That wasn’t really the point, TVA. Do you think there would have been fewer meaningful posts if “potable" had been added to the title? OccamYes, but you caught me. I was being purposefully deceptive. I'll never let it happen again. No more sensationalism to enhance a point. Just the facts, no embellishment. :down: Cap't Jack
I’m disappointed in that TVA, but glad you learned your lesson.
I’m disappointed in that TVA, but glad you learned your lesson.Well, Occam did have a point that I hadn't reckoned, with and hey sometimes it's hard to defend an indefensible point even though it did open an avenue for further discussion. Hopefully a few people did sit up and take notice even if the science was purposively flawed. Cap't Jack
Hold on there Cap't, easy up on the capitulation "even if the science was purposively flawed" Come on, it was a title. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ But it's true, titles can be very important. For example recently I finished an essay, that I'd been mulling for over half year (heck for years). I played with it for a couple months, started ugly as hell, couldn't find a hook, went through many stages. In fact, I had to write another essay to set the stage for this one. But it was an important article for me since it involved others serious geology work. With deadline counting down, I made a u-turn, coming at it from a totally unexpected angle. Finally, I pulled it off and came up with an essay I feel really good about… amazed at, even - consider what it looked like a few days earlier. Sent it into the …., where the editor has always done me proud. Her editorial style is light and she understands what I'm trying to say so her changes have consistently been improvements and lessons for me. I finally get the issue and open it to find my article… (incidentally, it's the editor who puts the titles on these columns) "The Magic That Made The Mountains" it was like getting punched in the belly, demoralizing is the descriptive that keeps coming to mind. Drained the fun right out of the thing. I can't even get myself to read through it carefully to find and review her edits, which I always do. I haven't even gotten around to sending copies to the two scientists in question, it's too depressing. All because of the god awful disgusting title. If you're curious see: Ancient Landscapes in Motion http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/2013/12/ancient-landscapes-in-motion.htmlI’m disappointed in that TVA, but glad you learned your lesson.Well, Occam did have a point that I hadn't reckoned, with and hey sometimes it's hard to defend an indefensible point even though it did open an avenue for further discussion. Hopefully a few people did sit up and take notice even if the science was purposively flawed. Cap't Jack
OK getting this back on topic:
Hell of a book, it was frightening reading it years ago, and now it seems like we are standing at the brink.
EXPLODING SOUTHWEST POPULATION ON COLLISION COURSE WITH WATER SCARCITY By Leon Kolankiewicz, CAPS Senior Writing Fellow In his classic 1986 book, Cadillac Desert, the late author Marc Reisner argued that explosive population growth and development in the American Southwest were on an inevitable collision course with the fundamental hydrological realities of an implacably arid region. Subtitled The American West and its Disappearing Water, Cadillac Desert presented the history of two powerful federal bureaucracies in the West: the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of Engineers. Both agencies are loved and loathed in equal measure. Reisner’s book chronicles their grand scheme to tame and harness wild water resources in the West—all in the service of relentless human ambition, first to settle this once nearly empty land and then to build upon it an ever greater and enduring empire. . . .
Thevillageatheist - 03 February 2014 02:12 PM I’m disappointed in that TVA, but glad you learned your lesson. Well, Occam did have a point that I hadn’t reckoned, with and hey sometimes it’s hard to defend an indefensible point even though it did open an avenue for further discussion. Hopefully a few people did sit up and take notice even if the science was purposively flawed. Cap’t Jack Hold on there Cap’t, easy up on the capitulation “even if the science was purposively flawed" Come on, it was a title. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~While I'll freely admit my mistake here my purpose was to draw attention to pollution and the problem still persists. Now parents are being warned that their infants shouldn't be allowed to drink the water. My cousin lives in the area and she and her family are still drinking bottled water. She said that the smell still lingers in their plumbing (licorice smell) and schools in the area are cautioned to use bottled for a while longer. Remember that this was one, one chemical spill from one of many factories in that area and all because of sloppy inspection and lax EPA standards due arguments over state sovereignty. And if this is happening in our area what must it be like nationwide? People here believe in a Deus Ex Machina. Somehow the "government" (whatever that is) will miraculously take care of the problem so they'll just suck down the free bottled water and wait, and that concept can be expanded to include national issues as well. So yeah I'm a tree hugger. I admit that too. Fresh water is my favorite drink. Lincoln called it "Adam's Ale". Cap't Jack
Nice if you can actually get "fresh water." just about all of it is recycled fom sources we don't want to think about. The point is--and you made it very well--we are poisoning what little potable water we have. Another thought: why do we fight fires with drinking water? For that matter, why do we flush toilets and wash cars with drinking water? LoisThevillageatheist - 03 February 2014 02:12 PM I’m disappointed in that TVA, but glad you learned your lesson. Well, Occam did have a point that I hadn’t reckoned, with and hey sometimes it’s hard to defend an indefensible point even though it did open an avenue for further discussion. Hopefully a few people did sit up and take notice even if the science was purposively flawed. Cap’t Jack Hold on there Cap’t, easy up on the capitulation “even if the science was purposively flawed" Come on, it was a title. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ KWhile I'll freely admit my mistake here my purpose was to draw attention to pollution and the problem still persists. Now parents are being warned that their infants shouldn't be allowed to drink the water. My cousin lives in the Oarea and she and her family are still drinking bottled water. She said that the smell still lingers in their plumbing (licorice smell) and schools in the area are cautioned to use bottled for a while longer. Remember that this was one, one chemical spill from one of many factories in that area and all because of sloppy inspection and lax EPA standards due arguments over state sovereignty. And if this is happening in our area what must it be like nationwide? People here believe in a Deus Ex Machina. Somehow the "government" (whatever that is) will miraculously take care of the problem so they'll just suck down the free bottled water and wait, and that concept can be expanded to include national issues as well. So yeah I'm a tree hugger. I admit that too. Fresh water is my favorite drink. Lincoln called it "Adam's Ale". Cap't Jack
