Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by BTPost, Jan 18, 2014.
Somebody pulled the Plug on Cammiefornia's Bathtub..........
LMAO! Could someone mssg me how to start a thread on here. please?
It has been mentioned in the past and diversion of Great Lakes water west will likely come up again....let me think about this.....No Fu****ng way!
Gov. Jerry Brown declared a drought emergency Friday for California after weeks of intensifying pressure from lawmakers to take action as the state's water reservoir levels remain strained with no rain in the forecast.
Running Dry: CA Drought Maps | Water Resources | Read: Map Shows CA's Drought Problem
Photos and Videos
No Surprise to...
More Photos and Videos
The declaration comes during one of the driest winters on record in California, following two dry years that already have left many reservoirs depleted. The state is facing "perhaps the worst drought that California has ever seen" since records began, Brown said during the Friday morning announcement.
One plan from the past
Great Lakes Water Wars
Aversion to Diversion (excerpt)
IT WAS ONE OF THE BOLDEST engineering schemes ever conceived on the face of the planet, and it called for replumbing much of the natural hydrology of North America. It started in the extreme Northwest—the wilds of Alaska—and marched methodically south through British Columbia before spanning across most of the continent. The plan’s western half envisioned harnessing some of the largest and wildest rivers in
Alaska, British Columbia, and the Yukon Territory, including the Copper, Susitna, Tanana, and Yukon. The Columbia and Fraser rivers would have been affected too.1 The idea was to divert part of the flows of these raging rivers into the mother of all reservoirs: the Rocky Mountain Trench, a giant natural canyon stretching through most of British Columbia.
Damming this canyon would create a surreal five-hundred-milelong inland sea, the waters of which could be sent to the rest of the continent as needed along with up to seventy thousand megawatts of surplus hydropower.2 Of course, the plan called for much of this diverted water to be sent to the American Southwest. The dry Canadian prairies would get a cut too. The system’s eastern branch would send water into the Peace River Valley of Alberta and on through Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and western Ontario until it reached Lake Superior. This eastern arm of the system was referred to as the Canadian–Great Lakes Canal or the Alberta–Great Lakes Canal and would carry 40 million acre feet of water to Lake Superior annually.3 That’s enough water to raise the level of all five Great Lakes, double the hydropower output at Niagara Falls, and still have water to spare for the Mississippi River watershed.4
Such was the vision of NAWAPA—the North American Water and Power Alliance—and it was estimated to cost anywhere between $100 billion and $300 billion (in 1960s dollars).5 The project would have touched at least seven Canadian provinces or territories, thirty-three U.S. states, and a portion of northern Mexico (fig. 4.1).6 Widely promoted in the 1960s by the Ralph M. Parsons Company of Pasadena, California, NAWAPA would later be viewed by environmentalists (as well as by most Alaskans and Canadians) as the hydrologic anti-Christ. Though it never came close to being built, it was the envy of several water engineers who were looking for a way to outdo the massive subsidized water projects that had been built in the 1930s,
’40s, and ’50s. These “welfare water” schemes came from a generation of men who believed that leaving water in its natural basin was somehow a missed economic opportunity.Water was meant to be moved and used where humans needed it most, rather than foolishly be permitted to flow into the sea. Behind their schemes lay a notable disregard for what these projects would do to the natural environment left behind by the displaced water. “NAWAPA, of course, is the granddaddy of them all—the most grandiose and the most ludicrous,” says water expert Peter Gleick. “Some people have described it as a water engineer’s wet dream—which is sort of a funny joke on all sorts of levels. It’s a ridiculous idea. But it was the logical extension of a whole series of somewhat less ridiculous ideas, like . . . the massive plumbing projects that we built in the West.”
NAWAPA seems bizarrely far-fetched today, but it had a number of influential supporters in the 1960s.7 Though it merely envisioned the Great Lakes as a connecting channel in a much larger scheme, it struck a chord among regional residents who wondered how long it would take for someone to concoct a similar plan that just happened to send Great Lakes water in the opposite direction. NAWAPA helped inspire a generation of far-flung Great Lakes diversion schemes—none of which made any economic sense. “Diverting Great Lakes water is financially stupid,” says Reg Gilbert, senior coordinator at Great Lakes United, in Buffalo, New York. “Even though it doesn’t make sense, the fact that people keep thinking about it just shows you the magnetic attraction of the water body.”
