The terribly small volume of water on Earth

toxcrusadr said:
Interesting concept, the water footprint. Except that 'using' that water to produce whatever the product is, does not necessarily mean it goes out IN the product.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Most of the water used for production will not leave the country, but it is unavailable for the natural water cycle. If a company recycles its own water, it doesn't return in the cycle. If the production numbers grow, more water is needed. And with ever sold (and exported) product some water will leave the country.
If the company drains the water it has used for production (hopefully after some purification) they have to take in 'new' water to keep on producing, so the netto amount of water not available for other uses is more or less the same as with a company that recycles water.

Not to mention countries where companies use water and just dump the polluted water into rivers, lakes etc., making the 'clean' water impossible to use without some expensive and difficult purification (Yangtze river, China for example).

Of you wanna know more about the water footprint, see http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/home .
 
Mark W. said:
There's not a fresh water storage. There never has been. What there is is a over population problem.

TOO MANY PEOPLE IS THE PROBLEM
Click to expand...

Actually any decent HydroGeologist will tell you that's there is plenty of water. Retention and distribution may be a problem, as well as political difficulties...
Perhaps the answer would be something along the lines of a "Hydraulic Civilization" that Dr. Karl Wittfogel depicts in his famous book Oriental Despotism (1957).
 
Last edited:
nitrous said:
Yes, according to many contemporary astrophysicists, water on Earth arrived here from the numerous collisions of protoplanets & comets with the early forming Earth.
Click to expand...

All that stuff is balony!

Actually, the truth is that I just brought the water with me, when I was assigned to this Planet.
:yes: :no: :scratch2:
 
TerryO said:
Actually any decent HydroGeologist will tell you that's there is plenty of water. Retention and distribution may be a problem, as well as political difficulties...
Perhaps the answer would be something along the lines of a "Hydraulic Civilization" that Dr. Karl Wittfogel depicts in his famous book Oriental Despotism (1957).
Click to expand...

That is my understanding. If you live in New Orleans or Seattle, water is in abundance. Arizona or New Mexico, not so much. There is no natural distribution of water that is rational. Which is why we have deserts, rain forests, etc. The people of Egypt wish they had the problems of Bangla Desh. Or is it the other way around?

It is like saying the USA is overpopulated and crowded. It is, if you live in New York City. Drive the length of just New York State, however, and you see a lot of space.

This was good reading:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-water/2012/04/06/gIQAS6EB0S_story.html
 
sKiZo said:
Those are some big balls ...

Somebody mentioned underground rivers. I recently read that the great minds really haven't a clue how much potable water actually exists. Much of it is either in vast aquifers or underground river systems.

A hydrologist at the state university once told me my water starts out in Scotland ... so excuse me, but I'm gonna go drink me a couple liters of scotch and then spin some vinyls.
Click to expand...

IMHO there are not nearly as many 'underground rivers' as people think. They are actually fairly rare, and represent only a tiny fraction of subsurface fresh water. My theory is that most people don't really understand the movement of groundwater and what makes it 'go'. Whether a river is above or underground, it has to flow downhill, and there are only a few places where the conditions of water supply, changing elevation, rock types, etc. are right for it. Most groundwater percolates slowly through soil or rock.

The Scotland thing has me stumped. There is really no way for fresh water to get from Scotland to Michigan without going up into the atmosphere first. But if the guy was a hydrologist he would know that, so I have no idea what he's talking about. :scratch2:
 
+1 on Tox's statement. I was in email contact earlier today with my HS buddy who is a hydrogeologist about all of this- his job is to find water for individuals, corporations, communities, etc. His experience and opinion is that there are some large volume or high-flow subterranean water bodies, but not in the quantity that many people want to think. It's not middle earth!
 
I don't put much weight on what the average hydrologist says either ... just mentioning what I've heard and passing it on. That's what the innernet is for anyway, passing unsubstantiated rumour. So, like ... pass it on. :D

Don't even get me started on "corporate" hydrologists. We fought the good fight up here with a major development across the way. 600 prime acres from a farm going up for sale. After shooting them down on four residential plans, they threatened us with a sewer works or a chicken farm, so we knew it was time to reconsider. The final plan was for about 300 houses in a PUD (planned urban development) with centralized sewer and water and one tiny little retention pond. I was fortunate enough to have some pics of half that area flooded out some years before.

