• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

National water pipeline project

Mircea said:
Oregon does not have a "surplus." The rivers support ecosystems, which you are apparently willing to destroy to feed your own greed. If California needs water, then it needs to ration water until it can build enough desalinization plants to meet current and future needs.
Click to expand...
I randomly picked oregon for no particular reason. If tjey dont have excess water they obviously would not be sharing any.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
I randomly picked oregon for no particular reason. If tjey dont have excess water they obviously would not be sharing any.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Put a pump at the mouth of the Columbia. Could probably fix a lot problems that way.
 
trouble13 said:
With all the recent talk about infrastructure, there's one thing I never hear anyone discuss. Ways to combat the effects of droughts. I would like to see a national pipeline put in place that connects all our resiviors. This way if say Oregon has so much water in its resiviors that they are actually opening damn to divert it into stream it could instead be sent into a pipeline that could carry it to places that have low resiviors.

Just curious what you all see as the pros and cons to my idea

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

States control water rights that are owned by corporations, govt agencies and individuals. Water is a precious commodity. In order to shift water form one state to another is an extremely proposition. Colorado and California have been fighting over water from the Colorado River for decades. The federal govt made a huge power grab to try to control water rights that states should control. There is no way that this can be done without states working together. In order to do that they ahve to get buy in from businesses like breweries, ski resorts, ranchers, farmers and any other owner of water rights. Ain't gonna happen and it shouldn't.
 
camlok said:
You fail to mention how the USA has for years stolen Mexican water in its usual overbearing, exceedingly greedy manner.

"... the mighty Colorado River ... rarely reaches the sea".

Where the Colorado River Runs Dry - The New York Times
Click to expand...

How do they do this? Do they send big trucks to Mexico in the middle of the night with guys dressed like ninjas and **** with black bandanas? I think that is the dumbest post I have seen all week.
 
States are more than possessive about their rivers, etc. So, I can't see much cooperation on water, unless it flows through multiple states. One of the big bottling companies wanted to bottle Colombia gorge Spring water. The locals had a hissy-fit. It might have been Nestle.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I have a well too. Nothing like a cold drink of well water in the summer.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. I drank from our well at the truck when the driller hit 230ft.
 
Mircea said:
How does it feel to want?

Not gonna happen.

If California needs water, they need to build desalinization plants, instead of taking water from others.
Click to expand...

California built a desalinization plant, got a lawsuit and had to shut it down for a several months. Of course with that sort of plant you cant just shut it down without serious engineering issues. It will now cost more to make the plant operable again than it would to build a new one. California solutions, hard at work.
 
NonoBadDog said:
How do they do this? Do they send big trucks to Mexico in the middle of the night with guys dressed like ninjas and **** with black bandanas? I think that is the dumbest post I have seen all week.
Click to expand...

You really have to have at least a basic understanding of these things before you get involved in discussions on them.
 
camlok said:
You really have to have at least a basic understanding of these things before you get involved in discussions on them.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I just thought I would comment the intelligence your post deserved. Your post was idiotic. It's not surprising that I would have to explain the gist of my post to you.
 
chuckiechan said:
The fact that the globe shows California downhill from Oregon oversimplifies the problem. It’s energy intensive to pump over the mountains.

It’s an engineering challenge as well as a social one.
Click to expand...

The basic engineering is done in the 60's.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The basic engineering is done in the 60's.
Click to expand...

Northern California doesn't need the water, so you need to keep pushing the water south through the Sacramento valley where most if it will be lost to evaporation in the summer.

Can you get your hands on some maps or research or explanations of how they planned to do it. Pour it into Lake Shasta and down the Sacrament river to the delta and south from there? I'd be interested to take a look at it. BTW, the Sites Reservoir still hasn't started and it was first planned thirty years ago but our anti growth government won't all permits.

https://www.sitesproject.org/

So exactly what happens to the water when it crosses the border!? I thing plumbing from the Mississippi to the Colorado river would be a good idea. Send it straight to LA and stop sucking northern California dry!
 
NonoBadDog said:
Yeah. I just thought I would comment the intelligence your post deserved. Your post was idiotic. It's not surprising that I would have to explain the gist of my post to you.
Click to expand...

You haven't explained anything in this badly worded post of yours, or in your first one.

As I mentioned one really has to have at least a basic understanding of these things before they get involved in discussions on them.
 
Saskatoon has a population of just over 250,000. We get our water from the South Saskatchewan River which flows from the Rocky Mountains. The City Council is all excited about the prospect of our population growing to 500,000 in the next few decades. Funny thing is, the glaciers that feed the river are rapidly disappearing. What are all these people going to drink?
 
trouble13 said:
With all the recent talk about infrastructure, there's one thing I never hear anyone discuss. Ways to combat the effects of droughts. I would like to see a national pipeline put in place that connects all our resiviors (sic). This way if say Oregon has so much water in its resiviors (sic) that they are actually opening damn to divert it into stream it could instead be sent into a pipeline that could carry it to places that have low resiviors (sic).

Just curious what you all see as the pros and cons to my idea
Click to expand...
Typically, water pipelines -- such as the ones that feed New York City, run from high elevation reservoirs. I would suspect that if reservoirs "A" is higher than reservoirs "B" water can be sent from A to B, but not the other way without pumps. Since water weighs 8 lbs per gallon, that's a lot of energy needed to ship water.

Moreover, please note the correct way to spell "reservoirs."
 
MTAtech said:
Typically, water pipelines -- such as the ones that feed New York City, run from high elevation reservoirs. I would suspect that if reservoirs "A" is higher than reservoirs "B" water can be sent from A to B, but not the other way without pumps. Since water weighs 8 lbs per gallon, that's a lot of energy needed to ship water.

Moreover, please note the correct way to spell "reservoirs."
Click to expand...

This is just for you.

 
MTAtech said:
Typically, water pipelines -- such as the ones that feed New York City, run from high elevation reservoirs. I would suspect that if reservoirs "A" is higher than reservoirs "B" water can be sent from A to B, but not the other way without pumps. Since water weighs 8 lbs per gallon, that's a lot of energy needed to ship water.

Moreover, please note the correct way to spell "reservoirs."
Click to expand...
Water towers provide pressure not pumps. It's just a matter of opening and closing valves
https://goo.gl/images/1ADxrP


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
camlok said:
You haven't explained anything in this badly worded post of yours, or in your first one.

As I mentioned one really has to have at least a basic understanding of these things before they get involved in discussions on them.
Click to expand...

See post 30.
 
PirateMk1 said:
This is just for you.

[video=youtube_share;8Gv0H-vPoDc]https://youtu.be/8Gv0H-vPoD
Click to expand...

Most of Al's errors are only teaching errors. The stuff that Americans are taught is English grammar is mostly all silly prescriptions, aka goofy rules, that are not part of the English language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom