1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

And If The Water Dries Up?

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by Old_Trapper70, Jul 24, 2016.

  1. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    http://pulitzercenter.org/projects/...aquifers-global-california-india-peru-morocco

    "Much of the planet relies on groundwater. And in places around the world—from the United States to Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America—so much water is pumped from the ground that aquifers are being rapidly depleted and wells are going dry.

    Groundwater is disappearing beneath cornfields in Kansas, rice paddies in India, asparagus farms in Peru and orange groves in Morocco. As these critical water reserves are pumped beyond their limits, the threats are mounting for people who depend on aquifers to supply agriculture, sustain economies and provide drinking water. In some areas, fields have already turned to dust and farmers are struggling.

    Climate change is projected to increase the stresses on water supplies, and heated disputes are erupting in places where those with deep wells can keep pumping and leave others with dry wells. Even as satellite measurements have revealed the problem’s severity on a global scale, many regions have failed to adequately address the problem. Aquifers largely remain unmanaged and unregulated, and water that seeped underground over tens of thousands of years is being gradually used up."
     
  2. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yet another actual problem that will never be addressed, and nothing will be done about it because the manmade climate change scam continues to suck all the air out of the room and all of the treasure from the coffers.

    There are a host of actual issues that should be addressed, and progress could actually be made towards solving them but it won't happen because the hundreds and thousands of billions of dollars that could be spent on those issues is being wasted by climate science.
     
  3. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,993
    Likes Received:
    1,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    To be fair you can't just buy water but you could make desalination mire b affordable.
    But if the water doesn't kill us the lack of food will.
    We have a LOT of people.
     
  4. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63

    And more coming in the future. Too bad PR has his head up his ass, and cannot see that many are trying to fix the problem. Sometimes you have to dig a little deeper, educate yourself, and not depend on others to spoonfeed you the information.

    Desalinization, hydroponics, family farms, collecting rain water, or even your dirty dish/bath water to be used on gardens, all can help solve the problem.
     
  5. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    16,993
    Likes Received:
    1,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
    We have virtually the same amount of water we have always had. When water goes down the drain it doesn't disappear it goes through the waterms cycle over and over. Desalination can add to the potable supply but not much. There is no solution. Supply and demand will work things out.
     
  6. Lagboltz

    Lagboltz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,847
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hurricane alley
    In Florida, the loss of ground water is causing sink holes all over. To prevent strawberries from freezing in an especially cold winter, the farmers continually sprayed them with millions of gallons of water. 140 sink holes appeared in a matter of 11 days.
     
  7. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63

    In parts of California the ground has sunk as much as 30 feet, most often 2-3 feet. In the Ogallala aquifer the water level is dropping a foot a year, and many wells have already gone dry. And, contrary to Dogs declaration, even the increased rainfalls we have had are not enough to stop it.

    http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/08/vanishing-midwest-ogallala-aquifer-drought/
     
  8. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sorry guy...it seems to be you with your head up your ass....the fact is that according to warming wackos, everything is the fault of climate change which is the result of man's activities and the place to spend money is on climate change....not on the things that could actually result in results.

    For example, the Ogallala aquifer...practically every mention of it, is accompanied by breathless exclamations on the topic of climate change....the area is not experiencing drought...the area is experiencing overuse....the reduction in the snow pack is not the result of climate change...it is simply the natural cyclical nature of the climate in the area...if the area were experiencing drought...the natural flora and fauna would be dying off from a lack of water...it isn't...when the natural plants and animals in the area start dying off from lack of water..then you can properly assume drought conditions...

    http://cjonline.com/stories/080606/kan_aquifer.shtml#.V5c0EVdUb8s

    http://www.nber.org/papers/w17625

    https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts/greatplains.html

    http://www.cwi.colostate.edu/UCOWR-.../16_-_Ogallala_I/Weiwei_Wang/UCOWR_Weiwei.pdf

    And I could go on and on with the most dire predictions coming from government agencies and educational institutions which depend heavily on grant money...and when there are dollars to spend on the issue, where do you think the bulk of them will go?...towards the problem of overuse, or towards climate change?

    As to where my head is....I generate electricity on my property to power my few outbuildings....and I collect water in both above and underground cisterns for the use of my small number of livestock...and to water my garden which produces about 80% of the vegetables we eat each year. I dare say that I "walk the walk" re: effective use of resources more than you but not from some perverse fear of climate change...but because it is economically the best thing for me to do...such activity, however, will not alleviate the problem of overuse with the Ogallala aquifer and other large aquifers because the primary users are large scale farmers and the amount of water they use can't be compensated for by people connecting barrels to their gutters. I have two 2000 gallon cisterns and a rather elaborate system for collecting water and it just barely keeps up with my small needs re: a few animals and my garden. Most people don't even have room for an underground cistern, much less the desire to put one in if they did.