So where do the hydrologists come in? They also planned an earth berm along the entire length of the road to stop water from flowing south - my way. Once again, drag out the pics, this time of my seasonal whitewater river going thru the back forty heading NORTH, and come to find out, they had half the county flowing backwards. So, they were basically pulling numbers out of their collective behinds to support their side.

Final result - one humongous retention pond by the road (there's 15 foot trees growing in it now, and they're just barely starting to peek out the top) and the closest home is about 600 feet. Score one for the little guys! The berm was still built - a contract for the work had already been let - and either they couldn't or forgot to stop it - but they ended up punching it full of trenches. Maybe they'll try to pass them off as Indian burial grounds. <G>

So, yes ... don't take the Scotland to Michigan thing as gospel, but he did have some compelling arguments ... things like the water getting a big squeeze from the Pyrennes and a jet boost from all the volcanic activity as it meandered under Greenland. Then again we were fairly wasted at the time ...

Anyway - the jury's still out on exactly how extensive any underground water reserves are. For one, we've never really made a concerted effort to determine this (Russia is the only country really pushing, and they're just getting started) AND we just don't have the technology to get consistent accurate results for any "in depth" mapping as yet. I've also seen recently (Discovery Channel I think) where some estimate the fresh water reserves UNDER the oceans to exceed the volume of the oceans themselves ...

Getting a bit dry here ... time for another couple liters of Scotch.
 
Last edited:
Good job on the development project man!

As for Scotland...OK, I'm prepared to acknowledge that VERY deep water may do some interesting things. However, your typical public water supply (if it's not coming out of a river or reserviir) is going to be from wells a few hundred or a thousand or so feet deep, and is most likely going to be recharged from the same general geographic area. Michigan will be full of 1) nice lakes and 2) shallow gravel and sand glacial deposits, both of which would be great for water supplies. I could be wrong, but I doubt your water is welling up from some aquifer connected to Iceland, etc. Interesting topic though and I'd love to have a Scotch with you guys and hear more about it.
 
toxcrusadr said:
However, your typical public water supply (if it's not coming out of a river or reserviir) is going to be from wells a few hundred or a thousand or so feet deep, and is most likely going to be recharged from the same general geographic area.
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary in many cases. My son lives in an area that runs from 400-675 feet above sea level. To hit water for a domestic well, you have to drill apprx. 700'.

If you drive 19 miles East to an elevation of just over 1000', you hit water at 200'.

Water can easily flow uphill as long as the strata is fed by a source that has a higher elevation.
 
I would agree with that, it's all about the groundwater gradient. By 'local recharge' I just meant more local than, say, another continent.

An additional complicating factor in drilling a well is finding a stratum that with quality and enough volume to use. You may be able to find water at 15 ft. but it's not usable for one reason or another. So in a situation like you described (not necessarily yours because I don't know anything about it), the difference in required drilling depths can be about rock stratigraphy as much as elevation.

But I digress into geeky groundwater stuff. :D
 
Michigan also has the advantage of being surrounded by some fairly large bodies of water that leak like sieves ...

My drinkin' well is a 4"er at about 120 feet. Could have settled for about 80 feet, but figured what's one more table. I've also got a stab well that supplies the gardens, pond, and irrigation that's only at around 25 feet. Plenty water at that level, but lots of nitrates. Don't need no expert to tell me that 600 acres of centennial farm maybe had something to do with that. Tastes fine, and the nitrates are only a problem for growing bones.

<insert viagra joke here>

Depends where you're at I expect. We got plenty of water here - at least till Nestle gets done pumping us dry. Their Ice Mountain bottled water plants have already sucked a bunch of streams dry if we're to believe the hydrologist working for the "concerned citizens" of the area. Then again, Nestle's legions of hydrologists suggest minimum impact, having a maximum impact on the case FOR keeping the pumps running.
 
Scientists/physicists once said that the human body couldn't withstand speeds higher that 193 mph.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom