The coming water shortage

[TexasTiger 12,865]

Rapid growth in the southwest is likely to grind to a halt.

https://newrepublic.com/article/161463/40-percent-water-colorado-river-arizona-california-nevada
 

Is relatively abundant water what ultimately saves the upper Midwest from further decline? A boom for the Southeast? 

[jj3jordan 2,053]

I’ve thought for years that a large pipeline project to connect major watershed areas would allow regions with extra water to be transferred to areas experiencing drought. Seems like every year some region is massively flooding and others are dry.  Environmental issues relevant to oil and gas would not be a problem since a spill would be water. Am I crazy or is this potentially doable? Seems like a great infrastructure job and when complete think how much food california will produce with enough water for the Central Valley and the smelt. Yeah I know water wars like the ones in Fl ga and al. Maybe something fair could be worked out.

[TexasTiger 12,865]

28 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

I’ve thought for years that a large pipeline project to connect major watershed areas would allow regions with extra water to be transferred to areas experiencing drought. Seems like every year some region is massively flooding and others are dry.  Environmental issues relevant to oil and gas would not be a problem since a spill would be water. Am I crazy or is this potentially doable? Seems like a great infrastructure job and when complete think how much food california will produce with enough water for the Central Valley and the smelt. Yeah I know water wars like the ones in Fl ga and al. Maybe something fair could be worked out.

I’m not sure how that would work given the sheer volume of water required for millions of humans versus the value of comparatively very little oil via a pipeline. I suspect advances in other technologies such as desalination and removing water from the air may be more viable, but I also think there are areas where a pipeline may make sense— perhaps East Texas to Central/West Texas?

[rhughes 59]

11 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I’m not sure how that would work given the sheer volume of water required for millions of humans versus the value of comparatively very little oil via a pipeline. I suspect advances in other technologies such as desalination and removing water from the air may be more viable, but I also think there are areas where a pipeline may make sense— perhaps East Texas to Central/West Texas?

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2019/03/26/integrated-pipeline-project-to-furnish-350m-gallons-water-a-day/

They started something similar in East Texas moving water from reservoirs to the DFW metroplex.   

[TexasTiger 12,865]

2 hours ago, rhughes said:

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2019/03/26/integrated-pipeline-project-to-furnish-350m-gallons-water-a-day/

They started something similar in East Texas moving water from reservoirs to the DFW metroplex.   

Huge pipe, a relatively short distance:

”The solution is now buried across 50 miles of Ellis County. The pipeline is big enough to drive a truck through, and massive pumps push millions of gallons of additional water every day to the north.”

[AU9377 4,930]

16 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

I’ve thought for years that a large pipeline project to connect major watershed areas would allow regions with extra water to be transferred to areas experiencing drought. Seems like every year some region is massively flooding and others are dry.  Environmental issues relevant to oil and gas would not be a problem since a spill would be water. Am I crazy or is this potentially doable? Seems like a great infrastructure job and when complete think how much food california will produce with enough water for the Central Valley and the smelt. Yeah I know water wars like the ones in Fl ga and al. Maybe something fair could be worked out.

I can't help but to feel that some places aren't meant for massive growth, if they cannot sustain thriving communities without going to these lengths. That said, I'm not unreasonable and the answer is somewhere between i'm sure.

[autigeremt 6,616]

Auburn University has been looking at this at the Water Resources Center for several years. I have some experience in this area serving as an advisor on a couple of research projects for grad students. The southeast has been seeing an agricultural shift from the west due to water access. I expect it to continue as shifts in population and agriculture continue. 

[TexasTiger 12,865]

On 5/4/2021 at 12:50 PM, AU9377 said:

I can't help but to feel that some places aren't meant for massive growth, if they cannot sustain thriving communities without going to these lengths. That said, I'm not unreasonable and the answer is somewhere between i'm sure.

Some aren’t. It can be compensated to a degree. But wasting water to have green grassy lawns in a drought prone or desert climate doesn’t make much sense. Folks need to adapt to where they are.

[abw0004 10,113]

On 5/3/2021 at 3:42 PM, TexasTiger said:

Rapid growth in the southwest is likely to grind to a halt.

https://newrepublic.com/article/161463/40-percent-water-colorado-river-arizona-california-nevada
 

Is relatively abundant water what ultimately saves the upper Midwest from further decline? A boom for the Southeast? 

There is a new study coming out where California is considering putting solar panels across all of the concrete waterways.  It seems like a great idea.  It would save 63 billion gallons of water from evaporating each year as well as help keep the panels cool with moving water underneath them.  I think it is a great idea.

https://www.wired.com/story/why-covering-canals-with-solar-panels-is-a-power-move/