    The fact is that climate change has co opted practically every issue from depleting aquifers, to harvesting fish, to medicine in the third world and when it comes time to hand out the limited supply of money for various causes, climate change gets an unfair proportion...take a minute and just look at the amount of money being flushed down the climate change toilet...and if you are able to think like an adult for just a minute...consider what else could be done with that much money that would produce tangible results.....and while you are at it, ask yourself what actual results have come from the thousands of billions of dollars that have already flushed down the climate change toilet.
     
  9. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    If you had actually read the article, the overuse problem is one of the main topics being discussed as is the reality that the lack of snowfall is not adequate to refill the aquifer. In our area here in the High Desert region of Oregon we are seeing the same affect of the loss of snowfall, and moisture. reservoirs are being drained in an attempt to keep the groundwater levers up to no avail.

    As to the loss of natural fauna, etc., I would suggest you do some more research, or at least read the entire article.

    http://ca.water.usgs.gov/data/drought/drought-impact.html

    http://www.biologydiscussion.com/es...disaster-and-their-impact-on-environment/7134


    But as usual, you know everything, and what is happening everywhere, and what causes all of it.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150929142248.htm
     
  10. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    63
    As usual...nothing you posted in any way rebuts what I said....Your USGS report simply states what drought is with some redefinition of the word...again...the native plants and animals are doing just fine...so no drought...it is the imports who aren't adapted to living in the desert that are having a problem. The region, historically has had actual droughts that have gone on for hundreds of years at a stretch...and the native plants and wildlife have adapted to live in that sort of environment...the short rainfall and snow pack that we have seen in the past decade hardly constitutes even a blip....

    And your breathless, handwaving account of "disaster" is just more hysterics...there is no disaster there with regard to the native plants and animals...the only "disaster" is the disaster created by the imported plants and wildlife and the disaster is that they are not adapted to that climate...and again, nothing will be done because the available funds are going down the climate change toilet...

    And as to your science daily article...what "large" trees are native to desert climates?...for that matter what desert climate includes "forests"...we were primarily talking about the western region of the US correct?

    You seem to jump from topic to topic...breathlessly proclaiming disaster, or imminent disaster with out the first bit of actual knowledge as to what is natural...what history has shown us....what we can reasonably expect in the future based on what has happened in the past...etc...in short, you read opinion pieces as if they were fact, accept their hypotheses to be true with no actual evidence and the spew what you religiously believe to whoever happens to be within hearing distance.
     
  11. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63

    YAWN, again with the nonsense of the genius. Yes, native plants that have adapted to the lack of water will survive. Does not mean they will thrive, or even spread their territory. It simply means they will survive even as their seeds will survive without water for a hundred years. How that proves there is no drought is beyond common sense.

    As to evergreens, we live in the High Mountain Desert, and yes, there are tall evergreens here. Not so much in Death valley though. Here is a list of trees that grow in the desert some as high as 35 feet:

    http://www.desertharvesters.org/native-tree-information/native-tree-list/

    Then there is this:

    http://netnebraska.org/article/news/heat-drought-killing-nebraskas-evergreens

    And I simply respond to the nonsense you post, so if there is "jumping around" then follow the little ball.
     
  12. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    63
    YAWN?....typical response from someone not interested in the truth at all. First....adapting to the desert is about survival...not thriving...and the desert is their territory...if the desert spreads, then they will spread....and the fact that their seeds survive for 100 years and more without water should be ample evidence that lack of water for spans of that long are perfectly natural for that part of the world....how long do you think it takes for a plant to adapt a survival mechanism that keeps its seeds viable for a hundred years and longer without water?.....that is what the climate is, and has been like there for tens of thousands of years....what warmer wackos are calling drought....and whining disaster is just business as usual in that region.

    Like most warmers, you seem to "know" vast amounts of information that happens to not be true. It doesn't require genius to learn the truth about the climate history of a region...it only requires wanting to know what the truth is....something you clearly have no interest in.

    Wow...35 feet huh...and those trees are not dying off due to lack of water are they...so your "large tree die off" link was just more emotional, hysterics from the wacko contingent who sees climate at the root of everything bad.

    Wow...an eastern white pine stressed by the desert climate?...say it isn't so....I live in the piedmont region of North Carolina and even we don't try to grow white pines here...and the loss of forest to wildfire is the result of piss poor forestry practices...restricting logging...letting the forest become so choked with underbrush that when fire starts it burns much hotter than it would if the forest were in its natural condition...where FIRE IS PART OF THE NATURAL ECOLOGY....

    And the Australian Pines aren't doing well in Nebraska?....imagine that?...and neither are the Scotch Pines?....what a tragedy....and what is the little tree the guy in the picture is looking at?...is that a Japanese Maple?...not doing well in Nebraska?...who would have thought... It seems that their problem...is that they aren't planting trees which are adapted to survive the natural climate fluctuations of that region....do you really read that sort of bilge and see disaster just around the corner?...I see disaster, but it is the fault of people who live in a region but don't like the native plants of that region so they plant something else.... And down at the bottom of the page, they have a link to re tree nebraska....where they list trees that people should be planting...I can't access the site, but what do you bet that the list is native trees that will do just fine in the regional climate.

