h a l f b a k e r yWe have a low common denominator: 2
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Alas, global warming is destroying the ice caps. The seas will rise, flooding all the good places on the earth. Surf spots with sweet beaches and Amsterdam. Well I say it's time to work to save them for the future!
If we mount big scoops at the edges of the Arctic Icecap we can catch the runoff and
then runit into big pipes. These pipes will then be run to the Grand Canyon. It's really far from the sea and needs some fresh water. Well more is better so we'll just take it all!
If we block one side of the Canyon we could easily fill it with fresh water. This would also put a really sweet spring break location near the UofA.
The Grand Canyon will be renamed the Grand Lake and the future of all slackers will be saved.
A new ice age from global warming?
http://www.commondr...views04/0130-11.htm
[ldischler, Sep 22 2006]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
The Yarlung Tsangpo Great Canyon is bigger.
Some models predict a lowering of the ocean levels due to global warming. Something to do with freshwater / saltwater ratio change screwing up the Gulf Stream and initiating a Northern Hemispherical freeze over (Ice Age). |
|
| |
And it could happen very quickly. See link. |
|
| |
Several decades ago, there was a plan to dam the Grand Canyon. It was stopped, fortunately. But, if the project was revived, it would theoretically lower the sea level by the amount of water trapped in the canyon, which wouldn't count for much, worldwide. Any other dam and reservior on a river would do the same thing, with no need for pipes from an ice cap. |
|
| |
Actually, in the Grand Canyon a dam on the river wouldn't affect sea level at all, as the water in the Colorado River is all taken out for irrigation before it reaches the sea. The once-wonderful delta is now dry and dead. Remember that before you start screwing with the environment. |
|
| |
Water doesn't run uphill, so getting water to the canyon from the Arctic isn't going to work, either. The Arctic ice cap, at the North Pole, floats on the ocean, so it is at sea level. |
|
| |
Fishbone for bad science, poor spelling and bad writing. And a few other things, too. |
|
| |
poor spelling?! Bah! It's the only thing right about this idea. |
|
| |
Well that and thoughts of University of Arizona coeds at spring break. mmmmmmmm. |
|
| |
Saving the slackers! Woo Hoo! |
|
| |
Seems awful complicated... Why not just dig some channels. One from the pacific ocean to Death Valley would work well, and wouldn't require pumping. Ocean dept could be regulated based on channel depth for a while. Of course, the water wouldn't be fresh, but there might be some nice new surf spots, and shipping. |
|
| |
A similar project could be undertaken at the Dead Sea, but aside from giving Israel a place to put their own #$%* Navy to fight the Arabs, no good can come from messing with the land area of Palestine. |
|
| |
OR... You could redirect the Colorado River slightly, say to the San Fernando Valley (and add a dam near SF!) or down towards the salton sea. |
|
| |
Similar dam works in Africa might also help. Just let evaporation and rain do the rest. |
|
| |
I can't see Israel putting a navy in the Dead Sea, why? |
|
| |
1. The dead sea goes nowhere, you could bombard jordan with it, nowhere else, why not build a navy in the med, where you can bomb everyone from America (if you go a really long way) to Japan to Lebanon. |
|
| |
2. The dead sea is tiny, you can swin across it into Jordan so easily they put a lifeguard there to stop you! It apparently is very deep in the middle, so it certainly could support a battleship or something, but that ship would be so visible to Jordan from months before it was built, you'd lose any element of tactical surprise. |
|
| |
3. The ship would be able to move nowhere, it would be a sitting duck, if you did try and use it it would take 1 Jordanian bomber to bring it down. |
|
| |
I like it as a half-baked idea but it would be better to stop burning oil!! |
|
| |
Stop burning oil? It's already too late. |
|
| |