If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TreeHugger)   Since the next world war is going to be fought over water, you might as well start getting used to taking air showers   (treehugger.com) divider line 90
    More: Interesting, Australian Bureau of Statistics, CSIRO, showers, water resources, fresh water  
•       •       •

5892 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2013 at 10:12 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-25 11:05:15 AM

fickenchucker: Not really. Most of Wisconsin seems likes it's armed--how do you think we have 750,000 deer hunters a year running around the great north woods? Plus we'll have the home turf advantage. I have four guns myself--three of them unregistered so the gubmint can't find 'em when they come to confiscate 'em.


I'll distract the populace with truckloads of free beer containing mind control additives. Minnesota will be even easier, free Garrison Keiler concerts.
 
2013-01-25 11:06:22 AM
Seems like most of what comes out of my tap isn't really consumed; it's used for laundry, showering, flushing the toilet, etc.

I could see a future that included a "grey water tap" into homes for these purposes, and anything meant for consumption or cooking would be purchased bottled or purified at home.

First things first, though, why on earth is rainwater collection illegal anywhere???
 
2013-01-25 11:09:33 AM

psychosis_inducing: The water shortage would become so much less of an issue if everyone stopped dumping perfectly good drinking water on grass. Unless you're growing some useful plants in your yard, just let it die

go dormant and grow back in 3 months. (And your water bill drops tremendously. In drought-prone areas especially, it can get cut in half or more.)
 
2013-01-25 11:11:21 AM
Did they not teach about the water cycle to you guys? If you live in the midwest and water your lawns, there's no loss of water, it all gets recycled. Idiots in the south west shouldn't be watering lawns, but there's no harm in doing it for a big chunk of the country.
 
2013-01-25 11:12:58 AM

udhq: I could see a future that included a "grey water tap" into homes for these purposes, and anything meant for consumption or cooking would be purchased bottled or purified at home.


Here in SW Idaho where suburbia has overgrown irrigated farmland and the canal infrastructure is there, all new subdivisions have a raw water sytstem that is used for homeowner irrigation of grass/gardens/trees as well as the parks and other green spaces. Cost about $150 a year for all the water you can use and keeps the city billls down to a minimum.

You could do something similar to recycled water and may places have started doing exactly that.
 
2013-01-25 11:14:29 AM
air showers are why the hippies have smelled like death for decades.
 
2013-01-25 11:20:59 AM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: [wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net image 448x320]

We're good, thanks.


i141.photobucket.com
Enjoy your Swill!
 
2013-01-25 11:42:33 AM

Fizpez: StreetlightInTheGhetto: [wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net image 448x320]

We're good, thanks.

Lake Erie FTW baby - yeah living near Cleveland brings the jokes at all times but at least we got some high quality H2O!


I don't think you are using that term correctly.

/great lake snobbery
//my great lake is better than your great lake
 
2013-01-25 11:47:35 AM

Nutsac_Jim: psychosis_inducing: The water shortage would become so much less of an issue if everyone stopped dumping perfectly good drinking water on grass. Unless you're growing some useful plants in your yard, just let it die go dormant and grow back in 3 months. (And your water bill drops tremendously. In drought-prone areas especially, it can get cut in half or more.)


This.

My parents recently moved to a retirement community in the Phoenix area, and most lawns in their area are native plants and desert stone. My folks HOA, though, requires grass lawns, and no one complains because the HOA handles all the maintenance, and they never actually see a water bill as the cost is buried in their dues.

I, for one, would love to see a ban on the planting of non-native grasses. Aside from water use, it would end the air and noise pollution associated with gas lawnmowers, which emit more particulate matter than cars because they aren't required to have catalytic converters. Unfortunately, whenever this is brought up, the same crowd that derps it up over incandescent light bulbs shows up screaming about "tyranny".
 
2013-01-25 11:53:21 AM

doglover: will just lead to better and more widespread de-salination.


Not ruling out technological breakthroughs here, but right now desal is very expensive and energy intensive. Fine for a place like Aruba that's right next to the ocean and has limited industry and almost non-existent agriculture, not going to water the cornfields of Nebraska.
 