    Again...you believe disaster is imminent...and are waving your hands over trees dying in the drought...which is something that you believe you know, but upon closer inspection, it is trees that are not native and not adapted to the climate...an attempt to force trees to grow where they don't belong....much like the oyster "disaster" on the west coast where the oysters were dying off...but when one actually looked at the issue, the oysters that were dying were a non native species introduced by oyster farmers and the native species were doing just fine....they just like the taste of the non native species better...

    I am just following you...what hysterical non disaster will you post next as evidence that the planet is dying? To date, for all the crap you have posted...you haven't even come close to anything that constitutes evidence that man is altering the global climate...you did a pretty good job of proving that not native species of trees don't do well when the natural regional climate moves into conditions that they don't like....
     
  13. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You really are good at proving yourself to be the fool. And once again you read only what you want to see, and ignore the rest like the pathetic child you are:


    “We’re adrift in a really bad situation right now. Trees that are 20 to 30 to 80 to 100 years old are starting to go away. It’s just simply too many years continuous dry,” Nickerson said.

    "Nickerson said the drought has already been underway for a decade, despite a couple of wet years. But it was accelerated by last year’s record-breaking high temperatures, which helped spark the worst wildfire season in state history. Fires raged across north-central Nebraska and destroyed thousands of acres of the native Pine Ridge Forest near Chadron.

    "In the matter of five short decades, we’ve seen our timber land base go from 250,000 acres of live, green viable forest to something less than 100,000 acres, probably more around 80,000 to 90,000 acres left," Northwest District Forester Doak Nickerson said about the Pine Ridge Forest in Northwestern Nebraska.

    “After smoke cleared in 2012, we dropped our forestland acreage to about 40 percent of what it was historically. That’s how bad it is. We are literally losing this forest resource right in front of our very eyes,” Nickerson said. "

    Then too, you seem to think that until all plant life dies off, or the animals all die (and some will survive) there is no drought. Kind of like your belief that as long as there is a sheet of ice on the waters of the Arctic the ice is not melting. However, you are too arrogant to see the simplistic idiocy of your beliefs.

    As to your oyster story, and yet another new subject you have introduced, it does not prove the ocean is not subject to acidification:

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160610140658.htm


    Then too, and you will actually have to read the article to see this, it was the Native oysters that were preferred for their taste. The Pacific Oyster just grew bigger, and faster. Even so, the native Oyster (Olympia Oyster) was virtually destroyed by mans habits such as this:

    "Researchers speculate that the remaining Olympia oyster populations may have succumbed to increased silt generated by 20th-century logging and mill operations, which either killed them outright or covered their beds and destroyed their habitat. They have not returned in discernible numbers to Oregon estuaries."
     
  14. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    63
     
  15. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,874
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No, it is not "hard evidence" you prefer. I it simply "evidence" that supports your outdated, and often erroneous, ideology.

    Actually I did look it up which is why I posted what I did. From what you have said, and that is all there is to go on, the native trees should not be dying unless there is a drought. Now, I understand you ave a very limited view on what constitutes a drought, however, in many areas the trees are dying. In your limited world view, or self centered view, the idea that the water tables which have taken thousands of years, and even millions of years, to create, are dropping at the rate of a foot a year means nothing to you. And the idea that it will take thousands of years, or even millions, to refill them is just "hype". And the knowledge that this drop in the levels did not occur until the rising of the temperatures, the lack of rainfall, and mans overuse, is of no concern. As long as you can believe it is not a "drought".

    Yes we know. Until all life dies off there is no drought. Got it. BTW, planting only the native plants will not produce enough food to feed America.

    You want to use an isolated area to demonstrate what is happening globally. Here in Central Oregon we have already broken the heat record twice, and am looking to a third time tomorrow. Las Vegas? Phoenix? How about Southern California? Just not globally:

    http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php

    Try this one for chuckles:

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/drought/historical-palmers/psi/199607-201606

    Where did it say they were not native trees? Have you ever been to Nebraska?

    Not sure if you can get anymore ignorant. Did someone say the ice never melts, or was it that the ice never melts as fast, nor as much, as it has? And short of a switch in poles, which has occurred, where is your evidence that there was no ice at the poles? I realize that there have been skeletal remains found near the poles of tropical animals, or so we think, how does that prove there was no ice?

    Again you demonstrate just how much smarter you are then any other. Why Einstein must be marveling from his grave that someone as smart as you has finally arrived to take his place. Now, perhaps I should ask just which ice age are you speaking of? The "Little Ice Age", or the major ones? Then too, should we speak of the warming of the globe (medieval warm period" just prior to the "Little Ice Age"?

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

    Didn't say it did. Was just pointing out the errors in your comment, and the role man played in the near extinction of a species of oyster. Well, that plus the error in your reason as they why they switched types of oysters.
     
Loading...

Share This Page