4 ms·
In fact water may become scarce there, by relative vs absolute measures. The area depends on water to supply the massive natural streams and rivers and lakes an
by awful 9y ago
In fact water may become scarce there, by relative vs absolute measures. The area depends on water to supply the massive natural streams and rivers and lakes and marshlands. These waters flow all the way to the Great Lakes and help keep those waterways and everything downstream refreshed. Water reduction could dry out huge swaths of wetlands ecosystem and affect water life. This is exactly why they are studying the river water levels to make sure it doesn't. That's like saying because you live near an ocean, there is plenty of water around. Not hardly.
- tptacek 9y agoCan you find a source backing up this argument? The sources I've found suggest that this is very unlikely given the amount of groundwater available in Michigan.
- awful 9y agoA lot of groundwater in Michigan, but in that very place the groundwater meets surface, everywhere. It supplies vast areas of marshland and swamp and huge ecosystem that surrounds it. If you reduce the pressure by pumping aquifer and groundwater (a lot of sand there), will it divert the groundwater from replenishing the surface, that is the wetlands, the rivers, and the lakes that all this wildlife depends? Measurement is needed, and undergoing as I understand. BTW, Mich is so varied because of its unique geological history; across the state underneath it is like very different places 10s to 1000s of feet below, from sand to granite to salt domes, many different types of technical soils(?) IIRC. PS No, there may be, but if there were reliable studies it would not be so controversial.
- tptacek 9y agoI understand the logic. I'm asking if you know of a source documenting that actually happening in Michigan. I know that high-volume pumping apparently disrupts the neighbors wells, but the same source I read that in said that it wasn't disrupting the ecosystem. Since none of us have done any actual work here, and all of us are capable of telling a good story, I'm really specifically interested in sources.
- awful 9y agohttp://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/04/nestle_evart_wetlands_impact.html http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/04/nestle_evart_wet... This is exactly the point I was making. What are the odds.
- tptacek 9y agoNot rebutting but just breaking the claims in this story down: * The Osceola pump is supposedly hydrologically isolated from the surrounding wetlands. * Geologically, it may be possible that the site they selected might not be isolated, and so high-intensity pumping could have a material impact on those wetlands. * Nestle is loathe to acknowledge that geological claim and further, stipulating it, says that any impact it would actually have on those wetlands would be marginal. * Residents claim significant impact to marshlands near their homes. I concede based on this source that the specific siting of Nestle water pumps can have environmental impact (as I conceded up front that it can have an immediate impact on the residential water supply for well-fed houses). I restate though my original claim, which is that Nestle stands no chance of draining the underlying aquifer from which it is pumping. It might just as plausibly set out to drain Lake Michigan. It's possible that Nestle will have to move its pumps at perhaps significant expense, to some other place in the same watershed.
- awful 9y agoOh, I never saw your original claim. The only thing I saw was your challenge to me about sources to my assertions. I don't keep sources handy, but have a historical interest in the area and retain what I read.