5 ms·

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 Sou

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.