Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 03 Jun 2022, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 12:41 pm

Gosh, no. I thought you could run a pipeline over the Rocky Mountains without a pump - just let gravity get it up there. Now that you mention it, that makes my idea lot less simple. Gotta add an energy source. I could donate one of my portable generators, if that would help. Might be an even bigger job than that. Might need a whole-house Generac.

I wonder if there are any sizeable tracts of land in the midwest that using for retention ponds wouldn't bother anyone too much? I know that almost 4% of the land is already being used by humankind, but maybe we could find a few low-lying, flood-prone spots that aren't, and build the ponds there?

As usual, Xavier doesn't know **** about what he blurts.  Here's a map of WHO owns nearly all the land out west.

Skans » 03 Jun 2022, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 1:00 pm

As usual, Xavier doesn't know **** about what he blurts.  Here's a map of WHO owns nearly all the land out west.

 In fairness, the retention ponds he quibbled about retardedly would be located on this side of the Rockies - likely on State land, and likely not requiring eminent domain. If it DID require eminent domain, it would likely be met with glee by the person stuck with the land, as the obvious place to excavate would be undeveloped, very low-lying, flood-prone real estate.

This project is a straight no brainer for those who understand the office of stewardship for which God made Adam and his progeny accountable.
 

If California could encourage more people to invest a few hundred bucks in rain catchment storage..that would put a dent in the problem.
As it stands now I doubt more than 1% of the homes are so equipped.
Years ago I found 50 gallon plastic barrels for $15 each that were used by a brewery for liquid malt extract.
I found plastic fittings and hose [at Lowes] to "gang the barrels together" so that after the first barrel fills, it over flows into the next barrel, then into the next. By the time you get to the last barrel the contents are pretty pure.
Before I send the rain gutter runoff into the barrels, it is sent into a 5 gallon bucket that has a paint strainer fitted to it..then the output is sent to the barrels. Lowes has these paint strainers also.

Cannonpointer » 03 Jun 2022, 1:10 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 1:10 pm

 In fairness, the retention ponds he quibbled about retardedly would be located on this side of the Rockies - likely on State land, and likely not requiring eminent domain. If it DID require eminent domain, it would likely be met with glee by the person stuck with the land, as the obvious place to excavate would be undeveloped, very low-lying, flood-prone real estate.

This project is a straight no brainer for those who understand the office of stewardship for which God made Adam and his progeny accountable.

Except.....I don't want any of OUR water going to welfare states like California.
 

Xavier_Onassis » 03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am

Haven't you noticed that huge amounts of  water would have to be pumped over the high plains to get it to the Colorado or some other Western river? And wherever you choose to store the water, that is land that belongs to someone who would be deprived of it forever.

how stupid are you, you don't pump the water back to the continent divide the original river supplied. You only pump it to where it is needed down stream.

That then allows the amount coming from the source to flow further without being used up in last state flowing through using most of the water before it reached the ocean at sea level covering 75% of the surface in salt water. Origin of evolving life on land masses.

What is the universal rule in plumbing? **** rolls down hill, so it is better to live on a mountain in shining cities above natural displacement and fresh water sources than in the valley used as a cesspool of urban sprawl.

Skans » 03 Jun 2022, 2:55 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 2:55 pm

Except.....I don't want any of OUR water going to welfare states like California.

Want in one hand, sociliast, and **** in the other. 

I see a *** thinking he OWNS a country's water because of where he wipes his nasty ***, I know I'm looking at McCarthy-bait. 
 

Cannonpointer » 02 Jun 2022, 10:50 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:50 am

I lived in a third world dictatorship that had deslination plants in the 70s. California is less competent than that. This is not a surprise - there is greater and more widespread corruption. California's political system (which launched kameltoe, whose qualifications came down to dispensing expert and enthusiastic oral favors for king maker Willie Brown) is more corrupt and less functional for citizens than Franco's Spain.

This ding bat will give Kamala a run for her money...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NIjg5BUgDs

SJConspirator » 02 Jun 2022, 10:27 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:27 am

Are you sure it's environmentalists blocking this?

Who could otherwise, logically, be blocking the construction of desalination plants ?

Rock » 02 Jun 2022, 10:50 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:50 am

The navy ship that I was assigned to, the USS Chicago, had one of those systems on board.
The water it produced was different but it served the purpose.
 

And when was that ?

Whatever  . . .  I think technology has improved since then ?

SJConspirator » 02 Jun 2022, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:48 am

apparently the concern is how desalination intake valves destroy marine life.

I say you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs

Except  . . .  we're not talking about an omelet here !

I'm sure with the proper precautions the damage could be reduced to next to zero.

It'll have a price tag, though !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have oil pipelines  . . .  maybe a pipeline conducting water from Canada or the great lakes could be a cheap(er) solution ?
 

Skans » 02 Jun 2022, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:56 am

I believe that was the concern, and a stupid one at that - so, some fish die.

I'd rather not have that fish die  . . .  if not for consumption.
And it's not only about fish !

Maybe disrupting ecosystems ?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Remember  . . .  the flutter of a butterfly  . . .  

ConsRule » 02 Jun 2022, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2022, 10:58 am

Not only that...but pulling that water out of the ocean and spraying in on the ground to produce food (and wine), would help offset the rising water level from melting ice.  Its a win-win

Not really sure about that !

