It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How Many People Will Have To Migrate Out Of California When All The Water Disappears?

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:23 AM
link   
I don' t think any of them are planning on leaving just yet. They're all too spoiled on the nice weather and won't move north. They will head to florida where there's an ocean for them still and warm temps.




posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:29 AM
link   
The vast majority of those in CA have the same issue that so many have across the US. That problem is that they can not afford to move. How many 10s of millions live a crappy life in some crappy area in the US where jobs are very rare and the few jobs are minimum wage, and they still do not move.

Most see moving as an impossible idea and so the millions in CA that might hit hard times will just stay there... The upper middle class and higher might move but the majority will just hang out with no hope.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

I like the idea, but we made it so the Colorado doesn't reach the ocean anymore- we could do it to the Columbia too eventually. That's my problem with our modern unlimited growth model- when we outgrow nature we are gambling millions of lives on our own ability to indefinitely do nature's job on a bigger scale, and it's a matter of time until we lose that bet. Moving fresh water from the Columbia is less offensive to my ideology than relying on our ability to make fresh water out of seawater, but sooner or later that's where I think we have to end up anyway.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

I like the idea, but we made it so the Colorado doesn't reach the ocean anymore- we could do it to the Columbia too eventually. That's my problem with our modern unlimited growth model- when we outgrow nature we are gambling millions of lives on our own ability to indefinitely do nature's job on a bigger scale, and it's a matter of time until we lose that bet. Moving fresh water from the Columbia is less offensive to my ideology than relying on our ability to make fresh water out of seawater, but sooner or later that's where I think we have to end up anyway.


If Lockheed martin's fusion compact fusion reactor works, or
if we can get the Luddites to consider a non-water Thorium
reactor that eats nuclear waste and turns it into power those
options could work too.

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor - prototype from 1960's had 6,000 full power hours

As for the tons of sea salt, I guess it could be loaded on rail
and used for salting the roads up north as an option.

Though that would upset AKZO Nobel who I used to work for
who has cornered the road salt market in the US.

China is ramping up development of the LFTR design,
and its covered in the above video.

edit on 5-4-2015 by Ex_MislTech because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 05:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: butcherguy

There's a whole lot of room between brother's keeper and let em die.

Yes. You want to tell me where to draw the line according to your feelings.
What gives you any right to impose your emotional response on anyone else?



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 05:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: muse7

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: arjunanda

More than one will be too many.
We don't need people that have that mindset infecting other states.


All anyone ever need to do if they wonder why America is such a mess is look at this post and see how completely we've allowed ourselves to become divided... to the point that we don't see each other as brothers and sisters but as a plague deserving to be starved out of existence.

Congrats...

If anyone is interested in how California came to be in the circumstances that it is in, just look at how they have handled things up until now.
They have plenty of feel good legislation, but they have been playing the long-legged part in the ant and grasshopper fable.

As far as your admonitions regarding me go, I fail to see why you insist on pushing the Judeo-Christian based line of me being my brother's keeper.
Keep your drivel in your church.


I fail to see the connection with this "feel-good legislation" you speak of, and California's lack of rain.

But you probably think it's them evil Liberal's fault for the lack of rain. Lol

You know much about it?
California's problem is too many people in an area that will not support them.
The lack of water isn't something new.
If the people had been concentrating on the problem for all of the years that it has been staring them in the face, they may have already found solutions.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

Exactly- there's all kinds of interesting side-opportunities that come with this stuff that is difficult to factor in on paper before the fact- salt is nice, but consider that you could put the inlet at the mouth of a river and passively mine the entire watershed for trace elements that do not exist at extractable concentrations,
For example, in a moderately rich location, seawater can contain 1mg of gold per ton, and although I know my math isn't precise, at 264 gallons to the ton and 80 billion gallons consumed in CA per day, that could be 58 tons or 2 billion dollars of gold a year as an unaccounted side benefit of not letting your customers die of thirst (you couldn't do it quite that simply in practice of course, but you see the basic concept)

There also obviously is a classified level of technology beyond what is generally available or known, so if we're being shown fusion in the near term pipeline, chances are that on a smaller less cost efficient scale it's already been proven as a practical concept in the black projects world.

