Why don't California build a water pipeline from the melting glaciers?

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: Xeven
Could you be a bit more specific? You said "the" melting glaciers, implying we all should know which ones you're talking about. However, as we don't I can only guess you're referring to ones in California itself.

Seeing as California's own glaciers (eg in the Sierra Nevada) are some distance away from the most populated regions they'd need long pipelines, with pumping stations along the way. That requires infrastructure. Power lines, service roads for maintenance and so forth.

Hate to break the news but calif is already tapping the water from the only calif glaciers.
The owens valley aqueducts are collecting it.
en.wikipedia.org...

The city of Los Angeles is stealing it from where I live and where it use to flow.

originally posted by: TM62
a reply to: Ceeker63

Apparently Hawaii's desalination plants work for them! No interest in actually providing drinkable water I suppose.

Hawaii does not have any desalinization plants.

LA has nicked loads of Cali and Nevadas water....You can see previous freshwater lakes all purdy and high saline concentrations now.

I dont think there ever will be a water problem on a water planet 70% water 30% land , Then you have underground as well. But there is so much lies u guess they want to privaties the water.. Lets say that all the fresh water on earth would finish we can stil desalination salt water but its little more expensive: Costs of desalinating sea water (infrastructure, energy and maintenance) are generally higher than the alternatives (fresh water from rivers or groundwater, water recycling and water conservation)

Achievable costs in 2013 range from 0.45 to 1 US$/cubic metre (2 to 4 US$/kgal). (1 cubic meter is about 264 gallons.)

Cool thing about water its the most perfect recyceble system on earth.


ca reply to: Xeven

a reply to: ANNED
Thank you for the info! I'm always glad to learn more from those who have good knowledge of a situation.

Hopefully the OP will read your post as well and become more aware of not only what has already been done, but the negative impacts that can result from such measures.

Yeah I dont' think HI has desalination plants. CA can barely afford them so I doubt Hawaii could either and they get way more rain there is no reason for HI to build them. Desalination is not the magic buillet. People on will research the hell out of some conspiracy or alien whatever but when it comes to hard science some of you really come up short. There are a whole host of reasons why desalination isn't practical. But despite that San Diego is on its way to building a desalination plant at the cost of billions. One aspect of desalination everybody seems to forget is the massive amount of waste generated by removing the salt from water. Most of the time it's pumped back into the ocean. Our oceans are already messed up enough as it is I'm sure there is nothing wrong with pumping massive amounts of salt right back into them? LOL.........yeah.........So where does all that massive amount of salt taken out of the ocean go? The costs involved in just dealing with that are a lot. Salt can destroy the environment and make soil unfertile for ...........well forever!!!! Not that they grow that much in soCal anyways but still.

originally posted by: Xeven
Why don't California build a water pipeline from the melting glaciers? In fact I am not sure why we don't do this to fill all our aquifiers before its all melted into saltwater? I keep reading that in the future water will be as scarce as oil. why not grab it before it melts?

No need. There are already natural pipelines from many glaciers, taking meltwater from them straight down to the towns and cities.

They are called rivers.

originally posted by: Xeven
Why don't California build a water pipeline from the melting glaciers? In fact I am not sure why we don't do this to fill all our aquifiers before its all melted into saltwater? I keep reading that in the future water will be as scarce as oil. why not grab it before it melts?

How about all the people of California just move and live on the glacier? All the ice water they could ever dream of and the U.S. would immediately become a better place.

a reply to: Ceeker63

Because they're frightfully expensive energy consumers and couldn't even remotely provide enough water for California agriculture (or substantial agriculture anywhere for that matter).

Nature's desalination plant == winter snow in the Sierra Nevada mountains.

Have you got any other great ideas?
Why not start a soft drink bottling plant to use all that Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere?
Or plant crops on the now exposed land that was under the glaciers?
Or start a prawn fishery on all the parts of Florida that will be inundated by sea level rises before the end of the century?
(Could be a problem with that one as they won't have any accessible Calcium Carbonates to make their exoskeleton due to rising acidity in the oceans.)
Best idea yet; only use renewable sources of energy.
Why pose the questions here when any search engine will answer your questions?
Great laugh; for a moment I thought you were serious,

a reply to: Xeven

California just needs to live within its means. The water shortage has been caused drought AND...

- Agriculture that needs vast amounts of water sucked up
- Waste
- Poor environmental management

When it next rains and the groundwater is replenished will Californians do anything to prevent this happening again? We all know the answer to that.

For example... 1 acres of vines need nearly 3,000 cubic metres of water - say 650,000 gallons. It is not a sustainable agricultural practice to continuously rely on a reducing groundwater supply.

Regards

originally posted by: paraphi
When it next rains and the groundwater is replenished will Californians do anything to prevent this happening again? We all know the answer to that.

Los Angeles doesn't retain rainwater. Nearly all of the rainwater it gets is rapidly funneled through its concrete river system and is dumped into the ocean.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Yes, through very photogenic culverts.
blog.goodosphere.com...

originally posted by: Phage
Yes, through very photogenic culverts.
blog.goodosphere.com...

They have spiffed them up in some places like the Valley so they don't look so nasty, but you can still find the occasional burned out car or destroyed Terminator lying around in them. Also, just about every winter during a big rainstorm (except for the last few when we haven't gotten any rain) some idiot falls in them and there is practically no way for them to get out. Those people often die.

Terminated.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657

Ever been to California? Palm trees everywhere. The problem is California is a desert. They don't get enough rain.



a reply to: Emeraldous

California Native, really, there are? Maybe in certain areas. California has desert, it is not a desert,it has very diverse climates. You sound like one of those people who have only been to southern California or have only seen it on T.V.

a reply to: paraphi

Do you want to create a worse disaster? Withholding water from many agricultural areas have created dust bowls and ruined the land. Withdrawing water from dust bowl vulnerable areas is not a good thing for the ecosystem right now. It will create a bigger crash.

Wow I did not know California had glaciers! lol that's interesting..

California's problem is the idiots who live there. If somebody like Bill Gates decided to help out by building a desalinization plant that could end the problem, do you know what would happen? First, where would the plant be located? You are talking a large industrial complex that would have to be near the ocean. It would take about ten years worth of studies to decide on a location and as soon as you completed them, somebody would sue to prevent you from placing it there. You would be sued by all of the environmental groups, sued by the unions over who will get to work at the plant, sued by all of the minority groups over the racial make-up of the plant's employees. It would go on and on.

Why don't they just build a bunch of these instead?

Wow, don't even have to kill the wilderness to build pipes over it!

a reply to: JIMC5499
Less high tech, still effective.

"Seawater still

In 1952 the United States military developed a portable solar still for pilots stranded on the ocean, which comprises an inflatable 24-inch plastic ball that floats on the ocean, with a flexible tube coming out the side. A separate plastic bag hangs from attachment points on the outer bag. Seawater is poured into the inner bag from an opening in the ball's neck. Fresh water is taken out by the pilot using the side tube that leads to bottom of the inflatable ball. It was stated in magazine articles that on a good day 2.5 US quarts (2.4 l) of fresh water could be produced. On an overcast day, 1.5 US quarts (1.4 l) was produced.[7] Similar sea water stills are included in some life raft survival kits, though manual reverse osmosis desalinators have mostly replaced them.[8]"