Another thought: why do we fight fires with drinking water? For that matter, why do we flush toilets and wash cars with drinking water? LoisIt would require another infrastructure to supply another type of water. It would be rather expensive. Fires don't happen often enough to make it worth it. I suppose planes and helicopters that pick up water could get sea water but I don't think it would be a good idea to put that water on land where we expect plants to grow. psik
Another thought: why do we fight fires with drinking water? For that matter, why do we flush toilets and wash cars with drinking water? LoisIt would require another infrastructure to supply another type of water. It would be rather expensive. Fires don't happen often enough to make it worth it. I suppose planes and helicopters that pick up water could get sea water but I don't think it would be a good idea to put that water on land where we expect plants to grow. psik Actually they do that in Southern California and maybe other places close to the ocean. I suppose the salt water does interfere with plant growth, but here it is mostly brush, anyway. They also put some kind of fertilizer in the water. When it's first dropped it shows up red. I don't think they drop it on houses or built up areas or on farmland. I wonder if they could do it with Great Lakes water, too, thought it's most useful for large brush fires in mountains and canyons as we have in Southern California. I can see that having two types of water piped in would be expensive, but wonder if it would be worthwhile in Southern California coastal areas and similar areas.. People around large lakes, such as the Great Lakes, might have it piped in for firefighting and toilets. It wouldn't solve the problem of drinking water contamination and availability but it might make a dent in it. I'm not an engineer so I don't know how that might be done practically, though I think it might be started on a small scale with new construction. Lois
I can see that having two types of water piped in would be expensive, but wonder if it would be worthwhile in Southern California coastal areas and similar areas.. People around large lakes, such as the Great Lakes, might have it piped in for firefighting and toilets. It wouldn’t solve the problem of drinking water contamination and availability but it might make a dent in it. I’m not an engineer so I don’t know how that might be done practically, though I think it might be started on a small scale with new construction.You do have a point though about using potable water for many other purposes. Our local fire departments rely on the river (Ohio) for their water. Even though it's fresh it must be filtered through local filtration plants before it can be used for drinking. No one would ever even attempt to drink it without chlorination and filtration, as it's far too contaminated by river boats and chemical plants. there was a time however... . Also notice that nearly every major city in the U.S. is located near a water source, either salt or fresh, and they all have filtration systems. Cap't Jack
Hmmm, this might interest some of you . . .
State of the Planet Mission http://stateoftheplanet.org/about/ The State of the Planet Conference, held every two years by Columbia University’s Earth Institute, assesses the state of global, natural and human systems in order to identify those factors central to achieving sustainable development. The conference brings together insights from the world’s most influential and innovative thinkers in a wide range of academic fields, including the earth sciences, engineering sciences, biological sciences, health sciences, and social sciences, with those from opinion leaders in the media, government and the policy community.
03/28/13 http://stateoftheplanet.org/program/ 8:00 AM Registration Opens 9:00 AM Opening and Announcements, Laura Trevelyan, BBC World News America 9:10 AM Welcome, Jeffrey D. Sachs, The Earth Institute, Columbia University 9:20 AM Keynote Presentation Good Derivatives: Water, The Next Frontier Richard Sandor, Environmental Financial Products LLC 9:40 AM The World at Risk: Water Scarcity How can we provide fresh water to meet the food and energy needs of 9 billion people? Moderated by Laura Trevelyan John Briscoe, Harvard University Mark Cane, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Upmanu Lall, Columbia Water Center Brian Richter, The Nature Conservancy 10:20 AM Solutions from the field (Skype) Raman Ahuja, Independent Advisor (formerly working with Unilever, FieldFresh Foods & Firmenich S.A.), India 10:30 AM Safe Water in Developing Countries Moderated by Laura Trevelyan Vijay Modi, Columbia University Jeffrey D. Sachs, The Earth Institute 11:00 AM Solutions from the Field (Skype) Francisco de Assis de Souza Filho, Columbia Water Center, Brazil 11:10 AM The Role of Corporations: Promoting Partnerships to Provide Access to Clean, Safe Water Moderated by Jeffrey D. Sachs Richard Delaney, PepsiCo Inc. Sue Tsokris, PepsiCo Foundation 11:40 AM Event Ends
Economist’s article on water and the Southwest:
There’s also serious pressure on ground water resources in other regions of the US.
Midwestern Farmers have relied on the High Plains Aquifer System since they first discovered the solution to their drought woes nearly six decades ago. The massive underground water source has turned a vast dry swath of the Great Plains from North Dakota to Texas into arable farmland. But in recent years reliance on the aquifer has skyrocketed—leading scientists to project that, barring a change in current irrigation trends, nearly 70 percent of the resource could be depleted in the next half century. Scientists studying groundwater declines in western Kansas who published their results in the August 26 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that farmers had tapped close to 3 percent of the aquifer’s supply by 1960 and 30 percent by 2010. At current usage rates, they estimate that an additional 39 percent of the water in the aquifer will disappear by 2060. Once depleted, the aquifer could take anywhere from 500 to 1,300 years to completely refill.http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/gwdepletion.html