2013-01-25 11:56:22 AM

Tom_Slick: fickenchucker: Not really. Most of Wisconsin seems likes it's armed--how do you think we have 750,000 deer hunters a year running around the great north woods? Plus we'll have the home turf advantage. I have four guns myself--three of them unregistered so the gubmint can't find 'em when they come to confiscate 'em.

I'll distract the populace with truckloads of free beer containing mind control additives. Minnesota will be even easier, free Garrison Keiler concerts.


Mmmmm....beeeeer....

What were you saying?
 
2013-01-25 11:57:33 AM
Sorry, but I'll never, ever, EVER use grease as a form of showering. I'll sooner switch to the warm blood of freshly slaughtered captives before I start dumping Crisco all over me.

The point of a shower to to get RID of grease! Not add to it!

/hippies smell
 
2013-01-25 11:57:37 AM

PIP_the_TROLL: damndirtyape: Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, Nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people, as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people... will become as nasty and as violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon. You don't believe me? Look at those faces. Look in their eyes.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x236]

I always loved how DS9 used Quark to tear down the secular humanist deification that drunken womanizer Roddenberry draped humanity in in TNG.

Quark: I think I figured out why humans don't like Ferengi ...

Benjamin Sisko: Not now, Quark.

Quark: The way I see it, humans used to be a lot like Ferengi: greedy, acquisitive, interested only in profit. We're a constant reminder of a part of your past you'd like to forget.

Benjamin Sisko: Quark, we don't have time for this.

Quark: You're overlooking something. Humans used to be a lot worse than Ferengi: slavery, concentration camps, interstellar war. We have nothing in our past that approaches that kind of barbarism. You see? We're nothing like you... we're better.


Oh definitely. I'll add:

Quark: I want you to try something. It's an Earth drink. Root beer.
Garak: I couldn't...
Quark: Go on.
Garak: *sips* It's vile!
Quark: It's so happy and bubbly and cloy.
Garak: Just like the Federation.
Quark: You know what's worse? If you drink enough of it, you start to like it.
Garak: It's insidious.
Quark: Just like the Federation.

/Niner all the way.
 
2013-01-25 12:06:09 PM

Faddy: ArcadianRefugee: It's going to be fought over water? So just planes, huh?

Hovercraft warfare!!


WhippingBoy: Here comes the invasion force...

www.thesmythgroup.com



He said hovercraft, not Hoveround.
 
2013-01-25 12:07:08 PM
Nexzus:

Absolutely. One of my favorite characters from any of the series. His insights were always poignant but accurate and a stark contrast to how we'd like to see ourselves. I was happy to see how the idea of the Ferengi changed from early TNG to DS9.
 
2013-01-25 12:20:54 PM

HMS_Blinkin: Yeah, I'm inclined to think this is more likely than outright "war for water." How exactly would one win such a war anyway? You can't put a river in a truck and bring it out to the desert---water is going to fall and flow where it wants to anyway.


Figuratively, it's done all the time. It's how we settled the western U.S.
Take over the dam and the means of distributing the water--it's yours. Then take over some more land, build irrigation canals and ditches--water goes to wherever you want it to go.
Take over an area of land where a big dam can be built, then build one--you control that river.
And of course--blow up a dam, you've just killed a lot of people and destroyed their dependable water source.

famagusta-gazette.com
 
2013-01-25 12:34:18 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: [wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net image 448x320]

We're good, thanks.


I live less than 20 miles west of Lake Michigan, and we are pulling water through sand and radium filled wells out of a non great lakes aquifer. The city is negotiating tapping into Lake Michigan fed Milwaukee water. Since this is a crazy republican stronghold, I wouldn't be surprised if some day there will be a war between counties.
 
2013-01-25 01:33:58 PM
That's why the wife and I are keeping our property - we live about 6 blocks from Lake Michigan.

Once the Great Water Wars of 2030 start our property will be worth...one MEELION dollars!!

mwahhh!!!!

/just keeding. We would share our precious water with most of you Farkers.
//except that one guy on here.
 
