3 ms·
True, but I think the GP's danans overall point still stands. Household water consumption (and waste) just isn't that much. It takes a lot of households to supp
by dalbasal 6y ago
True, but I think the GP's danans overall point still stands. Household water consumption (and waste) just isn't that much. It takes a lot of households to support a pretty little forest. Maybe a mature canopy increases your efficiency by 50% or more, but you're still working with a pretty small volume of water.
- maerF0x0 6y agoalso there is a systemic effect. More forests means more rain. Under the current models we send most of the rainfall immediately back into rivers + oceans. By creating inland forests we get mini little "oceans" to evaporate and move water for a 2nd rainfall. Each cycle the plants + ground hold onto a little, but mostly it can be evaporated and re-rained again and again. Deserts have the issue that they have little to hold onto the water, and to reevaporate it for subsequent rainfalls.