Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 197 posts

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#101

Post by voakbasda »

peteradio wrote: post #89
aSockPuppeteer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends how close farmers are to water sources. They run high speed pumps at night or camouflage them in streams to get by water restrictions. There’s the famous California telephone pole picture too. https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/themarinpost/emimg/1249/S...

I don't understand that telephone pole picture, the ground did not move around the telephone pole surely. I don't understand the graphics either. 1ft/year generally, but slower than that in the most extreme?

When you remove the water from the ground, the drained soil compacts. The topmost sign on the pole pole shows where the ground level was 50 years earlier, caused by excessive taking of groundwater.

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#102

Post by timerol »

tppiotrowski wrote: post #54
linuxlizard wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When water gets in short enough supply, we will burn coal, garbage, tires, anything to power desalination plants.

Desalination cones should work in tropical climates. [1] http://www.watercone.com/product.html

Does this exist? The product page mentions that the planned price is "below € 20", but the news page doesn't have anything newer than 2007

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#103

Post by aziaziazi »

gonzo41 wrote: post #81
Dennip wrote: post #49

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.

We pump brine inland to a large flat expendabe plain and flood it to allow the water to evaporate off and the salt to sette. 20-50 years later, pod racing on the salt flat.

The desalination plan provide water when the groundwater reservoirs are too low to fulfill freshwater demand.

The brine slowly go down through geological layers. After 5 years it reaches groundwater reservoir.

20-50 years later, the regions become famous for its fun pod racing and for its numerous ghost cities around the old plain.

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#104

Post by ROTMetro »

djfobbz wrote: post #79
swayvil wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Global warming. Warmer air holds more water.

[flagged]

So you point to a change in your local normal climate as showing there isn't... climate change? Just trying to clarify what you are trying to say here?

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#105

Post by aziaziazi »

_puk wrote: post #95
Dennip wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this causes its own host of issues as there are a load of other nasties such as arsenic etc in seawater which would build up there.

How does that work for e.g. small scale salt farming in many European countries that flood areas with sea water, then harvest the salt after the water has evaporated [0]? Is it just a case of the scale making it safe? 0: https://www.timeout.com/croatia/things-to-do/ston-salt-works

I think so, yes. One person salt consumption seems wayyy less than the brime that would be created by desalination of the freshwater he needs.

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#106

Post by ooz16 »

Genuine question here. What would be the expected change over the same period? The abstract says 53% of lakes saw declines...does that mean 47% saw no change or gains? If so, that seems pretty close to net stable to me globally. Or frankly what we would expect to see (some gains, some losses)

Also, this is stated later in the doc:

"Between 1984 and 2015, a loss of 90,000 km2 of permanent water area was observed by satellites—an area equivalent to the surface of Lake Superior, whereas 184,000 km2 of new water bodies, primarily reservoirs, were formed elsewhere (14)"

My first impression was that this means there has been a growth in total permanent water area from 1984-2015. Am I just reading this wrong?

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#107

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

Dennip wrote: post #49
pier25 wrote: post #26

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.

The ocean is way too big for removing some drinking water (which is going to end up back in the ocean anyway) to have a material effect on the salt concentration.

The problem is strictly local: if the brine produced by the plant is dumped in an area with low flow, it can hang around and affect sea life.

If you use a big discharge pipe and put it a decent distance offshore in a current where it can mix effectively, there’s very little effect.

This is not a reason to shoot down desalination plants as a concept, it’s a design constraint to take into account when building them.

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#108

Post by RC_ITR »

bombcar wrote: post #58
RC_ITR wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or (at least in the US), we will simply stop doing things like growing alfalfa in the desert to feed cows being raised in Texas. Sure beef will be a little more expensive but… You’re actually right. We’ll probably burn garbage and radio hosts will call people against burning garbage effeminate names.

Burning garbage may be one of the best things you can do with garbage - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/climate/sweden-garbage-us... As you can set it up to burn very hot and have all sorts of scrubbers on the outcomes.

Burning anything is never the right answer in a world of climate change.

We are scrambling to find ways to capture atmospheric carbon and store it underground and burning garbage is literally the opposite of that.

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#109

Post by _Microft »

gonzo41 wrote: post #82
seventytwo wrote: post #2

If weather patterns shift, the infrastructure built to store water will have to shift as well. Earth is a closed system, so we should expect to see water storage decline in some areas and flooding increase in some areas. It’s all climate change stuff.

Earth isn't a closed system, we take in energy from the sun.

That's not a problem. Closed systems can do that. If they additionally do not exchange energy with their environment they are called isolated systems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_system

Re: Satellites reveal widespread decline in global lake water storage

#110

Post by bombcar »

RC_ITR wrote: post #108
bombcar wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burning garbage may be one of the best things you can do with garbage - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/climate/sweden-garbage-us... As you can set it up to burn very hot and have all sorts of scrubbers on the outcomes.

Burning anything is never the right answer in a world of climate change. We are scrambling to find ways to capture atmospheric carbon and store it underground and burning garbage is literally the opposite of that.

If handling waste and burying it costs X carbon, and burning it creates Y carbon, and Y is less than X, then burning is better than burying.

You'd have to do the math, it's not manifestly obvious that it's not the case (especially once you consider all the transportation involved in sending waste around the country and across the ocean).

Post reply on HN