|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 8, 2015 1:43:15 GMT -5
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 7:57:03 GMT -5
Spot on article Rich. Amazing that California has no restrictions on how much water is pumped from wells. Expensive deep wells, and ground water is obviously dropping from withdrawals. Georgia limited to 100,000 Gal/day. Been that way for a long time. Most states limited to 25,000-100,000 gal/day. State by state restrictions: www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/state-water-withdrawal-regulations.aspxRecent moratorium on new wells along the coast of Georgia due to salt water intrusion. Mention of law suit between South Carolina and Georgia. Uppity Hilton Head Island with panties in a wad due to Georgia withdrawals, South Carolina threatening LA. ha Morons have been putting development on barrier islands for years. I know, my family from Amelia Island. Yea, we settled there as commercial fisherman. Mema had one of the only fresh water(stinky sulfa water) wells on the entire beach for 25 miles at 1500 feet deep. Deep to go below intrusion. jacksonville.com/news/georgia/2013-05-21/story/georgia-will-issue-no-new-withdrawal-permits-floridan-aquifer-northern
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 9:02:43 GMT -5
Map of flowing springs in Florida. Numbered springs 1rst magnitude and flow over 30 million gallons/day. Easily a river. Problem is still salt water intrusion moving inland over time from large water withdrawals.
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jun 8, 2015 11:48:13 GMT -5
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 12:11:32 GMT -5
Good on Arizona for intelligent planning. Good for Arizona that they have (massive)ground water reserves. Same water usage for 1 million as 6 million, an accomplishment.
|
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jun 8, 2015 12:48:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jun 8, 2015 13:06:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Jun 8, 2015 13:19:34 GMT -5
On climate change, the G7 leaders pledged in a communique after their two-day meeting to develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century. That's all well and good. A hundred years ago humans were just learning to fly. In less than 75 years, man was on the moon. If "we" can't figure out a alternative for the majority of fossil fuels within the next 85 years, something is very wrong. Bet everything I have we can do it in less than 50. Probably much less. Problem is, "develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century" to them means we need carbon taxes (NOW) and regulations against and penalties for the use of fossil fuels (NOW). obama wants coal plants shut down NOW. Carbon taxes NOW. Redistribution of wealth to third world countries to help them fight "climate change" NOW. NOW NOW NOW What happened to "by the end of the century"? obama said that the biggest threat to our National security is climate change? Seriously? Is he really that stupid? Not really, it's all part of their wealth redistribution and progressive agenda. And they stand to become filthy rich off of it. Impeach him and start throwing some of these crooks in prison. never happen... Oh look! Bruce Jenner has boobies!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2015 13:25:03 GMT -5
Proof positive of the failure of dominant progressive government.
|
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jun 8, 2015 13:42:46 GMT -5
On climate change, the G7 leaders pledged in a communique after their two-day meeting to develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century. That's all well and good. A hundred years ago humans were just learning to fly. In less than 75 years, man was on the moon. If "we" can't figure out a alternative for the majority of fossil fuels within the next 85 years, something is very wrong. Bet everything I have we can do it in less than 50. Probably much less. Problem is, "develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century" to them means we need carbon taxes (NOW) and regulations against and penalties for the use of fossil fuels (NOW). obama wants coal plants shut down NOW. Carbon taxes NOW. Redistribution of wealth to third world countries to help them fight "climate change" NOW. NOW NOW NOW What happened to "by the end of the century"? obama said that the biggest threat to our National security is climate change? Seriously? Is he really that stupid? Not really, it's all part of their wealth redistribution and progressive agenda. And they stand to become filthy rich off of it. Impeach him and start throwing some of these crooks in prison. never happen... Oh look! Bruce Jenner has boobies! Your right ...You have to introduce new things before you can eliminate the old ones. Its a small step and there is many other contributors to this problem. Whos that? lol
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 14:29:05 GMT -5
Because of thermoelectric uses ?
