Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's a very good question. Probably because modern California was settled by European colonizers, who brought their traditional construction and property practices with them?

I'd love to see a sociologist's analysis of the ring of fire, though. If anyone knows of someone who isn't just talking out their butt (like me), please drop a rec



>That's a very good question. Probably because modern California was settled by European colonizers, who brought their traditional construction and property practices with them?

Like lawns! Like California is the completely wrong state for lawns.


California is a massive state with 16 different climate zones. The vast majority of California is not a desert. Lawns are fine in most of the state.


All the sibling posts here have made their point. But just anecdatally, as a lifelong resident, lawns make zero water-economic sense.


But most Californians do live in the desert. Lawns may be fine in most of the state, but not many people live in those parts.


No, most Californians do not live in the desert, not even close.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/K%C3%B6p...


Ok, you discovered my colloquial use of a technical word. I know most Californians live in what is technically a "Mediterranean" climate. But relevant to the topic at hand: most Californians get well under 20 inches of rain per year. It isn't a "desert" biome, but "Desert" at least gets you in the right mindset.

http://ponce.sdsu.edu/california_average_annual_precipitatio...

https://gisgeography.com/us-precipitation-map/

A cursory google search suggests that grass lawns need the equivalent of 1" of rain per week. Very few people live in the parts of California that get 50+ inches per year, which was the original point. Grass lawns are entirely unsuited to the parts of California where almost everyone lives.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: