Day Zero, Capetown.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

It's still nice and chilly for the mammoths across large swathes of the globe, the earth getting warmer was not enough, on it;s own, to off them.  They had help.  We're super helpful like that.  

The same is most likely true about human beings.  Drastic climate change would inconvenience us, greatly, but it;s only with a little bit of help from our friends that we'd manage to off ourselves when it happens.  The residents of Cape Town have been negatively impacted by climate change, but as noted in the story they're getting helped along by their neighbors..who continue to be wasteful.  In the event that the area became uninhabitable..well, they have legs, sure..the problem is that the other guys  have guns and don't like immigrants.

Well, Cape Town is next to the ocean and engineers do know how to build desalination plants so maybe they should get busy and bang out six or twelve.  And neighborhoods can put in their own water from air machines if they are so inclined.  There are multiple solutions to the problem if people really want to do something about it.

http://ec2-34-230-69-62.compute-1.amazon...generator/

http://ec2-34-230-69-62.compute-1.amazon...-from-air/

https://www.treehugger.com/clean-technol...r-air.html

https://www.popsci.com/technology/articl...-water-air

http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Atmo...Generator/

[Fireball]

I've been running the water into a 5-gallon bucket to wait for warm water for a shower. The gallon and a half or so that I collect is used for flushing water. I've done this for decades. We had to completely quit watering our lawn with the new(er) water restrictions in southern California, because the only way we were going to get a 20% reduction was to do so. I have contemplated building a cistern that takes runoff from the street gutter, because of all the runoff from other people's sprinklers, and using that for flush water. Leaves and all.

I keep eyeing the water in the year around creek that runs along my Northern boundary with larceny in my heart.  When it runs into the culvert that goes under my street it stays underground until it gets to the bay in about a mile.  Seems such a waste when my garden could be a lush paradise if I had a certain water supply.

Apparently there are laws against capturing runoff for reuse in many places now.  If I do start .. detaining .. the creek water, I'd need to get a large cistern to store it in.  I've talked to an expert here on these forums who has given me a pretty good idea of what is involved.  The thing is people love to walk up the creek from the park behind us and someone would report me or mess with it if I tried to leave a pipe down to a sump in the creek all the time.  So I'd probably have to have something I could lower at night to pump water up.  Then disappear it during the day.  Not sure how often.  I'd have to work that out.

>snip pics<

You could check into getting water rights, but I don't know the ins and outs.

I've been running the water into a 5-gallon bucket to wait for warm water for a shower. The gallon and a half or so that I collect is used for flushing water. I've done this for decades. We had to completely quit watering our lawn with the new(er) water restrictions in southern California, because the only way we were going to get a 20% reduction was to do so. I have contemplated building a cistern that takes runoff from the street gutter, because of all the runoff from other people's sprinklers, and using that for flush water. Leaves and all.

Why don't you buy a machine?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/24/tech/innov...index.html

I ain't that desperate! Yet.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, Cape Town is next to the ocean and engineers do know how to build desalination plants so maybe they should get busy and bang out six or twelve.  And neighborhoods can put in their own water from air machines if they are so inclined.  There are multiple solutions to the problem if people really want to do something about it.

I don't think that you could honestly conclude that a dearth of "wanting to" is the reason that Cape Town doesn't have massive desal or condenser arrays.  Let's be adults, k?

Water is a big deal, and a problem that all cities will inevitably face, not all of them coastal, or in a humid environment, or capable of funding such projects. Displacement is an inevitable consequence of water shortage. It already happens where there are desal plants, and where there are other novel schemes to capture all sorts of water. It's not just for drinking, industry relies on it, and those solutions rely on industry for funding. I do agree with you, honestly, that we need to make it more of a priority, but reducing it to that, and pointing to desal and condensers...that's just lazy. You know the tune...wish in one hand, shit in the other?

