3 ms·

This technology could be a boon to country like India where huge population relies on rain and some of the reservoirs are at about 40% despite decent rainfall t

This technology could be a boon to country like India where huge population relies on rain and some of the reservoirs are at about 40% despite decent rainfall this year. On the other note will desalination and consumption of sea water by humans balance the rising sea level ?

delecti 10y ago
Pretty much all the desalinated water that is "consumed" will just flow right back out to sea.
- FreeFull 10y ago
  Either that, or end up evaporating in the atmosphere, precipitating somewhere, and then flowing into the sea.
- rs999gti 10y ago
  Eventually, according to the water cycle: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Watercyclesummary.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Watercyc...
douche 10y ago
The amount of water consumed by humans is a literal drop in the ocean, on the global scale, fear-mongering aside. I wouldn't worry about the impact of a handful of desalination plants.
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=50+billion+m%5E3+%2F+(1.3+billion+km%5E3+to+m%5E3) http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=50+billion+m%5E3+%2F+(1... California uses 1/26 millionth's of the ocean's volume per year (50bn m^3 out of 1.3 bn km^3). So a drop is quite right! According to [1], it takes 87 mi^3 (~320km^3) to raise the ocean level by 1mm. You'd need several Cali's worth of water use just to negate to that 1mm rise. And that's assuming you destroy the water after use, which basically does not happen. If you _could_ destroy the water (freeze it all or fuse it all or something) it'd still take a million years to use it up. 1: http://www.sealevel.info/conversion_factors.html http://www.sealevel.info/conversion_factors.html
  - srameshc 10y ago
    Thanks, this was very insightful reply.
  - akiselev 10y ago
    If we started doing this on a global scale I don't think we'd have much trouble negating sea level rise for a while. If energy became so cheap as to allow desalination and gargantuan pumping networks to distribute water across the world, the water used in agriculture alone would drastically change the water cycle and weather patterns. Combined with the increasing temperatures increasing evaporation I think we could one day make a difference. We don't need to destroy it, we need to get that pumped water as far out of the water cycle of the ocean as possible and lock it into reagions. Many new rivers will still flow back to the ocean but we can promote agriculture to siphon off the rivers. Imagine undoing the desertification of the once fertile crescent, the dustbowl, or the Colorado river Basin and Texas?
    - MichaelGG 10y ago
      I don't know how to calculate what it'd take to undo desertification of the dustbowl. But 1mm = 320km^3 of water that _doesn't_ go back into the ocean. To stop the current 2-3mm rise that's 1000 cubic km a year. I suppose over something the size of the dust bowl (400,000 sq km) that's not that much. But I'd take a wild guess that by the time we get to that level of terraforming, we can build solar reflectors and just prevent the warming in the first place. Desal'ing all that water is going to require massive amounts of power (big fusion plants) plus all sorts of machinery. Tossing a bunch of mirrors into space seems easier to my engineering-ignorant mind.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
CyberDildonics 10y ago
> On the other note will desalination and consumption of sea water by humans balance the rising sea level ? Is this a serious question?
rs999gti 10y ago
Countries like India, Israel, and the US have plenty of geographic areas where solar arrays could be created with tons of sun exposure. Plus, these countries all have nuclear (weapon) capability. Couldn't solar or nuclear power allow for desalination pretty easily in countries like these?
- witty_username 10y ago
  Sure, but nuclear power has lots of political resistance.

delecti 10y ago

Pretty much all the desalinated water that is "consumed" will just flow right back out to sea.

FreeFull 10y ago
Either that, or end up evaporating in the atmosphere, precipitating somewhere, and then flowing into the sea.
rs999gti 10y ago
Eventually, according to the water cycle: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Watercyclesummary.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Watercyc...

douche 10y ago

The amount of water consumed by humans is a literal drop in the ocean, on the global scale, fear-mongering aside. I wouldn't worry about the impact of a handful of desalination plants.

MichaelGG 10y ago
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=50+billion+m%5E3+%2F+(1.3+billion+km%5E3+to+m%5E3) http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=50+billion+m%5E3+%2F+(1... California uses 1/26 millionth's of the ocean's volume per year (50bn m^3 out of 1.3 bn km^3). So a drop is quite right! According to [1], it takes 87 mi^3 (~320km^3) to raise the ocean level by 1mm. You'd need several Cali's worth of water use just to negate to that 1mm rise. And that's assuming you destroy the water after use, which basically does not happen. If you _could_ destroy the water (freeze it all or fuse it all or something) it'd still take a million years to use it up. 1: http://www.sealevel.info/conversion_factors.html http://www.sealevel.info/conversion_factors.html
- srameshc 10y ago
  Thanks, this was very insightful reply.
- akiselev 10y ago
  If we started doing this on a global scale I don't think we'd have much trouble negating sea level rise for a while. If energy became so cheap as to allow desalination and gargantuan pumping networks to distribute water across the world, the water used in agriculture alone would drastically change the water cycle and weather patterns. Combined with the increasing temperatures increasing evaporation I think we could one day make a difference. We don't need to destroy it, we need to get that pumped water as far out of the water cycle of the ocean as possible and lock it into reagions. Many new rivers will still flow back to the ocean but we can promote agriculture to siphon off the rivers. Imagine undoing the desertification of the once fertile crescent, the dustbowl, or the Colorado river Basin and Texas?
  - MichaelGG 10y ago
    I don't know how to calculate what it'd take to undo desertification of the dustbowl. But 1mm = 320km^3 of water that _doesn't_ go back into the ocean. To stop the current 2-3mm rise that's 1000 cubic km a year. I suppose over something the size of the dust bowl (400,000 sq km) that's not that much. But I'd take a wild guess that by the time we get to that level of terraforming, we can build solar reflectors and just prevent the warming in the first place. Desal'ing all that water is going to require massive amounts of power (big fusion plants) plus all sorts of machinery. Tossing a bunch of mirrors into space seems easier to my engineering-ignorant mind.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

CyberDildonics 10y ago

> On the other note will desalination and consumption of sea water by humans balance the rising sea level ? Is this a serious question?

rs999gti 10y ago

Countries like India, Israel, and the US have plenty of geographic areas where solar arrays could be created with tons of sun exposure. Plus, these countries all have nuclear (weapon) capability. Couldn't solar or nuclear power allow for desalination pretty easily in countries like these?

witty_username 10y ago
Sure, but nuclear power has lots of political resistance.