Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Allen" data-source="post: 50694" data-attributes="member: 389">too expensiveDesalination of water is very expensive compared to pretty much everything else.  Very energy intensive.- - - Updated - - -Costs are astronomical no matter how you shake it.  The NW water supply to California is the brainchild of William Shatthimself.  He is already trying to raise money, I think around $4 billion to give to California to make it happen.  Stranger things have happened, but given the plight of the salmon stocks that depend on the NW rivers and the highly desired nature of keeping salmon a viable commercial AND sport fishery, this ain't happening anytime soon.The other idea in your post comes from a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers idea back in the 70s or 80s.  Take water from the Great Lakes and place it into the Mississippi River, let it flow down to St. Louis (??) and then canal it out to the Colorado River to make use of the existing infrastructure for water supply to Vegas and California.  That got shelved a long, long time ago.  Fraught with environmental concerns like ANS.I will say this though, water has always moved in the direction of a decrease in head (this makes it very much unmanly).  The one thing that has been known to overcome this fundamental physical property of water is the power of money.  So in some respects, it is well known in both scientific and lay communities that it takes copious quantities of money to provide more head which in turn gets water to where you want it.We can let guywhofishes or weedy go into the details on this, if they so choose.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA