4 ms·
lowering ground levels is pretty bad * a lot of these areas also flood, so you either now have more flooding or now you have to shore up levees and other flood
by bobthepanda 5y ago
lowering ground levels is pretty bad
* a lot of these areas also flood, so you either now have more flooding or now you have to shore up levees and other flood protections at great expense
* land subsidence due to groundwater draw is not necessarily evenly spread. most buildings and infrastructure are not supposed to unevenly shift large distances.
- s1artibartfast 5y ago>* a lot of these areas also flood, so you either now have more flooding or now you have to shore up levees and other flood protections at great expense My most familiar example is the central valley of CA, which is a basin, and which will flood either way, >* land subsidence due to groundwater draw is not necessarily evenly spread. most buildings and infrastructure are not supposed to unevenly shift large distances. this is absolute nonsense, no building has ever seen differential elevation gain. we are talking about meters across many kilometers.
- bobthepanda 5y agoSure they do. Here’s an article discussing how subsidence caused by overdrawn aquifers in Mexico City is causing buildings to noticeably tilt. https://amp.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article1938721.html https://amp.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article1938721.html
- s1artibartfast 5y agoany stories from California? The article about Mexico city wildly conflates building settling with groundwater subsidence - Like old buildings where the entire first floor is below ground level.