[2014] water water -not everywhere

[MULTIZ321]

Water Scarcity and the Private Sector - by The Editors/ ScientificAmerican.com

"Growing population and increasing demand for higher living standards have led to the overuse of water resources. More recently the management of watersheds has been threatened by the impacts of climate change on the water cycle. In the face of these challenges water companies and agribusinesses need to seek solutions.

The editors of Scientific American, Nature and Nature Climate Change (all part of Nature Publishing Group) have teamed up to analyze the problems posed by a drier future and explore the possible solutions..."

Credit: PhotoDisc/Getty Images \ Don Farrall

For those interested in doing additional reading on the subject.


Richard

 

[easyrider]

One huge waste of water that is usually overlooked is bottled water. It takes just less than 2 gallons of water to make each plastic bottle. In other words, it takes over 2 gallons of water to create a pint of bottled water.

When water is stored in containers of any kind it can not evaporate. When water does not evaporate in can not get back into the atmosphere. When water can not get back into the atmosphere it can not rain. When it can not rain the conditions for drought occurs.

The main reason for these current drought conditions are that the earth has been cooling for the last 20 or so years so there is less evaporation of the Pacific Ocean. This causes the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which is similar to an El Nino but lasts for decades instead of < 2 years. Basically the PDO pushes the weather systems north. Its been predicted that this current Pacific Decadal Oscillation event might last over 200 years. This has happened throughout earths history and is nothing new.

Other factors driving weather changes are magnetic pole shifts. Magnetic north is somewhere near Greenland.

There is no anthropogenic solution, imo. In other words " enjoy the ride".

Bill

 

[Passepartout]

One huge waste of water that is usually overlooked is bottled water. It takes just less than 2 gallons of water to make each plastic bottle. In other words, it takes over 2 gallons of water to create a pint of bottled water.

In other words, to produce a pint of stored water, almost 2 gallons are returned to 'the system'- 31/32nds. Not bad, actually. The earth holds a finite amount of water. It's a closed system. No new water is created, none leaves. There is exactly the same amount of water on earth as has always been here. In effect, we are drinking dinosaur pee that's been recycled a multitude of times.

The water is just in different places than it has been historically. What has been locked up in ice around the poles, is melting and rejoining the liquid state water in the oceans and in that held in suspension in the air- warmer air holds a lot more water (humidity) than colder air. Humans are pumping ground water that has taken thousands- maybe millions of years to percolate from the surface into underground aquifers. In the last hundred years, humans have reduced the amount of water- fresh water- stored underground and reintroduced it into the salt-water reservoirs (oceans) that are not going to be re-made by rain into usable fresh water.

Pogo Possum said it best: "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

Jim

 

[easyrider]

No Jim. A single plastic pint water bottle has a water footprint of about 1.85 gallons of water plus the pint used for contents. Certainly bottled water isn't the cause of the drought but it is a waste of water.

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/how-many-gallons-of-water-does-it-take-to-make.html

Individual Bottled Water
This irony shouldn't be lost on anyone: it takes 1.85 gallons of water to manufacture the plastic for the bottle in the average commercial bottle of water.

Another thing about empty plastic bottles are they are found every where. Im not sure how they escape but I have found them in the back country, on almost every shoreline I fish, floating in the rivers and oceans and on top of Mt Adams. In areas with population these bottles are all over the place.

Bill

 

[Passepartout]

Another thing about empty plastic bottles are they are found every where. Im not sure how they escape but I have found them in the back country, on almost every shoreline I fish, floating in the rivers and oceans and on top of Mt Adams. In areas with population these bottles are all over the place.

Bill

No doubt there is a huge problem with people not properly recycling water bottles, soda and beer containers and darn near everything else. But that has zero effect on a water shortage. And you missed the point also about the 2 gallons being used to make a pint bottle. It isn't lost. It doesn't go away. It may be boiled and evaporate, or go down some sewer, through a treatment plant, and empty into a river somewhere, but the thing is, it is not destroyed. The H2O of it still exists. The same as if the water that is directed to a wheat or corn or potato field, then doesn't flow out the lower end of the field. Some of it evaporates, some is used by the plants to produce their crop, and some just powers photosynthesis in the green parts. It is all a very inefficient use of the water. But in the end, that water is not destroyed. Just changed, then in time, changed back to water.

