jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (5 posts)

If climate change is melting the ice caps, then shouldn't we use the ocean for w

  1. bradmasterOCcal profile image31
    bradmasterOCcalposted 2 years ago

    If climate change is melting the ice caps, then shouldn't we use the ocean for water?

    Desalinization can produce water to offset the water shortage in the West Coast. If the ocean level is going to rise why not tap some of it for water while we wait for the future tidal waves. Desalinization won't get any cheaper tomorrow.
    Are you for or against Desalinization?

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/12739651_f260.jpg

  2. SgtCecil profile image92
    SgtCecilposted 2 years ago

    There's no reason to wait for sea levels to rise. The reason desalinization is not so popular is because it consumes so much energy. It's easier and cheaper to just drill a hole in the ground to reach ground water or use less water in general.

    All this may change with more people using more water in the future. Higher water consumption will force people to look to the sea. More desalination will encourage companies/municipalities to find ways to make it cheaper. Water prices will rise, encouraging people to waste less water and waste less food.

    1. bradmasterOCcal profile image31
      bradmasterOCcalposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree and using the tides can generate the energy to run the desal plant.
      Thanks

  3. chef-de-jour profile image96
    chef-de-jourposted 2 years ago

    It could be done if the cash and political will was there I guess. I'm sure someone on the California Climate Change Committee has already thought about it. All depends on how desperate the people of that state, and others, become. The same might be said for a fairer distribution of the available water, say from wealthier landowners to the needy? Or a priority framework? That probably won't happen, being realistic.

    What has to happen in future though, assuming global warming isn't going away anytime soon, is a strategy to ensure that drought conditions in years to come won't impact so negatively on people, agriculture and nature.

    I think this will be necessary for many areas, states, provinces, even countries in the not too distant future - serious strategies to deal with the effects of climate change. That's why the upcoming Paris Summit is so important - I deal with this issue in a recent hub.

    The cost of not doing anything has been estimated by the Citibank at 44 trillion dollars!! How they arrive at that figure is anyone's guess but for sure if we don't get ready for extremes we may regret not acting...and spending now, before Mother Nature gets really angry!!

    1. bradmasterOCcal profile image31
      bradmasterOCcalposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks Andrew
      California has shown a dismal record of being proactive, and pathetic on being reactive.
      For over thirty years they tell us that doing something is too expensive, and yet, waiting is what brought up the 44 trillion nationwide.

Closed to reply
 
working