Effectively prioritizing water is -not- telling poor people to build nets in the air. If that's the solution, they (and sooner or later we) are fucked.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Well, Cape Town is next to the ocean and engineers do know how to build desalination plants so maybe they should get busy and bang out six or twelve.  And neighborhoods can put in their own water from air machines if they are so inclined.  There are multiple solutions to the problem if people really want to do something about it.

I don't think that you could honestly conclude that a dearth of "wanting to" is the reason that Cape Town doesn't have massive desal or condenser arrays.  Let's be adults, k?  

Water is a big deal, and a problem that all cities will inevitably face, not all of them coastal, or in a humid environment, or capable of funding such projects.  Displacement is an inevitable consequence of water shortage.  It already happens where there are desal plants, and where there are other novel schemes to capture all sorts of water.  It's not just for drinking, industry relies on it, and those solutions rely on industry for funding.  I do agree with you, honestly, that we need to make it more of a priority, but reducing it to that, and pointing to desal and condensers...that's just lazy.  You know the tune...wish in one hand, shit in the other?

Effectively prioritizing water is -not- telling poor people to build nets in the air.  If that's the solution, they (and sooner or later we) are fucked.

So what's the problem and what are the possible solutions?

There are more more people now and there's a greater demand for water.  There's also more water available now than there was in the past.  Sure, there will be shortages and a lot of pain around the world.  But the oceans are full of water.  If coastal cities don't build multiple desalination plants then they will decline.  That may not be a perfect solution but it is a solution.  

Some people want to kill off 80% of the world's population so that the 20% left can get all of the goodies.  That's a solution but not a very practical one because the 1%'ers won't be capable of doing the necessary physical work necessary to keep themselves alive.  

One solution is to wait until the Earth makes more water but that takes time.  The problem is that we may not have enough time.

[The Grand Nudger]

So what's the problem and what are the possible solutions?

Read the article, they lay out their specific problems.  

As far as solutions, for them and for us, perhaps it's useful to note where our water comes from and how the majority of that water is consumed and how, after that consumption, it's made unavailable -to us- despite it..you know..sitting there.

Somewhere @ 80% of fresh water in the US comes from surface supply.  The remainder is groundwater.   So..as far as sources and consumption are concerned, we need to really focus on our surface water quality and sources..which is what I'll be doing below.

In the US most of our fresh water consumption is an effect of power generation.  Pumping it in to cool off equipment.  Saltwater is a poor fit here, where it's available...too corrosive (but e've been known to come up with novel solutions on that count).  OTOH..most of that water is returned to whatever body it was drawn from..and depending on what sort of regs and equipment we're talking about it may or may not be available to us afterwards.  40/50%, I don't recall off he top of my head but in that range.

Right behind that it's irrigation, about one third of all water consumption.  If you ignore power generation it's two thirds of water consumption.  Ignoring it because the water is much more available in the first example than it is here...in that here it;s often combined with toxins and also ends up going back down into the table rather than being pumped back into a lake.  

The remainder is a sort of dance between industry, public supply and domestic consumption.  Depends on where you live..but in general public supply is slightly more, industry behind that, and domestic consumption in the single digits.

So, knowing the above...where would you expect to see the greatest return for effort and investment in water?

(as to the remainder, groundwater..that's almost entirely used for irrigation - with a decent chunk for public supply as well..and a significant portion of that portion being used to irrigate peoples lawns.)

---

While you mull it over and come up with some solutions you think are worthwhile, I'll comment.

The first and most obvious category when you know he stats is probably one that most people wouldn't think of not knowing them.  Renewable power.  Solar and wind, for example..don;t rely on pumping in massive amounts of water for cooling like thermoeletric does.  Every coal fired plant that goes up puts more strain on the surface supply.  It also either makes some portion of that water unavailable for having been poisoned...or it puts the larger supply at risk of being poisoned in the case of a failure or accident.

So that's no 1.  The single greatest thing we could do to reduce stress on our water supply, is change how we generate electricity.  Solar saves water, isn't that something?  Not a little, alot...most of it, in fact.