Jim

 

[laurac260]

Agriculture is not always the best use of water. Example: a vegan diet requires far less water than a diet with meat. Growing plants to feed them to animals wastes water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So we should water plants to feed humans but let the animals starve???

 

[Passepartout]

So we should water plants to feed humans but let the animals starve???

Not at all. There are lots of plant parts that animals eat that humans do not. For instance the silage left over from the corn crop. Potato and sugar beet tops, The straw left over from wheat production gets plowed back in for soil enrichment and/or is used for animal bedding. There are lots of byproducts from the production of human food that benefit animals and other plants. Like the leftovers from fishing as plant fertilizer which in turn is fed to animal crops.

 

[VegasBella]

So we should water plants to feed humans but let the animals starve???

Yes exactly. We simply MUST eat water-intensive, environmentally-destructive factory farmed animal parts because otherwise they'd starve to death. Forget a more efficient, environmentally-friendly vegan (or nearly vegan) diet!

/sarcasm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SMHarman]

So we should water plants to feed humans but let the animals starve???

What animals? CAFOs are an environmental disaster. Humans heat too much meat protein.

Certainly glad we are keeping river water levels up to protect the fish.

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

 

[easyrider]

No doubt there is a huge problem with people not properly recycling water bottles, soda and beer containers and darn near everything else. But that has zero effect on a water shortage. And you missed the point also about the 2 gallons being used to make a pint bottle. It isn't lost. It doesn't go away. It may be boiled and evaporate, or go down some sewer, through a treatment plant, and empty into a river somewhere, but the thing is, it is not destroyed. The H2O of it still exists. The same as if the water that is directed to a wheat or corn or potato field, then doesn't flow out the lower end of the field. Some of it evaporates, some is used by the plants to produce their crop, and some just powers photosynthesis in the green parts. It is all a very inefficient use of the water. But in the end, that water is not destroyed. Just changed, then in time, changed back to water.

Jim

Jim, how long does this take and where does the water go ?

About 97% of water is salt water leaving 3% as fresh water. Within that 3% of fresh water over 70% of it is frozen. So there are limits on fresh water. Once contaminated it is no longer fresh. Fresh water has a shelf life.

Also, your examples of fresh water in natural hydrologic cycles as recycling doesn't consider a timeline.

Bill

 

[Passepartout]

Jim, how long does this take and where does the water go ?

About 97% of water is salt water leaving 3% as fresh water. Within that 3% of fresh water over 70% of it is frozen. So there are limits on fresh water. Once contaminated it is no longer fresh. Fresh water has a shelf life.

Also, your examples of fresh water in natural hydrologic cycles as recycling doesn't consider a timeline.

I never said it was quick. Only that the water is in a constant state of change. From salty seas that evaporate as vapor in the form of humidity, to clouds to fresh rain/snow to land/reservoirs/aquifers/polar ice fields/plant and animal (including us) life, and returned ultimately to the sea. Yes, it takes time. And as you accurately (I think) say, the vast majority of it is salty. Fresh water is more finite, but still, the earth DOES automatically de-salinate and return it to us as fresh. As humankind has learned to extract water from the depths, humankind, when faced with need, will be able to help nature out with the de-salination. Our future children's children's children and beyond will have to.

 

[Tia]

I have read in Colorado, not followed closely, the eastern slope (Denver side of the Rocky Mountains) has been trying to get legislation passed that gives them western slope water shed areas and divert it back towards the Denver direction.

People need to conserve but that message isn't being given out nor considered. Our area local codes require ( or just allow) green grass/trees to be planted in the dessert. You see the city watering grass at times when most of it evaporates...

 

[pgnewarkboy]

One huge waste of water that is usually overlooked is bottled water. It takes just less than 2 gallons of water to make each plastic bottle. In other words, it takes over 2 gallons of water to create a pint of bottled water.

When water is stored in containers of any kind it can not evaporate. When water does not evaporate in can not get back into the atmosphere. When water can not get back into the atmosphere it can not rain. When it can not rain the conditions for drought occurs.

The main reason for these current drought conditions are that the earth has been cooling for the last 20 or so years so there is less evaporation of the Pacific Ocean. This causes the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which is similar to an El Nino but lasts for decades instead of < 2 years. Basically the PDO pushes the weather systems north. Its been predicted that this current Pacific Decadal Oscillation event might last over 200 years. This has happened throughout earths history and is nothing new.

