As the Largest Supply of Groundwater in the United States Vanishes, Farmers Are Deeply Concerned Abo

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Step aside energy - we have a bigger problem in this country - water.
As the Largest Supply of Groundwater in the United States Vanishes, Farmers Are Deeply Concerned About What Is Next
by Michael Snyder  June 8, 2026
Gigantic underground aquifers are being rapidly depleted all over the world, and once that water is gone it will take a very long time for it to come back. In fact, in some areas of the United States the recharge rate is less than an inch per year. That is a major problem, because more than half of the water that U.S. farmers use for irrigation comes from underground aquifers. What in the world are our farmers going to do once that water is gone?

The largest underground aquifer in the United States is known as the Ogallala Aquifer. It covers a vast area under portions of eight different states, and it accounts for approximately 30 percent of all groundwater that is used for irrigation in our nation…

The Ogallala Aquifer (oh-gə-LAH-lə) is a shallow water table aquifer surrounded by sand, silt, clay, and gravel located beneath the Great Plains in the United States.

As one of the world’s largest aquifers, it underlies an area of approximately 174,000 sq mi (450,000 km2) in portions of eight states (South Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas).[1] It was named in 1898 by geologist N. H. Darton from its type locality near the town of Ogallala, Nebraska. The aquifer is part of the High Plains Aquifer System, and resides in the Ogallala Formation, which is the principal geologic unit underlying 80% of the High Plains.[2][3]

Large-scale extraction for agricultural purposes started after World War II due partially to center pivot irrigation and to the adaptation of automotive engines to power groundwater wells.[4] Today about 27% of the irrigated land in the entire United States lies over the aquifer, which yields about 30% of the ground water used for irrigation in the United States.[5]

The Ogallala Aquifer is one of our most important natural resources.
Unfortunately, it is steadily drying up.

In fact, the amount of water that it has lost since the 1940s is roughly equivalent to the entire volume of Lake Erie…

The Ogallala Aquifer sits under eight states and 111.8 million acres of US farmland. A windmill can lift only a few gallons per minute, useful for drinking water but useless for agricultural purposes. In the 1940s, electrification reached the Great Plains and a Colorado farmer invented center pivot irrigation, a sprinkler line on wheels that rotated around a central wellhead. The 1949 version could lift thousands of gallons per minute and irrigate 40 acres.

Since then the aquifer has lost 286.4 million acre-feet of water, comparable to draining Lake Erie entirely. The parts of it beneath arid states have seen much bigger drops. Large parts of Western Kansas have lost 50 percent of their aquifer depth. Texan wells are down as much as 265 feet. On current trajectories, the water there will be gone in 20–30 years.

If we stay on our current path, farmers that depend on the Ogallala Aquifer will be faced with some very tough choices…
https://economiccollapse.report/as-the-largest-supply-of-groundwater-in-the-united-states-vanishes-farmers-are-deeply-concerned-about-what-is-next/#google_vignette

[corbe]

   Same thing is happening here to the Edwards aquifer.  Years of Drought and over population compounded by the recent data centers.

[DefiantMassRINO]

The farmers won't have to choose ... Government will ... to build reservoirs, or to not build reservoirs.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

   Same thing is happening here to the Edwards aquifer.  Years of Drought and over population compounded by the recent data centers.

I grew up in Austin and decidedly chose 11 years ago not to retire anywhere near there(in spite of a lot of friends doing so) partially due to long term water shortages I saw coming.

Retired in East Texas instead as it has plenty of rain and surface water.  And a lot cheaper

[Fishrrman]

"Same thing is happening here to the Edwards aquifer.  Years of Drought and over population compounded by the recent data centers."

"I grew up in Austin and decidedly chose 11 years ago not to retire anywhere near there(in spite of a lot of friends doing so) partially due to long term water shortages I saw coming"

Hmmm....
You guys would call yourselves "conservatives", right?

And is it not "conservative" to take the position that more people are always better?
And that anyone who has the timerity to say, "there are too many people here" is to be denigrated and ignored?

Well... what happens when the water runs out, because the aquifers "below" (and the land in general) lacks the carrrying capacity to support any more than x number of people for any length of time?

But... MORE people, population growth, industrial growth, technological growth (as in "data centers") are ALWAYS better?

What happens when there are 50 million relying on the Edwards aquifer?
What happens when there are 75 million relying on the Edwards aquifer?

Explain to me why 75 million would be better than the number of Texans there today...

(I guess I'm mistaken, but I always thought "conservatism" originated from "conserve", that is, to protect and maintain things as they are...including the land and environment... the concept of "stewardship" comes to mind...)

[IsailedawayfromFR]

"Same thing is happening here to the Edwards aquifer.  Years of Drought and over population compounded by the recent data centers."

"I grew up in Austin and decidedly chose 11 years ago not to retire anywhere near there(in spite of a lot of friends doing so) partially due to long term water shortages I saw coming"

Hmmm....
You guys would call yourselves "conservatives", right?

And is it not "conservative" to take the position that more people are always better?
And that anyone who has the timerity to say, "there are too many people here" is to be denigrated and ignored?

Well... what happens when the water runs out, because the aquifers "below" (and the land in general) lacks the carrrying capacity to support any more than x number of people for any length of time?

But... MORE people, population growth, industrial growth, technological growth (as in "data centers") are ALWAYS better?

What happens when there are 50 million relying on the Edwards aquifer?
What happens when there are 75 million relying on the Edwards aquifer?

Explain to me why 75 million would be better than the number of Texans there today...

(I guess I'm mistaken, but I always thought "conservatism" originated from "conserve", that is, to protect and maintain things as they are...including the land and environment... the concept of "stewardship" comes to mind...)

If you had read the article, the fundamental problem stated was aquifer reduction not from population growth but due to farming.

It gets pretty serious if the water used to support the food we eat runs out, regardless of how many people live where.  That food supports about everybody.

The aquifer in Central Texas is indeed small potatoes compared the acquifer underlying our farm belt.