Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

Showing Original Post only (View all)

NickB79

(19,113 posts)
Mon Aug 26, 2013, 09:38 PM Aug 2013

Water Woes: Vast US Aquifer Is Being Tapped Out [View all]

http://news.yahoo.com/water-woes-vast-us-aquifer-being-tapped-222610439.html

Nearly 70 percent of the groundwater stored in parts of the United States' High Plains Aquifer — a vast underground reservoir that stretches through eight states, from South Dakota to Texas, and supplies 30 percent of the nation's irrigated groundwater — could be used up within 50 years, unless current water use is reduced, a new study finds.

Researchers from Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kan., conducted a four-year study of a portion of the High Plains Aquifer, called the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides the most agriculturally important irrigation in the state of Kansas, and is a key source of drinking water for the region.

If current irrigation trends continue unabated, 69 percent of the available groundwater will be drained in the next five decades, the researchers said in a study published online today (Aug. 26) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


snip

Scanlon pointed out that the new study does not consider the impact of extreme weather, such as droughts or floods. In 2011, Texas experienced a devastating drought that cost the state some $8 billion in economic losses, according to a report by Susan Combs, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. NASA satellites that studied the parched land determined that the drought depleted the region's aquifers to low levels that had rarely been seen since this type of mapping began more than 60 years ago.


So, we have 50 years of water left, IF we assume no future mega-droughts wrought by climate change.

Safe assumption, right?
42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Desalinate the ocean and pipe it wherever we need it. mbperrin Aug 2013 #1
Desaliniztion takes a lot of energy. hunter Aug 2013 #2
Even setting aside desalinization, moving water is incredibly energy-intensive hatrack Aug 2013 #5
So moving petroleum products is cheap, but somehow water is too expensive. mbperrin Aug 2013 #13
No, it's a question of scale hatrack Aug 2013 #21
Not really ever worked in the industry, have you? mbperrin Aug 2013 #25
Good, you can leave any time - knock yourself out. hatrack Aug 2013 #32
good block CreekDog Aug 2013 #34
+1 XemaSab Aug 2013 #35
It's the blazing gratuitousness of it all . . . hatrack Aug 2013 #38
he wasn't just arguing some science with you, he was dismissing the severity of the issue CreekDog Aug 2013 #39
I don't think so kristopher Aug 2013 #40
First, I'm anti-nuclear, Second, your arguments have problems, but at least you're trying, he wasn't CreekDog Aug 2013 #42
Not strange when you consider it relative to the value of the product. GliderGuider Aug 2013 #31
Why would wind and solar be very expensive? mbperrin Aug 2013 #12
As hunter pointed out, it's VERY energy intensive NickB79 Aug 2013 #3
Yet the OP doesn't say the whole country needs it. mbperrin Aug 2013 #14
One MASSIVE aquifer that irrigates millions of acres of land NickB79 Aug 2013 #18
Not really. Have you ever been through and seen the Tri-Matics run? mbperrin Aug 2013 #23
Let me repeat: 6,800,000,000,000 gallons of water ANNUALLY NickB79 Aug 2013 #28
Nope, can't "scale up." hunter Aug 2013 #20
So no amount of research will help. mbperrin Aug 2013 #24
Mother Nature bats last. hunter Aug 2013 #29
Wow. oldhippie Aug 2013 #4
Well, I did, so you can believe your own eyes, or you can just go with your mbperrin Aug 2013 #15
if we put the money into it, it could be done efficiently. mopinko Aug 2013 #6
What is your basis for that syatement? oldhippie Aug 2013 #7
there was a story on here just the other day about mopinko Aug 2013 #9
Yes, Tampa is already using this - wave action leaves the salt in the ocean and mbperrin Aug 2013 #16
In a gentle world we could make this work. hunter Aug 2013 #30
So your argument is that less research will help. mbperrin Aug 2013 #17
Nope. Made no such argument. oldhippie Aug 2013 #22
Sure you did. But since you won't own it, I won't be seeing you anymore. mbperrin Aug 2013 #26
You are gone - we don't need the snark, the hostility and the legions of strawmen hatrack Aug 2013 #33
I did the math in post #18 NickB79 Aug 2013 #19
Money is just pixels on a page. That's never an issue. mbperrin Aug 2013 #27
if what you propose is as difficult as others say, then why not do something easier but possible CreekDog Aug 2013 #36
transport it through existing rivers and streams? treat them like canals and conveyances? CreekDog Aug 2013 #41
is this what it took to extract it? mopinko Aug 2013 #37
I read this study about ground water extraction and sea level rise OnlinePoker Aug 2013 #8
thanks for answering a question that always comes up mopinko Aug 2013 #10
Study forecasts future water levels of crucial agricultural aquifer OKIsItJustMe Aug 2013 #11
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Water Woes: Vast US Aquif...»Reply #0