Right behind that, and again a massive chunk (surface or ground) is irrigation.  Not only are we hugely irresponsible with how much water we use to irrigate, we're hugeley irresponsible with -how- we irrigate.  Now, I grew up in florida.  Lotta strawberrys.  Lots of sinkholes.  In fact, winter is the sinkhole season because it;s the strawberry season.  Producers, rather than covering their crop (that would incur a greater cost and or..frankly..be impossible) turn on the sprinklers to keep flowing water over their entire fields for as long as the temp dips below freezing at night.   That's just one example of how our pattern of use in irrigation stresses the supply.  There, the sinkholes form because they deplete the surface supply and then dip into the ground supply.  A massive spike in water use.  Overhead irrigation is inherently wasteful even when it's done right, even from the producers point of view.  There's alot of loss and it increases disease pressure by giving pathogens a highway from plant to plant...and ofc by keeping everything moist.  Subsurface or drip is better, but still not better than hydro, and hydro is made better by re-circulation.  All of this, obvisly, before we get to agricultural runoff or the time it takes for water to go from the field back down to the table (which isn't where most of our water comes from anyway) even though most of it being used is being pumped from surface supply.

So there's no 2.  A change in how we grow our food..even changing it to recirculating hydro, actually uses less water in spite of using nothing -but- water.  It also doesn't incur the cost of sinking it into the table.  I guess it;s just a bonus that you get a better yield, too.

Here, I'll pause, because just those two things account for most of our water use and for most of the fresh water made unavailable for use by the nature of it;s consumption.  If we didn't change anything further down in the set we'd already be better off..and not just in water, when you think about it.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well shit, I go and have a drink and say hi to the wife and make some dinner........I come back, and find that "killing the poor" doesn't seem like a serious suggestion anymore?  Whoodathunkit?

[AFTT47]

It's still nice and chilly for the mammoths across large swathes of the globe, the earth getting warmer was not enough, on it;s own, to off them.  They had help.  We're super helpful like that.  

The same is most likely true about human beings.  Drastic climate change would inconvenience us, greatly, but it;s only with a little bit of help from our friends that we'd manage to off ourselves when it happens.  The residents of Cape Town have been negatively impacted by climate change, but as noted in the story they're getting helped along by their neighbors..who continue to be wasteful.  In the event that the area became uninhabitable..well, they have legs, sure..the problem is that the other guys  have guns and don't like immigrants.

Well, Cape Town is next to the ocean and engineers do know how to build desalination plants so maybe they should get busy and bang out six or twelve.

Desalination takes energy - a lot of it. When we figure out how to do fusion, the fresh water problem will go away. Until then, there are just too many damn people on the planet. We better hope we can figure out the fusion problem and that it is indeed solvable in a practical way because otherwise, we are looking at a world-wide decline in the quality of life over the next century.

[The Grand Nudger]

The sort of shitty thing about desal..is that we'd have to do all of the other shit so that there are twice as many (or more) people in order to be able to afford desal through taxation.

[Cinjin]

Well shit, I go and have a drink and say hi to the wife and make some dinner........I come back, and find that "killing the poor" doesn't seem like a serious suggestion anymore?  Whoodathunkit?

As I recall, a conspiracy nut I knew a few years back made the claim that the reason the US keeps starting wars/occupations was because of the water shortage and the need to thin the population by way of battlefield casualties.  Fast forward to Trump, and I'm reasonably sure he's claiming the reason why Trump is goading Kim Jong Un is because a couple billion less people in the world thanks to nuclear war will allow the planet to "survive" longer. How that logic works out for him is anybody's guess.

It goes without saying that these are of course his own undocumented assertions.

[brewer]

Desalination takes energy - a lot of it. When we figure out how to do fusion, the fresh water problem will go away. Until then, there are just too many damn people on the planet. We better hope we can figure out the fusion problem and that it is indeed solvable in a practical way because otherwise, we are looking at a world-wide decline in the quality of life over the next century.

Message received. Pandemic death is deemed necessary. STOP THE VACCINATIONS!