Other factors driving weather changes are magnetic pole shifts. Magnetic north is somewhere near Greenland.

There is no anthropogenic solution, imo. In other words " enjoy the ride".

Bill

the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is calculated by subtracting the average global ocean temperature from the average North Pacific temperature (JISAO). The difference is labeled "Pacific Decadal Oscillation" and gives us whether the North Pacific is warm or cold relative to the global ocean average and by how much in degrees Celsius It says nothing about whether or not the global average is warming or cooling or even if the North Pacific is warming or cooling overall. It just gives whether or not the North Pacific is warmer than the global average or cooler than the global average.

BTW, the earth has most definitely been warming -not cooling. It is an easily determined and widely known fact -like the earth circles the sun is a fact.

 

[easyrider]

This is not any type of political statement. Im not going to argue climate change with you.

Very simply put, when the ocean surface cools there is less evaporation. When there is less evaporation in the ocean there is less rainfall on land. Evaporation also drives ocean currents. When ocean currents slow they shift causing atmospheric pressure. This atmospheric pressure causes weather to move around the area of pressure.

Occasionally in earths history the ocean surface stays cool for decades. This causes droughts.

Recent articles I have read suggests that the Pacific Ocean surface water has cooled causing the PDO that is causing the drought.

http://www.livescience.com/38099-southwest-drought-linked-ocean-temperature.html

The two cycles, called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), flip back and forth between boosting rainfall and causing drought in the Southwest, among other effects felt throughout the continent.

Pacific Decadal OscillationPin It The Pacific Decadal Oscillation forms a cooler horseshoe of water in the northeastern Pacific Ocean to the tropics.

Only discovered in the past two decades, these climate patterns have caused periodic, long-term Southwest drought going back more than 1,000 years, according to tree-ring records. More than half (52 percent) of the long-term drought in the lower 48 states can be attributed to the PDO and the AMO, according to a 2004 study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783

Despite no global warming in 10 years and recording setting cold in 2007-2008

The sun actually heats the earth. Really. The sun is getting quiet. The trend has been cooling for the last decade or two. This article is a good explanation of what the sun is doing.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedo...ning-into-grand-minimum-says-solar-physicist/

Your comment of the earths orbit is interesting. Many people still think the sun orbits the earth, something like 25 - 30 %. I take it your in the group that thinks the earth orbits the sun, as am I.

Bill

 

[pgnewarkboy]

T"he sun actually heats the earth. Really. The sun is getting quiet. The trend has been cooling for the last decade or two. This article is a good explanation of what the sun is doing. "


But the earth is not cooling. The carbon and methane that is in the air is still in the air. It is still trapping the heat of the sun. That is an anthropological cause for warming. Once again, a proven fact. The oceans are not reflecting heat back , they are absorbing the heat. That is the reason the glaciers are melting. The glaciers are melting because the earth is warmer. If the earth was cooling the glaciers would not be melting all over the world. The rate of warming may change because of solar activity but the warming continues. It is simply physics.

From your link to the FORBES ARTICE by the astrophysicist dealing with Sun activity.

"Although the rise of global temperatures seen in “the last decade or so seems to have currently leveled off,” says Hathaway, he notes that even a Maunder Minimum would still not be enough to counter the warming effects of anthropogenic climate change.

If anything, a Maunder Minimum may simply make existing weather and short term climate even more unusual and difficult to predict."

 

[easyrider]

Who knows for sure. Things I do know are that the nuclear bomb testing caused ozone layer depletion. Other chemical reactions deplete ozone as well.

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects22.shtml

When a nuclear weapon explodes in the air, the surrounding air is subjected to great heat, followed by relatively rapid cooling. These conditions are ideal for the production of tremendous amounts of nitric oxides. These oxides are carried into the upper atmosphere, where they reduce the concentration of protective ozone.

The nitric oxides produced by the weapons could reduce the ozone levels in the Northern Hemisphere by as much as 30 to 70 percent.

The EPA list of ozone killers. If you look you won't see co2. Co2 doesn't affect the ozone layer.

http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/science/ods/classone.html

As the magnetosphere get weak magnetic north and south shift. These areas have ozone depletion or ozone holes. This lets uva radiation heat the earth. The magnetosphere protects the earth from solar radiation which includes uv rays from the sun. Interestingly, co2 blocks uv radiation. UVA radiation also has a way of melting ice deeper than uvb or uvc. The melt can occur under the ice as noticed on the Greenland ice sheet.

http://ecowatch.com/2012/11/12/greenlands-rare-earth-metals/

Magnetic north is now west of Greenland in northern Canada.

