5 ms·

I don't forsee a transcontinental water pipe going over well. I, for one, refuse to subsidize people who want to live in a dessert with my own water table. Peo

I don't forsee a transcontinental water pipe going over well. I, for one, refuse to subsidize people who want to live in a dessert with my own water table. People should live in areas that can support human life.

danaris 5y ago
While I think there should absolutely be limits of some kind, if the water need in places like California could be spread out over the water table of, say, everything else west of the Mississippi, I imagine it could make a big difference to the water-poor places without running the risk of depleting the water-rich places enough for anyone to even notice. Of course, that's assuming that such a pipeline network would be practical to build and maintain. Personally, I suspect that local desalination will end up being better for coastal or near-coastal areas like California.
- CapricornNoble 5y ago
  The nuclear power + desalination plant combo seems like a no-brainer to me in particular. Even if it meant sticking them in Oregon or Washington (for reduced seismic risk) and piping the fresh water down to Cali.
  - wiredfool 5y ago
    Nope. Washington/Oregon has the same or greater seismic risk to California due to the offshore Juan de Fuca Subduction zone. Less common, but much bigger earthquakes, and generally we're overdue for one. (return period, low hundreds of years. Last one, Jan 26, 1700, magnitude 8.7-9.2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake)
  - mindslight 5y ago
    Does anyone know how the capital depreciation versus electricity cost of desalinization works out? As in, would desalinization make for a good capacity smoother (for solar/wind and the like), where the plant could produce more fresh water while electricity was abundant and then idle when it was not? Or if desalinization is done by something like reverse osmosis then perhaps storing energy as accumulated pressure, while the filter membranes worked full time. It would seem to make more sense than using lithium for grid scale batteries.
  - jandrewrogers 5y ago
    The Pacific Northwest does not have reduced seismic risk. It is prone to regular strong earthquakes, both from the subduction zone and from systems of major thrust faults that run through populated areas. Also major tsunami risk since many of the thrust faults run through large bodies of water.
LBJsPNS 5y ago
Grow your own food then.
- bombcar 5y ago
  This is a good point - Californias could start buying fruits and foods from states without water problems, and everyone could boycott California produce. This would effectively be the same as shipping water to California.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  I do have a sizeable garden, and get most of my meat / produce from local farms. I think the only thing I buy from California is pistachios.
- newaccount2021 5y ago
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > Grow your own food then You’re saying this to Iowa?
  - juve1996 5y ago
    > Iowans spend an estimated $9 billion on food each year; 90—95% of this food is imported into the state. https://www.extension.iastate.edu/ffed/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/IowaFoodandFarmFacts-2018-1.pdf https://www.extension.iastate.edu/ffed/wp-content/uploads/20...
1970-01-01 5y ago
Someone else had an interesting idea: We could set up a transcontinental pipeline to the desert, and in exchange we would receive their solar power.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  Well, first of all, most of North America already has an interconnected grid. So if CA has surplus solar generation, we already get it today. If we wanted to build a dedicated line so that only the places pumping water to CA were getting the electricity, I am skeptical that the economics work out. I'm sure CA is sunnier than the average east coast state, but enough to cancel out all transmission losses and the higher cost of operating a plant in CA?
- Kon-Peki 5y ago
  It's only interesting if you live in the west. It's not a good trade. There's plenty of solar energy potential in the midwest, along with tons of wind energy potential. We don't need your solar power.

danaris 5y ago

While I think there should absolutely be limits of some kind, if the water need in places like California could be spread out over the water table of, say, everything else west of the Mississippi, I imagine it could make a big difference to the water-poor places without running the risk of depleting the water-rich places enough for anyone to even notice. Of course, that's assuming that such a pipeline network would be practical to build and maintain. Personally, I suspect that local desalination will end up being better for coastal or near-coastal areas like California.

CapricornNoble 5y ago
The nuclear power + desalination plant combo seems like a no-brainer to me in particular. Even if it meant sticking them in Oregon or Washington (for reduced seismic risk) and piping the fresh water down to Cali.
- wiredfool 5y ago
  Nope. Washington/Oregon has the same or greater seismic risk to California due to the offshore Juan de Fuca Subduction zone. Less common, but much bigger earthquakes, and generally we're overdue for one. (return period, low hundreds of years. Last one, Jan 26, 1700, magnitude 8.7-9.2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake)
- mindslight 5y ago
  Does anyone know how the capital depreciation versus electricity cost of desalinization works out? As in, would desalinization make for a good capacity smoother (for solar/wind and the like), where the plant could produce more fresh water while electricity was abundant and then idle when it was not? Or if desalinization is done by something like reverse osmosis then perhaps storing energy as accumulated pressure, while the filter membranes worked full time. It would seem to make more sense than using lithium for grid scale batteries.
- jandrewrogers 5y ago
  The Pacific Northwest does not have reduced seismic risk. It is prone to regular strong earthquakes, both from the subduction zone and from systems of major thrust faults that run through populated areas. Also major tsunami risk since many of the thrust faults run through large bodies of water.

LBJsPNS 5y ago

Grow your own food then.

bombcar 5y ago
This is a good point - Californias could start buying fruits and foods from states without water problems, and everyone could boycott California produce. This would effectively be the same as shipping water to California.
dahfizz 5y ago
I do have a sizeable garden, and get most of my meat / produce from local farms. I think the only thing I buy from California is pistachios.
newaccount2021 5y ago
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> Grow your own food then You’re saying this to Iowa?
- juve1996 5y ago
  > Iowans spend an estimated $9 billion on food each year; 90—95% of this food is imported into the state. https://www.extension.iastate.edu/ffed/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/IowaFoodandFarmFacts-2018-1.pdf https://www.extension.iastate.edu/ffed/wp-content/uploads/20...

1970-01-01 5y ago

Someone else had an interesting idea: We could set up a transcontinental pipeline to the desert, and in exchange we would receive their solar power.

dahfizz 5y ago
Well, first of all, most of North America already has an interconnected grid. So if CA has surplus solar generation, we already get it today. If we wanted to build a dedicated line so that only the places pumping water to CA were getting the electricity, I am skeptical that the economics work out. I'm sure CA is sunnier than the average east coast state, but enough to cancel out all transmission losses and the higher cost of operating a plant in CA?
Kon-Peki 5y ago
It's only interesting if you live in the west. It's not a good trade. There's plenty of solar energy potential in the midwest, along with tons of wind energy potential. We don't need your solar power.