One way or the other water will always find its way back to the oceans !
 

In India farmers dig enormous holes in the ground, with stairs leading to the bottom of them, pave them with stones to limit leaking (you may call them small lakes) and collect monsoon water in them !
They release some fish in them to see that the water is cool.

And use it for irrigation purposes and drinking water.

In some cases they cover up to two thirds of the "lake", to limit evaporation while still allowing sunshine in the water !

As the water level during the year decreases they descend via the stairs to the lower water level !

When they're brimming . . . it's real fun -and refresshing- swimming and diving in them !

Some are as deep as 35 yards !
Depending on how prosperous the land owner is.

And then there're aquifers . . . but those need electrical or fossil-fuelled pumps to get the water to the surface !

JinnMartini » 10 Jun 2022, 4:17 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 4:17 am

Not really sure about that !

One way or the other water will always find its way back to the oceans !

Most, but not all.

ConsRule » 10 Jun 2022, 5:14 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 5:14 am

Most, but not all.

So, where do you think the  "not all"  will go ?

If it evaporates  . . .  it'll be rainfall  . . .  and flow into the oceans anyway  . . .  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way  . . .  how about creating an ocean on the moon  . . .  with all this polar ice melting ?

Seas won't rise no more  . . .  and we'll be creating an  "atmosphere"  of sorts on the moon !

Next we bring some fish there  . . .  who knows what the benefits will be ?
Can't do no harm having a sea over there !

It gets as much sunshine as we get, afterall !
 

JinnMartini » 10 Jun 2022, 5:36 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 5:36 am

So, where do you think the  "not all"  will go ?

If it evaporates  . . .  it'll be rainfall  . . .  and flow into the oceans anyway  . . .  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way  . . .  how about creating an ocean on the moon  . . .  with all this polar ice melting ?

Seas won't rise no more  . . .  and we'll be creating an  "atmosphere"  of sorts on the moon !

Next we bring some fish there  . . .  who knows what the benefits will be ?
Can't do no harm having a sea over there !

It gets as much sunshine as we get, afterall !

Ever hear of trees, flowers, shrubs, grass, weeds, animals, etc.?
 

Jinn Martini » 10 Jun 2022, 5:36 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 5:36 am

So, where do you think the  "not all"  will go ?

If it evaporates  . . .  it'll be rainfall  . . .  and flow into the oceans anyway  . . .  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way  . . .  how about creating an ocean on the moon  . . .  with all this polar ice melting ?

Seas won't rise no more  . . .  and we'll be creating an  "atmosphere"  of sorts on the moon !

Next we bring some fish there  . . .  who knows what the benefits will be ?
Can't do no harm having a sea over there !

It gets as much sunshine as we get, afterall !
 

the moon doesn't have the gravity to sustain an atmosphere as this planet has. you remove the periodic elements from this planet and this planet lost that amount of recycling energy of evolving through molecular migration in this atmosphere. It won't work going against universal natural balancing limited to evolving only taking place now.

Cannonpointer » 03 Jun 2022, 1:10 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2022, 1:10 pm

 In fairness, the retention ponds he quibbled about retardedly would be located on this side of the Rockies - likely on State land, and likely not requiring eminent domain. If it DID require eminent domain, it would likely be met with glee by the person stuck with the land, as the obvious place to excavate would be undeveloped, very low-lying, flood-prone real estate.

This project is a straight no brainer for those who understand the office of stewardship for which God made Adam and his progeny accountable.
 

Adam made up the concept of God to gain stewardship over everyone else evolving the same way to create a utopian social order where a few dictate and define whom everyone is on a pay to stay in character or else legal system. Instincts are Satanic forces against the will of God granding humans free will to ignore their sense of direct proportion as part of the whole time being alive now happens.

omh » 10 Jun 2022, 7:07 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 7:07 am

the moon doesn't have the gravity to sustain an atmosphere as this planet has.

It can be created, though !

And anyway  . . .  it  DOES  have a gravity of its own, albeit feeble !

Sea water brought to the moon won't be floating eternally like a bubble  . . .  eventually it'll settle  down somewhere!

Like the Apollo guys did not just float around and could eventually set foot on the moon  . . .  so will the sea water !

Bring enough of it  . . .  and we'll have an ocean !

The rest will come naturally !
Including clouds, storms  . . .  and rivers !

For as weak as the moon's atmosphere / gravity  may be  .  .  .  seawater won't disappear into the void of outer space !
-------------------------------------------------------------
With sea levels rising  . . .  worth to try and get rid of all the surplus water !
 
 

Jinn Martini » 10 Jun 2022, 8:20 am » wrote: ↑

10 Jun 2022, 8:20 am

It can be created, though !

And anyway  . . .  it  DOES  have a gravity of its own, albeit feeble !

Sea water brought to the moon won't be floating eternally like a bubble  . . .  eventually it'll settle  down somewhere!

Like the Apollo guys did not just float around and could eventually set foot on the moon  . . .  so will the sea water !

Bring enough of it  . . .  and we'll have an ocean !

The rest will come naturally !
Including clouds, storms  . . .  and rivers !
-------------------------------------------------------------
With sea levels rising  . . .  worth to try and get rid of all the surplus water !

to what end? Moon separates from orbiting earth or worse comes crashing into the atmosphere? You have no sense of kinetic compounding results. your mind is no greater than two dimensional guessing what else is possible.