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jun 8, 2015 15:49:46 GMT -5
Arizona's water buffer can be credited to a landmark 1980 law that requires storage, the identification of water supplies for new development in urban areas, conservation measures and a cap on agriculture acreage.
That would be the Arizona Groundwater Management Act of 1980. The 1970s also were when it all came together for water management in Arizona. Over the previous four decades, lawmakers had labored unsuccessfully to limit groundwater pumping. What was different in 1976 was the cities and the mining interests lost an important case at the Arizona Supreme Court when justices ruled a private company (pecan growers) could impose a limit on how much groundwater a municipality (Tucson in this case) and copper mines could pump. The cities and the mines demanded relief from the Legislature. Pretty soon the Legislature formed a 25-member groundwater commission to write a new groundwater law. After a year and a half of the members getting an education on water law, it was time for some decisions.
There were three issues over which great struggle ensued:
1. Who should have the right to pump groundwater and how much? 2. What methods should be used to reduce the groundwater overdraft? 3. Should groundwater be managed primarily at the state or local level?
Agriculture always has been the biggest groundwater user. Farmers wanted to keep things as they were, and proposed anyone who wanted to initiate pumping should have to purchase an existing right. The mines and cities objected, because they saw it as a bonanza for the farmers.
One of the commissioners complained, “We are not going to buy the farm so the farmer can move to La Jolla and raise martinis.”
The mines proposed that each acre in a groundwater basin receive a “quantified right” to water. More disagreements were in store. Agriculture wanted farmlands to be purchased and taken out of production, thus reducing groundwater pumping. The mines and cities felt everyone’s pumping should be reduced by the same percentage. Farmers, the biggest water consumers, would take the biggest hit.
The cities and mines brought things to a dangerous impasse when they garnered enough support to pass several provisions that angered agriculture representatives. The outcome looked in doubt.
Around this time, a well-rehearsed strategy was played out by the governor, Bruce Babbitt. He convinced the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Cecil Andrus, to issue an ultimatum: unless Arizona enacted tough groundwater laws, he would refuse to approve construction of the Central Arizona Project.
Shocked back to reality, the cities, mines and agriculture asked Babbitt to mediate the discussions. One of the first items of agreement was creation of the Arizona Department of Water Resources.
In relatively short order, what was once considered impossible was a reality. On June 12, 1980, Gov. Babbitt signed the Groundwater Management Act (Code). For the first time, all responsibilities for water planning and regulation, (except water quality) were centralized in one state agency. The Act designated four parts of the state where groundwater pumping was heaviest as Active Management Areas (AMAs).
The Department applied more stringent laws and regulations in the AMAs, including the requirement that a developer verify he has secured physical, legal, and continuous access to a 100-year supply of water. Since 1980, the Department has written and executed three of the five management plans required by the Code. The management plans outline conservation goals and methods for various groundwater users in the agricultural, industrial and municipal sectors.
The Code was the most eagerly-awaited and far-reaching policy initiative ever undertaken by the State. This progressive law granted vast, new responsibilities and authority. Arizona was recognized in 1986 by the Ford Foundation for its landmark work in water management.
www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/PublicInformationOfficer/history.htm
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 16:48:16 GMT -5
Proof positive of the failure of dominant progressive government. Odd that California does not have ground water withdrawal limits. So California farmers are out drilling wells left and right, pumping at will. Ground water needs cooperation and withdrawal limits. Been in place in Georgia a long time and we get 50 inches a rain per year. Georgia and all of the surrounding states if not mistaken. The guy with the best drilling rig will most likely win that game. And take over adjacent farms as he out draws them. Interesting concept. Situations like this anger me. It invites dominant progressive government situation. Who am I to talk, I drilled a well at a 60 degree angle and under my neighbor's property. We laugh about it, but he is not a farmer and does not need the water.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,562
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 8, 2015 16:56:11 GMT -5
Similar approach to agricultural use of ground water here in Georgia parfive. It is good planning and has kept ALL farms secure and water usage predictable. We have thousands of these systems in Georgia, about all fed by wells.
|
|
|
Post by adam on Jun 8, 2015 17:09:31 GMT -5
Wildlife and cultivation and everything is effected. Mass die offs of fish worry me. Of course the only solution would be to pump in water from the ocean or other areas. I have gained interest in the Salton Sea, and it's the biggest lake or man-made lake in California. If it goes, southern Cali goes. And my ex lives right by it. There are many pictures online and videos that make you wonder how low America has got. I feel sorry for those that live in the desert.
