Could desalination solve the water problem and the rising ocean problem? (Israeli, global warming)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
\Massive amounts were ours for the asking from the governor of alaska in the seventies.
He had plans already written, and designed to run a pipeline from his state to California, and he was turned down by the state water resources board.
I think that idea needs to be researched once again. The governor's study said it would be less expensive than building plants along the California coast to desalinate the ocean water.
Bob.
This is not so.
First, the plan came from former Alaska Governor Hickel and was proposed during his second stint as Governor in the early 1990s (not 1970s).
Second, the decision was not California's at all. Such an interstate project would require Congressional approval in any case, and in this one in particular because the proposal had the pipeline running underwater, on the continental shelf (and through Canadian waters, so it would also require the approval of the Parliament in Ottawa).
As an aside, it would be interesting to see if it would be cheaper to route it via land. My guess is - probably not. The four 14-ft pipes would probably each need an access buffer of at least 20 feet per side, creating a 200'+ corridor. First, those pipes would have to cross continuous mountainous terrain from Alaska through British Columbia to the U.S. border. Then it would run through low-lying coast and valley through Washington and much of Oregon - a lot of valuable land that would have to be seized by eminent domain at considerable cost (and I can't see the governments of either Oregon or Washington, to say nothing of British Columbia, being enthusiastic about this). Then in southern Oregon and northern California, more mountains. Then more expensive real estate in the central valleys of California. And for Southern California's share of the water, another mountain range to cross.
Anyway, third - the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment studied the project and concluded that it would cost $110 billion dollars (that's $186 billion in 2015 dollars - or 50% more than the entire annual budget for the state of California) and take 15 years to complete. What do you think the odds are that the project would come in at cost and on time? I'm thinking the best answers are 'slim' and 'none'.
Fourth, the project would only supply 12% of California's water needs, so it wasn't some sort of unlimited supply.
Why wouldn't desalination help with the rising water levels? If we substituted desalinated water for underground water, wouldn't the underground "storage tanks" replenish (due to rainwater, snow melt, etc.) and fill back up enough to reduce the rising ocean levels?
Interesting question. Google says:
Volume of world's oceans = 1,370,000,000 km3
World annual water use = 4000 km3
So if we took all our water from the oceans and no more water flowed back in, it would take about 350,000 years to drain them dry.
I can't seem to find an estimate of how much water is stored in underground aquifers or how much of that has been depleted. But I'm guessing it is insignificant compared to the water in the oceans, or even to the amount of water stored in the Antarctica and Greenland ice caps.
I think the simpler solution is to do what we do to the Colorado river to more rivers, just use the existing water that's getting wasted into the ocean.
I've been arguing in favor of desalinization plants in California. It needs to be accompanied with a pipeline, though, and it would tally up into an exhorbitant cost. But the state has run out of time to fart around with the problem and they have no other viable option, as far as I'm concerned. It would be money much wiser spent on than the stupid speed train that they deem more important.
The extract sea salt could replace ALL table salt.
I'm inclined to think that the solution would also help with rising sea levels, if on a small scale.
They have been taking measurements, for more than a century in some places. The issue with the land based measurements is land movement. You can look over these graphs and you'll find some going down, some up and at all different rates. One thing to keep in mind is the sea has been rising since the end of the last ice age. The question is has it accelerated.
Water is a constant....we have the same amount today that we had BILLIONS of years ago..taking it out of the ocean, to drink or water or wash with will not decrease the amount of water! Desalination is expensive.
The key to rising water levels ON SHORE is to stop building on the coastline! So simple...so easy....eventually, the water will retreat, when another little "ice age" comes along..and it will...the climate has been changing since the beginning of the earth...and will continue to do so.
I think you are asking too complex (and that's putting it mildly) a question to be answered in a few paragraphs or in one night.
Given how complex the oceans are, from biology to chemically such as Oceanic carbon cycle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
to physical such as currents and waves to acoustics to tectonic (how many desalination plants moving how many billion gallons of water would it take to produce a tsunami?), just to name a few factors....................
......................I don't think addressing the question just from an angle to see that humans have enough to drink and that they stay dry is the proper way to go about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
