61–70 of 197 posts
We're going to need a lot of desalination plants powered by clean energy.
IIRC These can have thier own host of problems because the 'brine' byproduct doesn't mix well back into the ocean and can settle/pool and create marine dead zones. Although suppose that will be less of a priority if people are thirsty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, sure, but never in enough volumes to be actually usable by us. It’s not like we can capture every single evaporated water droplet before it cools to form fresh water. So while technically it happens all the time, practically it’s as if it isn’t happening at all when it comes to the concerns talked about here, specifically the quantity of available fresh water declining.
This is where essentially all freshwater comes from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this might be just because their comment is borderline useless - it is so condensed that one can hardly make any sense of it. So what did they want to say? Is it "Science, it works?" like in XKCD comic #54? Or are the quotes around science the actually important thing, casting doubt on it? It's hard to tell because they did not bother to spend a few seconds to actually write it out. Beside that there is more…
The intention was to get people to read the main thesis critically. That quote is sort of a tell about the quality of this paper, and the more I dig into this paper the more it confirms this is isn't good science.
We're going to need a lot of desalination plants powered by clean energy.
IIRC These can have thier own host of problems because the 'brine' byproduct doesn't mix well back into the ocean and can settle/pool and create marine dead zones. Although suppose that will be less of a priority if people are thirsty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Global warming means generally more water in the air and more rain, not less. Think of Jurassic Park, not Mad Max
Yes, more total rain. A steady steam from the mountains is a much better source of water though to keep lakes, rivers and our water supply going. The rain isn't evenly distributed through both space and time. We might get a drought for years and then torrential rainfalls. We are already seeing this. It's happened in California and Germany. Both places I'm most tide to. So maybe it's sampling bias. At my parent's in G…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are quite wrong about that. The evaporated ocean water becomes rain. Evaporated ocean water is the source of over 80% of all rain on earth.
And most of that rain is going to go into the ocean again. Or be distributed in a large area. Neither of which can really be captured in any sort of predictable and scalable manner. You know, unless we build a massive “roof” of devices to capture all that rain. Literally covering the entire planet. At that point yeah it would dev a reasonable thing to bring up in the context of fresh water reserves falling. So I very…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can somebody explain why is this downvoted? If 53% decline, what do the other 47% do? How about total storage?
This, and why 1992-2020? How many of these large lakes are distributed in say, Midwest America/Canada. What were the precipitation levels in that region just a few years prior? Why did they need to involve climate models when we have observable data?
There's a map linked in the paper if you want to see where the lakes are: https://www.science.org/cms/10.1126/science.abo2812/asset/ab...
Dumb question: where did the water go?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC These can have thier own host of problems because the 'brine' byproduct doesn't mix well back into the ocean and can settle/pool and create marine dead zones. Although suppose that will be less of a priority if people are thirsty.
Put them down stream of farm runoff so everything is already dead
