What does 10 TRILLION gallons of water even equate to?

I had no idea that so many RVers were climatologists.

There will always be a drought somewhere. Then that drought will be over and a new one will start elsewhere. It's the cycle of life. And earth is a part of that life.

westend wrote:

GaryKH wrote:
I've wondered, with California and the drought that they have been through, why can't they create more holding areas (reservoirs), to hold back the water when it does rain. I realize there would be a tremendous cost associated with something such as this, but wouldn't it be cheaper than failed crops, landslides, failed highways, deaths, etc.? It does seem like a waste now, it's just dumping into the ocean. We have a similar, but definitely smaller issue here on Vancouver Island. If they can build a series of small dams, then we could spread out the water over time.

The problems with the current situation on the West Coast is multiple issues. There is a drought that needs to be overtaken by rain and snow melt. There is a storm dropping copious rain in a short time period. Even if additional catchments could be built, you need the water resource to fill them. If another storm like this doesn't repeat, those catchments remain dry and of no use.
To implement this catchment scheme, you need to acquire the land and even if taken through easement laws, the cost would be astronomical, given the land prices that exist.

I can speak somewhat about CA since I lived there. Most of the State, particularly in the South, was part of an ecosystem that was drought tolerant and didn't have the vegetation that we've either planted or pushed into certain areas. A lot of the original vegetation and that which man has created, does not have a lot of water dissipating ability. What is also created is bare hillsides and hard surface runoffs. All of these environmental nuances evolve into certain areas that are prone to high runoff and mud slides. With a storm of the intensity and duration going on now, limits are surpassed.

Cadillac Desert
Sort of like building a city below sea level behind dikes. What can go wrong?

pnichols wrote:

garyhaupt wrote:
What does 10 TRILLION gallons of water even equate to?

Gary ... I'll go way out on a watersoaked limb here and make a guess to help visualize things: That much water probably could fill somwhere around the coach interior volumes of 5 billion motorhomes like yours.

By the way, along with all that water comes nasty winds. Here's what was laying next to our rig when I got up last Thursday morning:

Oh man...glad the branch didn't land on the roof. Such a worry for folks in the path of water damage. Between flash floods, dams bursting, rock falls, slides and all of it...hard to feel secure.


Gary

California - Welcome to the Pacific Northwest baby. It's why we are sooooo green.

It would have been done, If the government had the power to do what ever it wanted
Too prevent totalitarianism, we have government that can't take overt land and people and dictate
So there has to be an approved consensus from the people, before the valleys and rivers can be turned into reservoirs
And right now that consensus does not exist
And this forum is an example of the situation

GaryKH wrote:
I've wondered, with California and the drought that they have been through, why can't they create more holding areas (reservoirs), to hold back the water when it does rain. I realize there would be a tremendous cost associated with something such as this, but wouldn't it be cheaper than failed crops, landslides, failed highways, deaths, etc.? It does seem like a waste now, it's just dumping into the ocean. We have a similar, but definitely smaller issue here on Vancouver Island. If they can build a series of small dams, then we could spread out the water over time.

The problems with the current situation on the West Coast is multiple issues. There is a drought that needs to be overtaken by rain and snow melt. There is a storm dropping copious rain in a short time period. Even if additional catchments could be built, you need the water resource to fill them. If another storm like this doesn't repeat, those catchments remain dry and of no use.
To implement this catchment scheme, you need to acquire the land and even if taken through easement laws, the cost would be astronomical, given the land prices that exist.

I can speak somewhat about CA since I lived there. Most of the State, particularly in the South, was part of an ecosystem that was drought tolerant and didn't have the vegetation that we've either planted or pushed into certain areas. A lot of the original vegetation and that which man has created, does not have a lot of water dissipating ability. What is also created is bare hillsides and hard surface runoffs. All of these environmental nuances evolve into certain areas that are prone to high runoff and mud slides. With a storm of the intensity and duration going on now, limits are surpassed.

Whiskey is for drinkin'

Water is for fightin' over

- Mark Twain

I've wondered, with California and the drought that they have been through, why can't they create more holding areas (reservoirs), to hold back the water when it does rain. I realize there would be a tremendous cost associated with something such as this, but wouldn't it be cheaper than failed crops, landslides, failed highways, deaths, etc.? It does seem like a waste now, it's just dumping into the ocean. We have a similar, but definitely smaller issue here on Vancouver Island. If they can build a series of small dams, then we could spread out the water over time.

fulltimedaniel wrote:


And keep in mind that just because it's raining in Bangkok and they are having one heck of a monsoon that rain does NOTHING for the drought in Rajasthan...or California Or Sub Saharan Africa.

Yes it is raining somewhere but not where it is needed most. But that certainly does not negate the FACT that there is a drought in another part of the world.

So?
What do you want to do about it?

This is the cycle of life on the planet.
Nothing new, it's been going on since the dawn of mankind.
The Sahara use to be green. Nature take from one and gives to the other, over and over again.

P.S.
Not taking a shot at you here.
Just getting tired of all these experts preaching doom and gloom. It's life, it happens.