It's that lake Shasta?
I have no idea... It is somewhere in Commieforiania...
Years ago when I lived down in Yuma AZ. , there was the perception that cal. considered all water sources to be theirs exclusively.. Seems they already had laid claim to the colorado river..
Been talking about the drought on Facebook. Given that according to 'science' all water on Earth stays on Earth, the problem is not availability then. It's A: the fact that polluted water doesn't help anybody, and B: improper water usage(like all those people in California who think swimming pools and perfectly landscaped yards that must be green 24/7 are a God given right).
Since they work so hard dismantling dams and eliminate reservoirs within CA, I think they should be made to drink from their ubiquitous swimming pools before allowed to buy from another state. A water shortage will be a great way to discourage so many people from living there.
CA has some of the most abundant natural resources of any state. If they can't manage it properly within their borders then too bad, go thirsty.
A water shortage there could effect a migration out of California and into an area where water is more abundant. Which is not a good thing for those of us in the Pacific NW. They have already had a negative effect enough as it is, we don't need more of them here.
They just need to make lots of alcohol. Before too long, they won't even remember they ran out of water. Build a wall and let it fall to Mexico.
It is illegal in California to water green stuff with tap water. (Spent 5 years there) grey water only.(once or more used) car washes recycle almost all if their water, and watering with rain barrels is most common, I had roughly 150gal. Homemade cistern off a flat roof downspout. And it would self syphon, every time it got within a few inches of full. This fed a series of soaker hoses, mostly underground.
If you live in the desert, what's wrong with sand? Why bother with a stupid lawn when you can have a dune?
You don't have sand.you got dirt on hills as fine as silt, and every rain, the yard washes into the neighbor's yard, or in my case, across a public road. This causes the city to fine you. Can't be on a public road, impeding traffic. Plants and retaining walls solved that problem, and by planting agavae, improved privacy. ( only a d@mn fool, would climb through agavea, better than barbed wire.)
That's news to us, was never illegal the 20+years we lived in southern and northern parts of the state.
It's also REQUIRED (in california) to recycle metals and plastics and glass, now. But they failed to assign a penalty to the "crime" so they could ticket you thousands of times, but they can't do anything to you for failing to comply. People know it is required, but don't understand they can ignore it. California is great at telling everyone how they have to live. And this much was 20 years ago, it hasn't improved any. iMHO.
Well my mother grew up in the L.A. area, and she does not miss it in the least. I don't blame her.
Wow. Thanks for the explanation, Kellory. I wasn't being mean, I was just wondering. I wouldn't live in CA even if someone payed me to. Sounds like too many people with too much time on their hands, worrying about what everybody else is doing.
I'll stick to the humidity in the summer, and the snow in the winter, thank you!
No, no extra time really. When I was there the cost of living was about 4X why it is here in Ohio, but the wages were only about 1.5X what they are here, so a much higher percentage of your income is tied up in just food and a place to sleep. Much harder to get ahead there, though it was a nice place to leave the beach. I was always scrambling for side jobs to fill in the gaps in my bills.
They also had " voter revolt" and voted down EVERY tax increase and levy, so the state ramped up fees on everything the state had a stranglehold on, such as plates and registrations. Permits, variances, Road taxes on gas, you name it, court costs in L.A. were 1. 5X the fine, so a $100. Ticket cost you $250. If you fought and lost. On street parking at the court house is limited to 2 he's., but you can't leave to feed the meter. Or you could park in the court house lot for a flat $30. And this is just to plead guilty, not guilty, or no contest, then you get to either pay the fine, OE return for your real court date, and another $30. For parking.
You can run in place, like a rat on a wheel, but you can't get ahead. That's why I returned to Ohio.
Hollywood may be the land of broken dreams, but L.A. is the city of scr@w you.
I lived up in the Napa valley back in the early 90's.. Only lasted nine months before I said enough was enough...
Separate names with a comma.