2013-01-25 01:35:13 PM

phaseolus: doglover: A lack of artesian wells and river water will just lead to better and more widespread de-salination.


...which unless I'm mistaken has higher costs than purifying fresh water -- energy mostly, but also filter membranes, capital equipment, etc.


Artesians require 0 energy.
 
2013-01-25 01:37:07 PM

SuperT: water? really? yea, there is not a water shortage on this planet. there may be a plumbing shortage, but there is water literally falling out of the sky.


I see this argument a lot by mouthbreathers. So, when you drink 20 ounces, do you pee out 20 ounces? No. The more people means the more consumed. It doesn't just automatically get recycled by people. By plumbing, that's diff.
 
2013-01-25 01:42:01 PM

udhq: Seems like most of what comes out of my tap isn't really consumed; it's used for laundry, showering, flushing the toilet, etc.

I could see a future that included a "grey water tap" into homes for these purposes, and anything meant for consumption or cooking would be purchased bottled or purified at home.

First things first, though, why on earth is rainwater collection illegal anywhere???


If you captured all of the water coming from the sky instead of letting it fall as it naturally would, then the things around you would turn to a wasteland.

Some people do want to capture and put back into gardens, but even then it would be concentrated areas instead of dispersing it as it naturally would. Therefore, areas surrounding would shrivel/dry up. The water should be allowed to go back through the system, not be dumped on an annual flower bed that's just for looks, or for thirsty introduced grass species you want to grow in your lawn.

/that is a highly charged subject, though
//it's similar to water rights use, everyone's gotta share y'know
 
2013-01-25 01:42:41 PM
You cut your use down and the government will do the same thing they did here. They howled about needing conservation, you can save water and save yourself money. Then when it happened they raised the water rates saying "We have to have the revenue."
 
2013-01-25 01:45:29 PM

udhq: I, for one, would love to see a ban on the planting of non-native grasses. Aside from water use, it would end the air and noise pollution associated with gas lawnmowers, which emit more particulate matter than cars because they aren't required to have catalytic converters.


Another problem is that non-natives can handle so much more abuse than fragile natives, generally speaking. They also tend to cost less in seed prices than natives. But I do see your point, and wish xeriscaping would be embraced more.
 
2013-01-25 02:16:36 PM

HMS_Blinkin: doglover: The surface of the earth is 70% covered in water. A lack of artesian wells and river water will just lead to better and more widespread de-salination.

Yeah, I'm inclined to think this is more likely than outright "war for water." How exactly would one win such a war anyway? You can't put a river in a truck and bring it out to the desert---water is going to fall and flow where it wants to anyway. Maybe you could force people who live in high-water areas to go elsewhere and then the desert people take over the lake areas? Anyway, I'm not buying it. All that stuff is a lot more complicated than the obvious solution of "let's desalinate seawater" and then think about ways to distribute it inland. And with the ocean levels rising, there will be NO shortage of seawater.


I'm not advocating this but genocide would do the trick. Dead people don't drink water.
 
2013-01-25 02:18:39 PM

Savage Bacon: slayer199: Crap, let me try that again:

[cdn100.iofferphoto.com image 625x447]

And on that note: Tank Girl Sand Shower Sceeeeeeeeeeeeene
Love that movie for so many reasons, including the fact that I discovered Portishead because of it.


Came here for this.

// and I do mean came.
 
2013-01-25 02:28:34 PM

Petey4335: StreetlightInTheGhetto: [wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net image 448x320]

We're good, thanks.

I live less than 20 miles west of Lake Michigan, and we are pulling water through sand and radium filled wells out of a non great lakes aquifer. The city is negotiating tapping into Lake Michigan fed Milwaukee water. Since this is a crazy republican stronghold, I wouldn't be surprised if some day there will be a war between counties.


That war's already on, sort of. It's recently escalated to dueling Journal-Sentinel editorials: the opening salvo and the response.

The Republicans want to form a Regional Water Authority, purportedly to make negotiating water diversions easier, but the cynic in me wonders if they want to attempt an end-run around the Great Lakes Compact.
 
