5 ms·

You know, having a lot of a critical resource the US needs is not exactly an enviable position to be in.

bpodgursky 5y ago
Water is a highly local resource. The US as a whole has plenty of water, forever -- you could divert 10% of the Mississippi to the West and solve the water crisis. But you can't, because there's a mountain range in the way. Pumping and canals are VERY expensive. Canada is even further away.
- pmiller2 5y ago
  Canada is close enough for the army to get to.
  - donavanm 5y ago
    Not relevant. The US Army Corp & DNR studied this in the 50s and 60s. It’s not feasible to get water from the Columbia, eel, or Klamath rivers to central or Southern California. As parent mentioned there are too many mountain ranges in the way and nuclear tunneling didn’t even pass muster then. Why would the US go to BC when it already flows in to WA & OR, and is still too isolated from CA populations?
    - pmiller2 5y ago
      You miss the point. Take over Canada and make it part of the US. Move the people, not the water.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - tdeck 5y ago
        People could already move to wetter parts of the U.S. if that's what they want. Vermont and Maine are plenty wet and have small populations.
        pmiller2 5y ago
        So does Canada, and there's a lot more room there than in Vermont.
    - garyrichardson 5y ago
      Don't tell Suncor or Alberta. They'll be happy to build you a pipeline anywhere.
  - gfxgirl 5y ago
    The point is Canada's water is not close enough to the places in the USA that would need that water for it be compelling to invade Canada for their water.
    - pmiller2 5y ago
      Sure it is, when Canada becomes part of the US and people who live where the water isn't just get to move there.
      - orf 5y ago
        If this line of comments is a sarcastic joke then you need to make it a bit more obvious.
        berrynice 5y ago
        I don't understand why you think he's joking
        pmiller2 5y ago
        Not sarcasm: https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-like-4degc-warmer https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-l... Everywhere that's not green is where humans won't be able to live by the end of the century.
- kungito 5y ago
  Is it trillion$$ expensive tho? Or maybe 10 trillion $$ ? Because that is still not that expensive

Water is a highly local resource. The US as a whole has plenty of water, forever -- you could divert 10% of the Mississippi to the West and solve the water crisis. But you can't, because there's a mountain range in the way. Pumping and canals are VERY expensive. Canada is even further away.

pmiller2 5y ago
Canada is close enough for the army to get to.
- donavanm 5y ago
  Not relevant. The US Army Corp & DNR studied this in the 50s and 60s. It’s not feasible to get water from the Columbia, eel, or Klamath rivers to central or Southern California. As parent mentioned there are too many mountain ranges in the way and nuclear tunneling didn’t even pass muster then. Why would the US go to BC when it already flows in to WA & OR, and is still too isolated from CA populations?
  - pmiller2 5y ago
    You miss the point. Take over Canada and make it part of the US. Move the people, not the water.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - tdeck 5y ago
      People could already move to wetter parts of the U.S. if that's what they want. Vermont and Maine are plenty wet and have small populations.
      - pmiller2 5y ago
        So does Canada, and there's a lot more room there than in Vermont.
  - garyrichardson 5y ago
    Don't tell Suncor or Alberta. They'll be happy to build you a pipeline anywhere.
- gfxgirl 5y ago
  The point is Canada's water is not close enough to the places in the USA that would need that water for it be compelling to invade Canada for their water.
  - pmiller2 5y ago
    Sure it is, when Canada becomes part of the US and people who live where the water isn't just get to move there.
    - orf 5y ago
      If this line of comments is a sarcastic joke then you need to make it a bit more obvious.
      - berrynice 5y ago
        I don't understand why you think he's joking
      - pmiller2 5y ago
        Not sarcasm: https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-like-4degc-warmer https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-l... Everywhere that's not green is where humans won't be able to live by the end of the century.
kungito 5y ago
Is it trillion$$ expensive tho? Or maybe 10 trillion $$ ? Because that is still not that expensive