• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ohio experiencing record droughts.

“I have always hated them”, is not a valid reason to hate anything.
My reasons are sound.
Moreover, the majority of the USA is currently in drought conditions.
Wind power has several problems.

They dry up the land downstream increasing drought potential.

The blades erode. Would you like breathing the aerosols of fiberglass and resin dust if you lived downstream?

The put a friction on the natural wind patterns, and do have an effect of the path of the wind.

They are not cost effective. The maintenance costs have proven this over time.

They are a scar on the planet. We have abandoned wind mill sites that are just a wasteland.

The kill endangered species.

This is just off the top of my head, and there most certainly are more reasons.
 
Meanwhile rivers are still drying up.
More water being used by population demand of a limited resource. It will get worse and worse until we desalinate sea water or something else.
 
Do you like fishing? Scientists didnt say climate change was a hoax. Thats dishonest. Climate change is here as in right now. We can mitigate it or watch our rivers dry up and be without water.

Its not just them that are finding out, we are all suffering the consequences.
The hoax is blaming everything on AGW.
 
Its not because of more demand. For once quit being such a contrarian…
Sure it is. It is because of demand.

The hydrological drought we see is no worse that other times of the past. The problem is, when we have less water than average now, it becomes a problem. A problem that was much less severe of nonexistent when we had less people.
 
A pity we couldn't send all that damn flood water from here in Tenn & NC to Ohio through a pipeline like oil.
I've been advocating a national water policy, and matrix of interstate pipelines, for over 25 years. The technology certainly exists. The problem is that we not so much a nation as we are 48 different States, a curse which comes with a host of built-in limitations. Had we adopted such a policy 50 years ago, we'd already be well on our way to recharging the Ogallala Aquifer of the Great Plains. Instead we might completely tap it out before our current generations pass away.

Every part of the country is subject to both drought and flooding at one time or another. With barely more engineering savvy than the Roman Empire employed a few thousand years ago, we could be greatly reducing the devastation of both those events, as well as preparing to avoid future catastrophes. But we prefer to serve our most short sighted needs rather than ensure a future for our children.
 
I've been advocating a national water policy, and matrix of interstate pipelines, for over 25 years. The technology certainly exists. The problem is that we not so much a nation as we are 48 different States, a curse which comes with a host of built-in limitations. Had we adopted such a policy 50 years ago, we'd already be well on our way to recharging the Ogallala Aquifer of the Great Plains. Instead we might completely tap it out before our current generations pass away.

Every part of the country is subject to both drought and flooding at one time or another. With barely more engineering savvy than the Roman Empire employed a few thousand years ago, we could be greatly reducing the devastation of both those events, as well as preparing to avoid future catastrophes. But we prefer to serve our most short sighted needs rather than ensure a future for our children.
I suspect moving water between regions is a much bigger problem than you are imagining. How do you even move flood levels of water? The amount of water to be moved would require an excess at one point and a need at another. Besides, eventually it will just diminish another regions water. How many nuclear power plants will it take to move all that water?
 
Iran has got to the point of moving water.

By 2018, about 45 interbasin water transfer schemes had been established in Iran, aiming to transport more than 5 billion cubic meters of water annually (3), primarily to meet agricultural and drinking water needs. Although these projects help the communities at the destination, they increase water scarcity at the source, sparking conflict. Communities at the source basins often depend on agriculture, and water shortages have led to economic stress and forced residents to migrate to regions with more water (5). The government has attempted to optimize water use at source locations to address these unexpected issues, but so far this strategy has not achieved notable success (5).


Imagine. They are moving 5 gigatons a year. What do you think that costs?
 
My reasons are sound.

Wind power has several problems.

They dry up the land downstream increasing drought potential.

The blades erode. Would you like breathing the aerosols of fiberglass and resin dust if you lived downstream?

The put a friction on the natural wind patterns, and do have an effect of the path of the wind.

They are not cost effective. The maintenance costs have proven this over time.

