Takin' From the River

Do you have a link for that Mark? You should consider sparkling water, pop, power drinks all to be a form of water.

This isn’t about daily water usage. What this is about is shipping water to locations that need it. It doesn’t need to be done in a day or even a week. To talk about daily water usage is not what this thread is about.

Andy

1 Like

It isn’t about the southwest, it is about shipping water around the Whole united states. There are many places that are having drought.

Andy

1 Like

Let’s change it to " So my tax dollars do not have to pay for some “Looney” to live on the ocean with Natural storms. You know the whole East Coast.

Andy

2 Likes

Dense is not the same as viscosity. Water is much easier to pump than Oil. As far as cost. Just go without oil for a month and water for a month. Which one will you pay more for?

Viscosity is a measurable physical property that tells us how much a liquid resists flowing.
Measuring viscosity of liquids gives insight into materials and their behavior, and is a practice found in a wide variety of scientific and industrial fields. It’s even important to understand in your home! Can you imagine how difficult it would be to keep frosting on top of a
cake if it flows too easily? Knowing how to increase it’s viscosity means you’ll have an easier
time baking!

Andy

2 Likes

Yes - I know. Lifting 100 gallons water 100 feet takes much less energy than lifting 100 gallons of oil 100 feet.

As far as cost, water is just lying around on the ground, and falls right out the sky. It’s cheap.

1 Like

Um, this thread is specifically about the Colorado River and the current negotiations to update allocation.

1 Like

Like surface water, groundwater is already spoken for.

2 Likes

I think this is precisely what the original post in the thread is about. The Lower Basin states that draw water from the Colorado River will have to cut daily consumption. Their current, unrealistic allocations are based on water that is not there.

1 Like

LOL your right it looks like I hi-jacked it. Sorry.

Andy

1 Like

Yes it is Syke but if you look at the aquifers they stretch all across the United States. So, the way it works in the Colorado is if someone puts water in that is measurable they can take the same amount of water out at a later date. In a sense Banking it. Why couldn’t they make a treaty to do the same thing with all the aquifers?

Andy

1 Like

Your right eldemonio, I was off topic. I will agree with you that the water that the lower basin draws is unsustainable. One bright spot is that Arizona just ended leases with Saudia Arabia.

The biggest culprit is California and the way they use the water. It is going to be hard for them to be moved. Not sure how that will be done but the way they ship the water and use it needs to be redesigned.

Andy

1 Like

Aquifers do, but individual aquifers don’t.

3 Likes

Sure, that would be great. The problem with those darn mountains is that they don’t cooperate by having lots of elevated basins for holding water up high, and those that do tend to have small ones or poorly located ones for pumped storage. There are some, I’ll grant, but generally it’s only a fractional solution for the problem.

Think about this. They bottle water and put it on trucks and ship it all around the country. The difference is that it is a company doing it and making money off of it

And suggesting that “bottled water” or “oil” are comparable in the same universe is to suggest that the person doesn’t understand the concept of scale.

Yes. It goes downhill, towards Iowa and Arkansas. Not really very near Arizona or New Mexico or Utah or Nevada. Are you suggesting tell it to run uphill?

Acquifers are, by definition underground. And contained by geology (as referenced by the maps “by rock type”). Further, they’re not necessarily giant lakes of underground water, but water in cracks and layers between geologic formations. The well at our house, for example, will run dry if pumped too quickly, but can pump infinitely if run at a slow rate, as the water trickles back into the well-head as it is pumped out.

You’re welcome.

4 Likes

But water can be moved (pumped) from one aquifer to another. That would allow flood waters to be moved around the country with less piping. We are not talking about someone’s small well at their tiny cabin. At one time Las Vegas valley had water coming out of the ground. These aquifers could be recharged and then allowed to pump into other areas. Here is a link for you.

You’re welcome.

Andy

2 Likes

Let’s look at that, with a brief comparison to oil. So where is there some excess water? In the Missouri and Mississippi watershed areas east of the Rockies. Where is the water needed? In the desert areas west of the Rockies.

Where are the oil pipelines in the US? Here you go:

Notice anything about these pipelines? None of them cross the Rockies. (That one up in Canada goes around the northern end of the Rockies.) Why would that be? Almost certainly because it’s either too hard or too expensive to pump the oil up and over those elevations.

If it’s too hard to do for oil, it’s going to be too hard to do for water. Or if it’s too expensive for oil (that’s worth something like $50 - $100 per barrel), it’s certainly going to be too expensive for water, which is worth $1 or less per barrel.

So that is why transporting water from the Eastern US to the Western US isn’t going to happen.

–Peter

4 Likes

Yeah, that makes sense. But…have you considered launching rocket ships carrying billions of water delivery robots from the Eastern US to the Southwest?

Seriously, I feel like I’m on crazy pills here. Conservation efforts are the most critical piece to solving this crisis.

1 Like

Your map is not complete Peter.

https://www.alyeska-pipe.com/taps-facts/

TAPS FACTS

FAST FACTS

Air Temperature Range Along Route: -80 degrees Fahrenheit to 95 degrees Fahrenheit.

Diameter of Pipe: 48 inches.

Elevations, Highest:

  • Atigun Pass: 4,739 feet (crest, pipeline MP 6).
  • Isabel Pass: 3,420
  • Thompson Pass: 2,812

Grade, Maximum: 145 percent (55 degrees) at Thompson Pass.

Length of Line: 800 miles (1,288 kilometers); includes 407 feet added in MP 200 reroute, April 22, 1985.

Andy

1 Like

I agree and a lot of those efforts have been or are starting to be implemented.

California agrees to long-term cuts of Colorado River water - CalMatters.

Andy

1 Like

Yes, I looked it up and did the rough math in my head when I posted. But if you think about it, it’s also common sense.

Bottled water volume in the U.S. 2022 | Statista.

15.9 billion gallons of bottled water per year
Post up-thread says - “US Daily Water Use - 322 Billion gallons”

I’m not talking about daily water usage, I am simply illustrating the orders of magnitude difference between water use and shipped water on trucks and trains.

2 Likes

Well - The Chicago River does run backwards, that was kinda a big deal from a public health perspective. I think the difference in altitude is a whole 6 feet.

All this talk about ‘moving water around’ is ridiculous. One does not just, ‘move water around’. It is neither physically nor politically possible. Distances are to large, differences in altitude are to great, the required volume to make it worthwhile is enormous, and absolutely no one is willing to let go of ‘their’ water. At least 2 million acre feet is needed to begin to make it worthwhile. Here’s a good example of moving water around for relatively small distances. Colorado–Big Thompson Project - Wikipedia

Draining the Owens Valley is another one.

My vote - take all the new fallow farmland due to lack of water, put in solar cells, and use that energy to desalinate the pacific.

2 Likes