Green houses gasses trap heat. Green house gases absorb and reflect uv radiation. UV radiation is the heat source. Its a paradoxical situation, imo.

Bill

 

[pgnewarkboy]

Who knows for sure. Things I do know are that the nuclear bomb testing caused ozone layer depletion. Other chemical reactions deplete ozone as well.

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects22.shtml





The EPA list of ozone killers. If you look you won't see co2. Co2 doesn't affect the ozone layer.

http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/science/ods/classone.html

As the magnetosphere get weak magnetic north and south shift. These areas have ozone depletion or ozone holes. This lets uva radiation heat the earth. The magnetosphere protects the earth from solar radiation which includes uv rays from the sun. Interestingly, co2 blocks uv radiation. UVA radiation also has a way of melting ice deeper than uvb or uvc. The melt can occur under the ice as noticed on the Greenland ice sheet.

http://ecowatch.com/2012/11/12/greenlands-rare-earth-metals/

Magnetic north is now west of Greenland in northern Canada.

Green houses gasses trap heat. Green house gases absorb and reflect uv radiation. UV radiation is the heat source. Its a paradoxical situation, imo.

Bill

Neither of the links you have above, ecowatch, or epa.gov state, or hint, or discuss or support your statement that "As the magnetosphere get weak magnetic north and south shift. These areas have ozone depletion or ozone holes. This lets uva radiation heat the earth. The magnetosphere protects the earth from solar radiation which includes uv rays from the sun. Interestingly, co2 blocks uv radiation. UVA radiation also has a way of melting ice deeper than uvb or uvc. The melt can occur under the ice as noticed on the Greenland ice sheet." You are claiming that the glacier melts can be caused by ozone depletion. That statement is yours alone. Your links simply do not make this claim...One is simply a table from the EPA and the other is an article on the riches to be found as the glaciers melt.

 

[easyrider]

Here is a bit on the geomagnetism regarding earth.

https://www.boundless.com/physics/magnetism/magnetism-and-magnetic-fields/geomagnetism/

Earth is largely protected from the solar wind, a stream of energetic charged particles emanating from the sun, by its magnetic field, which deflects most of the charged particles. These particles would strip away the ozone layer, which protects Earth from harmful ultraviolet rays. The region above the ionosphere, and extending several tens of thousands of kilometers into space, is called the magnetosphere. This region protects Earth from cosmic rays that would strip away the upper atmosphere, including the ozone layer that protects our planet from harmful ultraviolet radiation.

At present, the overall geomagnetic field is becoming weaker; the present strong deterioration corresponds to a 10 to 15 percent decline over the last 150 years and has accelerated in the past several years. Geomagnetic intensity has declined almost continuously from a maximum 35 percent above the modern value achieved approximately 2,000 years ago. Earth's magnetic North Pole is drifting from northern Canada toward Siberia with a presently accelerating rate—10 km per year at the beginning of the 20th century, up to 40 km per year in 2003, and since then has only accelerated.

This is interesting as well. Its about how uva radiation melts ice and the resulting release of co2.

http://www.nanowerk.com/news2/green/newsid=28968.php

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ase-co2-faster-than-thought.html#.U2KSEFVdX8N

To me, Towsey's paper on warming makes more sense than IPPC climate models.
In nature, results are based on a wide range of factors that can't be replicated by a climate model. For instance, over simplified, I would say that as the magnetism of the earth decreases the ozone layer depletes. When the ozone layer is depleted or missing more uva radiation warms earth. In response to the warming the earth releases co2. Because of the release of co2 the earth is able to reflect and absorb a percentage of uva radiation. The result of the extra co2 is a cooler stratosphere and a warmer toposphere. A cooler stratosphere creates conditions for polar stratospheric clouds which create conditions for ozone depletion. Occasionally this stratospheric cooling changes weather like with the recent winters polar vortex.