2013-01-25 02:39:50 PM

Liese: So, when you drink 20 ounces, do you pee out 20 ounces? No. The more people means the more consumed. It doesn't just automatically get recycled by people. By plumbing, that's diff.


Actually, yes. If you drink 20oz. Water, then you should put out 20 oz of water via urine, sweat, emesis, etc. It's called your fluid/electrolyte balance.

Link
 
2013-01-25 02:48:19 PM

lyanna96: Liese: So, when you drink 20 ounces, do you pee out 20 ounces? No. The more people means the more consumed. It doesn't just automatically get recycled by people. By plumbing, that's diff.

Actually, yes. If you drink 20oz. Water, then you should put out 20 oz of water via urine, sweat, emesis, etc. It's called your fluid/electrolyte balance.

Link


Yes, but it is not directly going back into the toilet. Sweating (and breathing) means it evaporates and goes back in the air, and may not come back down where you are. It's not quite apples to apples. That is not readily available in the system until later, for people to consume. There's a delay.

More of what I was going for when responding to that post, so felt compelled to clarify.
 
2013-01-25 02:59:41 PM

Liese: Another problem is that non-natives can handle so much more abuse than fragile natives, generally speaking.



Ignoring invasives, don't you mean the other way around? Native plants by definition have lived in the area ever since the glaciers disappeared and should be well-adapted to the environment.
 
2013-01-25 03:00:57 PM
Will the "water wars" finally get that shiat-seeping stankhole Chicago to stop draining Lake Michigan like a bathtub?

That asshole city cries and whines about being considered third-rate all the time, but refuses to stop acting third-rate.
 
2013-01-25 03:19:04 PM

phaseolus: Liese: Another problem is that non-natives can handle so much more abuse than fragile natives, generally speaking.


Ignoring invasives, don't you mean the other way around? Native plants by definition have lived in the area ever since the glaciers disappeared and should be well-adapted to the environment.


No, I don't mean the other way around. Natives are generally more delicate. Why do lawns and golf courses use introduced grasses? (Bermudagrass, kentucky bluegrass.) The two are both warm species, for instance, and that's when people golf, so it's a double bang for the buck--likes warm which is when you need it, grows lush, green, short, can handle heavy traffic (soccer fields, etc)--just add water!

I usually think on an agricultural level, but let me use that as an example. The reason native range is usually planted to introduced species is because A) a cow can chomp it a lot shorter and it will generally bounce back, whereas a native will generally give way to those species that grow faster and can handle the pressure B) native grasses generally take a lot longer to establish, leaving way for weeds or invasives/opportunistics to filter in C) introduced species do well in monocultures.

Natives do well when managed properly, but most people don't manage properly. They are better, especially nutrition-wise when speaking agriculture, but you can alter the diversity of species drastically with poor management, and it is next to impossible to recover if you cross a threshold. Introduced species do have a limit, too, obviously, but you can consistently push it and not eradicate it near as fast, unlike with the native.

It's true natives are well adapted to the area. However, they're not well-adapted to people abusing them. There's a reason prairies continue to diminish.

I see what you're saying though, but it isn't how it works, when people (and fenced livestock) are in the mix.

/not sure if I made sense but tryin' ;)
 
2013-01-25 03:32:19 PM

Liese: lyanna96: Liese: So, when you drink 20 ounces, do you pee out 20 ounces? No. The more people means the more consumed. It doesn't just automatically get recycled by people. By plumbing, that's diff.

Actually, yes. If you drink 20oz. Water, then you should put out 20 oz of water via urine, sweat, emesis, etc. It's called your fluid/electrolyte balance.

Link

Yes, but it is not directly going back into the toilet. Sweating (and breathing) means it evaporates and goes back in the air, and may not come back down where you are. It's not quite apples to apples. That is not readily available in the system until later, for people to consume. There's a delay.

More of what I was going for when responding to that post, so felt compelled to clarify.