They are a scar on the planet. We have abandoned wind mill sites that are just a wasteland.

The kill endangered species.

This is just off the top of my head, and there most certainly are more reasons.
I will add one more major windmill blade problem. Over the next few years companies will decommission some 8,000 turbine blades in the United States alone. That number will increase as more are brought online. The blades are made of fiberglass and are very difficult to break down and recycle, so instead they are sent to landfills and buried where they lay for an untold number of decades. Out of sight out of mind, not our problem we will leave it to future generations to cope with.
 
Take a look at this chart.
View attachment 67533798
Last year was 49% are not facing drought... start of the year over 52% were not facing drought... this year there is a drought. *shrug*

And stop watering your lawns. What a waste of water. We had to do that in dry years 30 years ago in CA.
 
I will add one more major windmill blade problem. Over the next few years companies will decommission some 8,000 turbine blades in the United States alone. That number will increase as more are brought online. The blades are made of fiberglass and are very difficult to break down and recycle, so instead they are sent to landfills and buried where they lay for an untold number of decades. Out of sight out of mind, not our problem we will leave it to future generations to cope with.
All we have to do is send those blades to the sun. Problem solved.
 
Sure it is. It is because of demand.

The hydrological drought we see is no worse that other times of the past. The problem is, when we have less water than average now, it becomes a problem. A problem that was much less severe of nonexistent when we had less people.

Seems like denying women abortions then isnt a very smart thing to do.

☮️ 🇺🇸 ☮️
 
I suspect moving water between regions is a much bigger problem than you are imagining.
I assure you, it isn't. Not nearly as big a problem as having no water where you need it, and too much water where you don't. Those are much bigger problems.
How do you even move flood levels of water?
You don't. You simply move whatever amount of water the infrastructure you have in place will allow.
The amount of water to be moved would require an excess at one point and a need at another.
The need is always there. Always! Even beyond what might be seasonal agricultural needs, we have aquifers in the country that we've pumped tens-of-billions of gallons out of for generations. We can be recharging those with naturally occurring surpluses from other regions.
Besides, eventually it will just diminish another regions water.
No. You don't draw any water from any region which isn't surplus, so no region's water gets diminished. Ultimately, this is all transactional. When states have surpluses, they'll be happy to sell water into the national pipeline. When states have droughts, they'd be delighted to buy it - perhaps even desperate to buy it, if they're facing crop failure. But you need the infrastructure in place to make this happen.
How many nuclear power plants will it take to move all that water?
You're asking the wrong question.
 
I assure you, it isn't. Not nearly as big a problem as having no water where you need it, and too much water where you don't. Those are much bigger problems.

You don't. You simply move whatever amount of water the infrastructure you have in place will allow.

The need is always there. Always! Even beyond what might be seasonal agricultural needs, we have aquifers in the country that we've pumped tens-of-billions of gallons out of for generations. We can be recharging those with naturally occurring surpluses from other regions.

No. You don't draw any water from any region which isn't surplus, so no region's water gets diminished. Ultimately, this is all transactional. When states have surpluses, they'll be happy to sell water into the national pipeline. When states have droughts, they'd be delighted to buy it - perhaps even desperate to buy it, if they're facing crop failure. But you need the infrastructure in place to make this happen.

You're asking the wrong question.
I would like to see you crunch the numbers. I am pretty sure you will be very disappointment.
 
All I know about the US weather is Lake Mead was at a record low recently and the people in the area had to take super drastic measures to conserve water.
I just had a look and it seems like the lake is slowly recovering to be somewhat normal which can only be a good thing.
 
I would like to see you crunch the numbers. I am pretty sure you will be very disappointment.
It wouldn't matter if I did. You would just deny the HUNDREDS OF BILLION$ it already costs in flood and drought damage, that will eventually be offset by having a very doable national water infrastructure.
 
It wouldn't matter if I did. You would just deny the HUNDREDS OF BILLION$ it already costs in flood and drought damage, that will eventually be offset by having a very doable national water infrastructure.