Towsey's paper
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/evidence-towsey.pdf

Article explaing that there has been no warming on earth for about 18 years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/05/no-global-warming-for-17-years-8-months/
Bill

 

[pgnewarkboy]

Here is a bit on the geomagnetism regarding earth.

https://www.boundless.com/physics/magnetism/magnetism-and-magnetic-fields/geomagnetism/





This is interesting as well. Its about how uva radiation melts ice and the resulting release of co2.

http://www.nanowerk.com/news2/green/newsid=28968.php

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ase-co2-faster-than-thought.html#.U2KSEFVdX8N

To me, Towsey's paper on warming makes more sense than IPPC climate models.
In nature, results are based on a wide range of factors that can't be replicated by a climate model. For instance, over simplified, I would say that as the magnetism of the earth decreases the ozone layer depletes. When the ozone layer is depleted or missing more uva radiation warms earth. In response to the warming the earth releases co2. Because of the release of co2 the earth is able to reflect and absorb a percentage of uva radiation. The result of the extra co2 is a cooler stratosphere and a warmer toposphere. A cooler stratosphere creates conditions for polar stratospheric clouds which create conditions for ozone depletion. Occasionally this stratospheric cooling changes weather like with the recent winters polar vortex.

Towsey's paper
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/evidence-towsey.pdf

Article explaing that there has been no warming on earth for about 18 years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/05/no-global-warming-for-17-years-8-months/
Bill

Your first two links in no way support your thesis. I read the towsey paper. Towsey is a geologist who is interested in mining gold. He is not a climatologist and basically stands almost alone in his positions.

"The European Federation of Geologists says climate change is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and poses significant risks to human civilisation. The Geological Society of America concurs that “greenhouse gases have been an increasingly important contributor [to global warming] since the mid-1800s and the major factor since the mid-1900s”. The Geological Society of London states that “evidence from the geological record is consistent with the physics that shows that adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms the world and may lead to: higher sea levels and flooding of low-lying coasts; greatly changed patterns of rainfall; increased acidity of the oceans; and decreased oxygen levels in seawater”.

So climate scepticism seems strongest among geologists closely linked to the mining and fossil fuel industries. Perhaps the words of Upton Sinclair shine some understanding on the forces at play here: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

 

[easyrider]

Where does all of this co2 come from ? Natural co2 emissions equals over 780 gigatons while anthropogenic emissions equal less than 29 gigatons.

Towsey has a masters degree in science, bachelors degree in science with honors, diploma of education and is certified by the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. His disciplines include geology but he is also a renown climate scientist.

Why are natural green house gas emissions increasing and anthropogenic green house gas emissions plateauing ? Could it be the correlation is diminished ozone layer and u.v.a. radiation heating earth causing the release of co2 and ch4 into the atmosphere ? While the focus is on co2, ch4 is far worse a green house gas.

Sorry, went a bit off track about the drought in the USA. From what I have read its going to be dry for long time. Research it your self. I can't explain it any better than I attempted. Its really interesting reading especially when you read differing opinions. good luck

Bill

 

[pgnewarkboy]

time to jump off this ship that is going nowhere.

 

[easyrider]

time to jump off this ship that is going nowhere.

Is your ship grounded because of the drought ? My buddy has a similar problem. Wanapum Dam cracked so the reservoir was dropped 26 ft.

https://www.wenatcheeworld.com/photos/galleries/2014/mar/03/wanapum-drawdown/#/0

 

[Tia]

Is your ship grounded because of the drought ? ]

 

[easyrider]

time to jump off this ship that is going nowhere.

Ok, honestly how can anyone really predict how long the drought will last. My problem with ICPP models is the lack of consideration given to factors such as magnetism, Milankovitch cycles, solar influences and earths rotational speed.

http://www.sciencecourseware.org/eec/GlobalWarming/Tutorials/Milankovitch/

The rotation of the earth does change. The axis does shift. Consider the shifts caused by some of the recent big earthquakes. These quakes caused axial shifts and change earths tilt causing a slower rotation. Besides earthquakes, changes in fluids in earths mantle and core cause weight to be redistributed can cause axial tilt changes.

Im not sure how it works but I have depended on the farmers almanac for years to plan trips. Last year I decided not to purchase a different snowmobile based off info in these pages.

http://www.almanac.com/weather/longrange/CA/Los+Angeles

Bill

 

[MULTIZ321]

What is Water Worth? - by Brian Dumaine/ Senior Editor-at-Large/ Tech/ CNNMoney/ Fortune/cnn.com

"Farmland is parched. Companies are worried. The global demand for water will soon outstrip supply. What's the solution? Simple, say some business leaders and economists: Make people pay more for the most precious commodity on earth..."

Richard