Originally posted by Eladar We would be moving waters from West of the Continental divide to the Southwest. Compare the volume of wayer flowing into the oceans to the size of the desert. Eaters on the Eastern side of the Rockies could be used to irrigate fields and water livestick and supply water for people. This would also lessen our need to deplete aquifers.
Of course the same id ...[text shortened]... used in other countries around the world. Perhaps we could actually start to refill the Aral Sea
And what source of energy do you propose using to move all that water?
And will you pay for the construction costs and energy costs with your taxes?
Originally posted by twhitehead Unless you bury it very deep, it will decay all the same. Fossil fuels form in the deep oceans and in swamps. They do not form in most other places.
[b]Think outside the box. Every little bit helps. No, delusional thinking usually does not help.[/b]
We have plenty of deep abandoned mines where the stuff can be put.
Originally posted by humy no, not specific enough; Apparently you cannot follow the conversation. I responded to;
Originally posted by Eladar
How do you think the carbon made its way [b]underground
to begin with? It was originally plant material.
from the word "underground" above he was CLEARLY talking about fossil fuels and not the more generic "pla ...[text shortened]... rring to in his above comment in such a way as to include the carbon in currently LIVING plants?[/b]Looks like you got schooled.
Again.
It's really no use talking to you, it seems.
You're dishonest, willing to twist and contort other people's words or data in order to try to make your point instead of simply following the truth regardless of its final destination.
Best of luck.
Originally posted by Eladar Why not use cheap renewables?
one day (and perhaps not too far into the future) we would surely have no shortage of cheap renewables but right now we don't have anything like the vast amounts of cheap renewables to use to shift all that water for what you are proposing which would be unlikely to result in any benefit and probably cause an environmental disaster of biblical proportions for the reasons I already explained.
Originally posted by Eladar We have plenty of deep abandoned mines where the stuff can be put.
so you think if, with the vast cost required, all the river water and well water was used to water all the dry land of the Earth that people would of course all naturally rush to, and with an astonishing combination of extreme altruism and long-term foresight never seen before amongst humans, spend huge amounts of personal time labor and cost and collectively spend trillions of dollars in the process with no profit in return to grow vast amounts of plant material suitable for carbon burial and then harvest all of it and then transport it all and ram it deep into abandoned mines? Which planet have you been on?
Originally posted by Eladar We have plenty of deep abandoned mines where the stuff can be put.
So, your proposal is to bury millions of tons of plant matter in mines? Not only are you 'thinking outside the box', but your mind has left sanity behind altogether.
Originally posted by Mammy Blue Is this enough water for you?
http://www.newsweek.com/larsen-c-iceberg-ice-shelf-antarctica-635428
Let's see. How many BTUs does it take to melt a trillion tons of ice into useable water? So about 144 BTU to melt one pound of ice and that iceberg is about 2 quadrillion pounds so about 288 quadrillion BTU. So burning gasoline gives about 114,000 btu per gallon so if you burned gasoline to melt that iceberg it would take 17 billion gallons of gasoline. Sure. It could happen.....
Originally posted by sonhouse Let's see. How many BTUs does it take to melt a trillion tons of ice into useable water? So about 144 BTU to melt one pound of ice and that iceberg is about 2 quadrillion pounds so about 288 quadrillion BTU. So burning gasoline gives about 114,000 btu per gallon so if you burned gasoline to melt that iceberg it would take 17 billion gallons of gasoline. Sure. It could happen.....
I recall a Middle East country, maybe Saudi Arabia, contemplated towing an iceberg up the Indian ocean to their country a few years back, and use it to water their deserts and palm groves etc.
Wonder if it happened...
Originally posted by sonhouse Let's see. How many BTUs does it take to melt a trillion tons of ice into useable water? So about 144 BTU to melt one pound of ice and that iceberg is about 2 quadrillion pounds so about 288 quadrillion BTU. So burning gasoline gives about 114,000 btu per gallon so if you burned gasoline to melt that iceberg it would take 17 billion gallons of gasoline. Sure. It could happen.....
Exactly! How would anyone melt an iceberg without using gasoline?
Good thing they have lots of oil in the Middle East. No other way to melt ice in the deserts of the region.
Originally posted by Eladar Exactly! How would anyone melt an iceberg without using gasoline?
Good thing they have lots of oil in the Middle East. No other way to melt ice in the deserts of the region.
If you transported an iceberg to the Middle East then the warmth of the climate would naturally melt that ice to liquid water without burning oil/gasoline to directly heat it to melt it.
Originally posted by humy If you transported an iceberg to the Middle East then the warmth of the climate would naturally melt that ice to liquid water without burning oil/gasoline to directly heat it to melt it.
Sea level rise
10 Jul '17 18:17
Back to Top