The amount of water contained within every person in the United States is insignificant compared to the overall water cycle. If we assume 350M people in the US average weight of 160 lbs (way overestimate just to be safe) assume they are 100% water (also just to be safe) - at ~8lbs per gallon we have:

About 7 billion gallons of water tied up in our bodies or biological processes at any time. For comparison Lake Erie has ~128,000 billion gallons of water. (128 trillion gallons). So, biologically speaking, every person in the US would account for only 0.005% of the water in even one of the great lakes - leaving every single other river, stream, pond and drainage ditch unused. In short the amount of water "unavailable" because of biology of people is practically nothing. It's the bazillions of gallons of water we waste washing our cars in the rain, watering our yards until they are a soggy swampy mess or taking our 12th shower of the day because we dont feel fresh.
 
2013-01-25 03:43:00 PM

Fizpez: because of biology of people


Well, that is true, when you put it that way. However, a lot of that water being used isn't clean to begin with (it's treated/recycled), and the amount of clean water that we could readily drink is decreasing. I think I'm getting lost a little in the argument/direction of this thread, so I may be treading water/backpedaling.

I was trying to go in this direction: clean water IS decreasing or is from increasingly unreliable sources. There's still clean water out there, sure, in aquifers, rivers/streams, wells, etc. But is it as much as it once was, historically? I constantly heard people exclaiming the Ogallala was getting lower/not being replenished fast enough. As far as all the water, maybe even just in the U.S., that the levels are the same as they 200 years ago?

A lot of people use the lakes as an example of water being there and just not tapped into. Yeah, it could be pumped, whatever. All the water of the world can be pumped! *flails arms!* But then you're impacting other things, too, just to supply the increasing need of clean water... no one thinks about that much. ;)

I dunno, it's a fun topic. :)
 
2013-01-25 04:46:53 PM

Liese: phaseolus: doglover: A lack of artesian wells and river water will just lead to better and more widespread de-salination.


...which unless I'm mistaken has higher costs than purifying fresh water -- energy mostly, but also filter membranes, capital equipment, etc.

Artesians require 0 energy.


Not true. You still need to treat the water (chlorine addition at a minimum) and pump it into the distribution system (typically at 35 to 70 psi)
 
2013-01-25 05:16:33 PM

HeadLever: Not true. You still need to treat the water (chlorine addition at a minimum) and pump it into the distribution system (typically at 35 to 70 psi)


Not necessarily true. For human consumption if it's your own artesian well on your property, only thing you'd want maybe is testing. Treatment may come later depending on that test. But in principle, the artesian well works without energy, so your water supply comes readily to the surface.

On larger scale, for the public, yes, at least a UV light at minimum and then treatment. But to RUN the artesian well, it is energy free. If it takes energy to pump it, it is not an artesian well--and that was what I was getting at. Not the treatment part. Regulations for cities and the costs associated is somethign else, and even then treatment would be similar to any other well, not necessarily MORE than other wells, as it too comes from an aquifer like many water supplies.
 
2013-01-25 05:44:44 PM

Liese: But in principle, the artesian well works without energy, so your water supply comes readily to the surface.


Parially true. if the well/spring has enough pressure to be of use, you wouldn't necesarily need to pump it. However, if the water just comes to the surface, you could still need to pressurize it.

/hates low pressure showers
 
2013-01-25 06:05:24 PM
Not worried about water wars. If it happens, it will be fixed.. in SONG!!
 
2013-01-25 06:46:49 PM
What all the world's water might look like.

All the world's water
 
2013-01-25 08:46:32 PM
For some reason, I can't use a quote on this post, but anyway:

HeadLeaverHowever, if the water just comes to the surface, you could still need to pressurize it.

The point is, artesian wells cost you NOTHING to get that water, unlike other wells. What you do with it afterwards is a different thing. That was the point I was making, as the original post I was quoting said that it took MORE energy. That is where I began my argument. :)
 
2013-01-27 03:55:35 AM

Faddy: ArcadianRefugee: It's going to be fought over water? So just planes, huh?

Hovercraft warfare!!


We can't fight with our hovercraft fleet full of eels!
 
Displayed 40 of 90 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report