s David Biello explained the mystery of the missing carbon before OCO’s launch:

Human activity—from coal-fired power plants to car tailpipes—is responsible for nearly 30 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide wafting into the atmosphere yearly. We know that roughly 15 billion metric tons remains in the atmosphere for a century or more. A portion of the rest ends up in the ocean—acidifying saltwater and making life tough for corals—and another chunk appears to be helping tropical trees grow thicker. We don’t know, however, where the rest of humanity’s CO₂ is disappearing to.

On the map the areas where drought conditions will “Persist” are graphically indicated in solid brown. They include areas in Hawaii, Southern California and Nevada, in South-Central Texas, and in seven southern US states, including the Lake Lanier watershed, which currently supplies metro-Atlanta with potable water.

California’s long-term water future, in particular, looks bleak.

Public water agencies are only receiving 35% of their annual allocation from the State Water Project this year – the lowest level since the 1991 drought. And in coming years, deliveries will likely be less. According to the initial forecasts from the National Weather Service, the drought conditions in the state will likely to continue into next year.

• Grain and oilseed crops will mature more rapidly, but increasing temperatures will increase the risk of crop failures, particularly if precipitation decreases or becomes more variable.

• Higher temperatures will negatively affect livestock. Warmer winters will reduce mortality but this will be more than offset by greater mortality in hotter summers. Hotter temperatures will also result in reduced productivity of livestock and dairy animals.

• Forests in the interior West, the Southwest, and Alaska are already being affected by climate change with increases in the size and frequency of forest fires, insect outbreaks and tree mortality. These changes are expected to continue.

• Much of the United States has experienced higher precipitation and streamflow, with decreased drought severity and duration, over the 20^th century. The West and Southwest, however, are notable exceptions, and increased drought conditions have occurred in these regions.

• Weeds grow more rapidly under elevated atmospheric CO₂. Under projections reported in the assessment, weeds migrate northward and are less sensitive to herbicide applications.

• There is a trend toward reduced mountain snowpack and earlier spring snowmelt runoff in the Western United States.

• Horticultural crops (such as tomato, onion, and fruit) are more sensitive to climate change than grains and oilseed crops.

• Young forests on fertile soils will achieve higher productivity from elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentrations. Nitrogen deposition and warmer temperatures will increase productivity in other types of forests where water is available.

• Invasion by exotic grass species into arid lands will result from climate change, causing an increased fire frequency. Rivers and riparian systems in arid lands will be negatively impacted.

• A continuation of the trend toward increased water use efficiency could help mitigate the impacts of climate change on water resources.

• The growing season has increased by 10 to 14 days over the last 19 years across the temperate latitudes. Species’ distributions have also shifted.

• The rapid rates of warming in the Arctic observed in recent decades, and projected for at least the next century, are dramatically reducing the snow and ice covers that provide denning and foraging habitat for polar bears.