As I was saying. Doomed. The only fix that would be politically viable would be one that cost nothing and required the people to do absolutely nothing different.
 
When republicans learn that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure we can stop this.
 
When republicans learn that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure we can stop this.

When was the last time we dedicated the will of the Nation to a long term goal? The War on Terror? Nah. That was vengeance. And after a few years we as a nation were grumbling about the cost and the lives lost. Before we pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan we were sick to death of it. Remember 9-11 we heard. We forgot it before the wreckage was cleared.

The International Space Station? We are getting ready to shut that down. We aren’t building on it as a station to the future exploration. We are going to decommission it and burn it up in the atmosphere.

You have to go back to Apollo. And honestly people were bored with it before Apollo 13. We had landed on the moon twice and people were bored with it all. We had the hardware and couldn’t manage the three additional mission we had originally planned on.

People in a drought care about it. But once it starts to rain, they move on. They go back to watching sports. Discussions of politics. The awfulness of the other party.

People don’t have the attention span needed to support a long term project to solve a recurring problem. They don’t have the attention span to remember what happened last year. Much less what happened twenty five years ago.
 
When was the last time we dedicated the will of the Nation to a long term goal? The War on Terror? Nah. That was vengeance. And after a few years we as a nation were grumbling about the cost and the lives lost. Before we pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan we were sick to death of it. Remember 9-11 we heard. We forgot it before the wreckage was cleared.

The International Space Station? We are getting ready to shut that down. We aren’t building on it as a station to the future exploration. We are going to decommission it and burn it up in the atmosphere.

You have to go back to Apollo. And honestly people were bored with it before Apollo 13. We had landed on the moon twice and people were bored with it all. We had the hardware and couldn’t manage the three additional mission we had originally planned on.

People in a drought care about it. But once it starts to rain, they move on. They go back to watching sports. Discussions of politics. The awfulness of the other party.

People don’t have the attention span needed to support a long term project to solve a recurring problem. They don’t have the attention span to remember what happened last year. Much less what happened twenty five years ago.
Why post then? I dont want to be dragged down by people like you and i dont want to die.
 
Why post then? I dont want to be dragged down by people like you and i dont want to die.

My friend. Everyone dies. I will. You will. My wife did. Nobody makes it out of this life alive.

Optimism is considered a positive outlook. But it has a flaw. Nothing is ever going to work out as well as you hope. Pessimism is seen as negative. But if you go into a project or task expecting things to go wrong you won’t be discouraged when things do go wrong.

If you really want to do something. Address a problem. The first thing you have to do is have a realistic idea of what hurdles you will face. I might be too pessimistic. It is certainly a possibility. But my assessment of mankind is accurate. So how do you overcome that resistance that I have outlined?

Tell you what. Watch the movie Don’t Look Up. Then look at the problems you see and ask yourself what are the realistic challenges you will face trying to address them.
 
My friend. Everyone dies. I will. You will. My wife did. Nobody makes it out of this life alive.

Optimism is considered a positive outlook. But it has a flaw. Nothing is ever going to work out as well as you hope. Pessimism is seen as negative. But if you go into a project or task expecting things to go wrong you won’t be discouraged when things do go wrong.

If you really want to do something. Address a problem. The first thing you have to do is have a realistic idea of what hurdles you will face. I might be too pessimistic. It is certainly a possibility. But my assessment of mankind is accurate. So how do you overcome that resistance that I have outlined?

Tell you what. Watch the movie Don’t Look Up. Then look at the problems you see and ask yourself what are the realistic challenges you will face trying to address them.
You didnt tell me anything about having a realistic idea of the hurdles. You just told me to give up which is pointless.
 
You didnt tell me anything about having a realistic idea of the hurdles. You just told me to give up which is pointless.

Watch the movie Don’t Look Up. Then try and figure out what if anything was wrong with the story.
 
Back
Top Bottom