We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#2We need to stop building massive cities in the desert and expecting that they'll have enough water. Maybe we should get on with that, instead?
And, when someone proposes that a grand "we" need to do something that will benefit them personally, that makes me a lot more skeptical. You want a water pipeline? You go build it. Don't look at me; don't even look at my tax dollars. But if you want it, feel free to get right on it.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#3Nope. Just nope. Not going to happen.
You can move, you are mobile. Move to where the water is.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#4We need to stop building massive cities in the desert and expecting that they'll have enough water. Maybe we should get on with that , instead? And, when someone proposes that a grand "we" need to do something that will benefit them personally, that makes me a lot more skeptical. You want a water pipeline? You go build it. Don't look at me; don't even look at my tax dollars. But if you want it, feel free to get right…
The article was published on desertsun.com
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#5Jesus, California and Nevada draining the "flyover" states? Can't get much more dystopian than that.
How about this -- build some desalination plants on the vast Californian coast. Nevada and Arizona can pitch in and share.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#6Jesus, California and Nevada draining the "flyover" states? Can't get much more dystopian than that. How about this -- build some desalination plants on the vast Californian coast. Nevada and Arizona can pitch in and share.
> California and Nevada draining the "flyover" states
You want to start Civil War 2? Because this is how you do it.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#7Nope. Just nope. Not going to happen. You can move, you are mobile. Move to where the water is.
It seems easier to move water than people.
Plus, sun is good for people and crops. Transferring water to where it will be useful seems like the kind of thing a government should do.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#8[deleted]
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#9We need to stop building massive cities in the desert and expecting that they'll have enough water. Maybe we should get on with that , instead? And, when someone proposes that a grand "we" need to do something that will benefit them personally, that makes me a lot more skeptical. You want a water pipeline? You go build it. Don't look at me; don't even look at my tax dollars. But if you want it, feel free to get right…
If the cities weren’t built up the agricultural water users would likely just use more water. They account for 80% of California’s use.
Re: We need to move water from Midwest west. Let's get on with it.
#10Nope. Just nope. Not going to happen. You can move, you are mobile. Move to where the water is.
It seems easier to move water than people. Plus, sun is good for people and crops. Transferring water to where it will be useful seems like the kind of thing a government should do.
My visceral reaction was also anger and opposition. It's questionable if it can be done in a way that's not harmful to the Mississippi watershed and ogallala aquifer. But you're right, the human good it could do would justify much.
The advocacy group NRDC has a much better explanation of the general concept and specific Mississippi/Ogallala proposal: https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/Water-Pipelines-rep...
Two things become clear. The mississippi/ogallala project would have to be an aqueduct project and not a pipeline if it wants to move a helpful amount of water to justify itself and it would require an exorbitant amount of energy to pump water from, say, Omaha to Denver. It doesn't seem like it has a chance of happening before many smaller projects are attempted first local to the southwest.