American Wildfires

xtsho

xtsho

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Surprising they're pumping the salt back into the ocean. That's something they probably won't be able to continue doing very long if they build a bunch more plants down there.
Click to expand...
That can't be good for the marine environment in that area. In a rush to solve one problem it's more than likely other problems are going to be created. The amount of water that plant creates in a day could be replaced with water conservation measures that should have already been implemented The solution isn't spending money. It's using water more wisely and better land use planning.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
xtsho said:
That can't be good for the marine environment in that area. In a rush to solve one problem it's more than likely other problems are going to be created. The amount of water that plant creates in a day could be replaced with water conservation measures that should have already been implemented The solution isn't spending money. It's using water more wisely and better land use planning.
Click to expand...
Word. Maybe fine with just the one, but as they said, it feeds 1/10th of SD county. Still the other 9/10ths and the other counties. It could go from a minor problem to a major one. Part of the problem is that Americans don't like to be told "no", which is something growers have been dealing with since forever. Some of the ways I'd like to see people told "no" is...

No new-build permits in counties that have been in drought at anytime in the past ten years.

No golf courses in the entire state.

No commercial farming of any kind in arid, semi-arid, and desert regions.

No commercial nut farming in the entire state.

No commercial beef farming in the entire state.

No more than X acres of alfalfa/hay farming in the entire state and no more than X acres per entity.

No agriculture products may be sold outside of the US.

No taxpayer funded insurance/subsidies of any kind.
 
smokinrav

smokinrav

Well-Known Member
Hmmmmm....brine. Didn't I just read something silly about pumping ocean water to the Salton Sea to revive its briney water levels? Yet brine is a byproduct of desalination. Something in the math I'm missing....hmmmm
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Still legal to dump all sorts of trash in the ocean per US law, as long as it's 12 miles out. If you had people eating dinner at a table, you could likely just grab the tablecloth with all the contents of the table and just throw that shit right in the ocean and legislators are like, "yep, can't see it from my house".
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
xtsho said:
www.npr.org

New Wildfires Are At A 10-Year High In The Hot, Dry Western U.S.

Federal officials warn of a long, potentially dangerous summer of fire. Since January, more than a million acres have burned from more than 28,000 wildfires.
www.npr.org www.npr.org
Click to expand...
I was about to brag about how much hotter it is elsewhere but, no, Oregon's mid 90's at the moment is pretty much in step with most of the south and west.

1624306901443.png

I feel cheated.

It's going to be a bad wildfire season. It is already.
 
Funkentelechy

Funkentelechy

Well-Known Member
Funkentelechy said:
There is no practical way even if we had infinite amounts of desalinized water to water all the forests of the west, so that they were properly moist, ahead of fire season. There is no way to distribute the water to all of those areas on a regular enough basis to address fire danger, it has to happen in the form of snow and rain. Fires are happening due to a lack of precipitation.
Click to expand...
hanimmal said: "I am willing to say without question that the water needs are not infinite, and would be extremely calculable."" I think what you are describing is incredibly wasteful and something like a drip line system that people can operate."
"The beauty of math and computer modeling is that would be needed to set up a good model to figured out from back to front."


Calculating how much water is needed is the easy part, that's not the challenge. What I'm saying is that you can not use drip line to water the forests of the west. A computer model will not help you physically run drip line across an area that is so vast, the plastic alone would make it an environmental disaster, not to mention the CO2 produced to pump that volume of water over that much land, even if it were possible which it's not.

After the disaster that occurred in Paradise California https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/camp-fire-by-the-numbers/ where 85 people lost their lives, President Trump visited the area where he then referred to the town as "pleasure" instead of Paradise,(I mean 85 people were burned alive there, why bother getting the name correct right?) and said that we need to "rake the forest", "like Finland". This comment was met with disbelief and general mockery from Americans and Fins, as well as confusing the president of Finland as they do not rake their forests.
Now to be fair, leaves, needles, and general forest duff is very flammable, and raking it up and disposing of it eliminates that potential for fire danger in the area that it has been raked from, we should all be raking around our properties, but the reason Trump's comments were mocked is that his comments were completely tone-deaf due to a total lack of understanding of the vastness of the area he was proposing should be raked. It's simply not possible to rake the west, it's way, way, too big.
Proposing to water the forest is, in a similar vein, tone-deaf. It is not possible, computer modeling has nothing to do with the non-viability of this idea.
Sorry(truly) not trying to compare your ideas with Trump in any way, just an interesting example of when someone has an idea based on a good concept but not enough info to know that it is literally not possible to apply this concept in actionable form.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top