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jun 8, 2015 19:26:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Jun 8, 2015 22:06:14 GMT -5
On climate change, the G7 leaders pledged in a communique after their two-day meeting to develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century. That's all well and good. A hundred years ago humans were just learning to fly. In less than 75 years, man was on the moon. If "we" can't figure out a alternative for the majority of fossil fuels within the next 85 years, something is very wrong. Bet everything I have we can do it in less than 50. Probably much less. Problem is, "develop long-term low-carbon strategies and "abandon" fossil fuels by the end of the century" to them means we need carbon taxes (NOW) and regulations against and penalties for the use of fossil fuels (NOW). obama wants coal plants shut down NOW. Carbon taxes NOW. Redistribution of wealth to third world countries to help them fight "climate change" NOW. NOW NOW NOW What happened to "by the end of the century"? obama said that the biggest threat to our National security is climate change? Seriously? Is he really that stupid? Not really, it's all part of their wealth redistribution and progressive agenda. And they stand to become filthy rich off of it. Impeach him and start throwing some of these crooks in prison. never happen... Oh look! Bruce Jenner has boobies! Wouldn't it be nice if NOW also applied to a balanced budget? Interesting how the proposed budget eliminates the deficit years down the road when most of them are gone and most likely by then they'll kick it down the road a few more years.
|
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jun 8, 2015 22:59:09 GMT -5
Scientists Are Coming Up With 'Last Ditch' Remedies for Climate Change Richard Branson, the billionaire chairman of Virgin Group Ltd., has offered a $25 million prize for the best solution in the field known as geoengineering. Smart Stones: www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-08/carbon-sucking-gems-among-last-ditch-climate-change-remediesSmart Stones, based in the Netherlands, is working with olivine, a yellow-green mineral found abundantly in the earth’s crust. Once a favorite of Egyptian jewelery makers, olivine absorbs CO2 as it weathers. The idea is to mine olivine, crush it and scatter it over land. A ton of olivine can capture about a ton of CO2. Cost estimates range from 3 pounds to 41 pounds ($4.60 to $63) a ton. “I could make sure that every year as much CO2 is absorbed by this method as is emitted by humans,” he said.
|
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jun 8, 2015 23:00:25 GMT -5
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Jun 9, 2015 0:38:29 GMT -5
Scientists Are Coming Up With 'Last Ditch' Remedies for Climate Change Richard Branson, the billionaire chairman of Virgin Group Ltd., has offered a $25 million prize for the best solution in the field known as geoengineering. Smart Stones: www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-08/carbon-sucking-gems-among-last-ditch-climate-change-remediesSmart Stones, based in the Netherlands, is working with olivine, a yellow-green mineral found abundantly in the earth’s crust. Once a favorite of Egyptian jewelery makers, olivine absorbs CO2 as it weathers. The idea is to mine olivine, crush it and scatter it over land. A ton of olivine can capture about a ton of CO2. Cost estimates range from 3 pounds to 41 pounds ($4.60 to $63) a ton. “I could make sure that every year as much CO2 is absorbed by this method as is emitted by humans,” he said. Another finalist is Zurich-based Climeworks AG, which is developing mobile systems to capture CO2 in filters. The gas is injected into greenhouses to promote plant growth or used in carbonated drinks. Hmmmmm! I got it! How about you just plant more trees............moron! And people wonder why we call them envirotards.
|
|