I take this as further evidence that the powers that be do have a plan to protect their interests, and it could easily be an energy-based escape from the population crisis, perhaps more convincingly than some of the other ideas that have been tossed around here, and that it will end up being a very lucrative development.

But the owners of the system are not showing any enthusiasm even for the basic down to earth premise of not letting the city of Los Angeles become a withered husk of its former self so far. They aren't making public long term plans to put things in order with these technologies as soon as they come off the drawing board. Which keeps me thinking they're up to something- playing close to the vest with what they obviously need to survive and are in fact spending money to develop, even while the message of the day is "we are caught off guard, there's nothing we can do, learn to live without water"- they want the inside track, they want pessimism where there is reason for optimism.

(And again, there's room for pessimism, because they could screw up. But screw em if they do and tough luck for us- evolution hurts but it hasn't destroyed humanity yet.)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

Absolutely, my wife and I do the same on 3 acres following the permaculture model.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Where you stop before let them die... I don't care. It's that extreme that worries me as I see it way too often. It tells me a civil war isn't a stretch. Nice that you're cool with that.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I suspect that at least 30% of the population will have to migrate out of California, to make things sustainable.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: butcherguy

Where you stop before let them die... I don't care. It's that extreme that worries me as I see it way too often. It tells me a civil war isn't a stretch. Nice that you're cool with that.

Have you taken them a tanker truck full of water yet?
They need to water their lawns.... and wash their cars.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: KnightLight

i0.wp.com...

This is a pretty good break down. 80% is agriculture, 20% is residential. Of that 20%, only one third is indoor use (drinking, washing, etc.)

To continue with my original comment, if we limited water use to residential indoor use only, California could reduce their water usage by ~93%.

This won't happen.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

Brilliant, you bring some great points to the table, thanks for your addition, I have some reading to do!



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Yeah Ceeker63, But it will be the 30 percent that can afford to move. AKA The Taxpayers, leaving those dependent on The State Government to fend for themselves. Just how it works in The Real World. Good Reply and A Star
Arjunanda. a reply to: Ceeker63



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

And inject into wells for fracking which voters keep voting against... but let's not talk about that, let's slam them all as liberals that need to die.

Not much I can do but welcome them to MA if they come this far.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Maybe they want migration. If they were serious they would be investing their money and resources in building desalination plants. Look at Saudi Arabia and other countries. One plant producing 245 million gallons of water per day from the ocean. There could be bi products to desalination. Gold and sea salt other trace minerals.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: arjunanda

The ones who can afford to move will not need to move, and why would they want to when looking at the prospect of a state that in order to go forward at all must somehow either get a shiny new lucrative infrastructure built on an emergency basis, or must be significantly depopulated thus curing most of its ills. No time to sell your property- just summer somewhere up North.

They can't thirst people out first, so they will cut some industrial and agricultural uses, which will eliminate jobs and send a stream of minority working class Californians bailing out of leases and moving in with relatives out of state or possibly even having to return to Mexico, or living on the streets, or imprisoned.

The cost of the country clubs will go up and the low six figure renting crowd will have to leave, but I won't miss them and their betters can and will pay a little more, build a little bigger, and carry on as if those people never existed and be happier for it.

The state will get sparser, richer, older, more employed but less prosperous, money and property will stagnate at the top of the economy and prices will drop until they have as much as they can manage while restoring the state. It's a bourgeois rope-a-dope.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: arjunanda

Sucks for California

They're welcome to come to Colorado - we have plenty of water. For now...

I'll tell you what - living in a semi-arid region that feels the need to dam up moving water so that we can build ever larger communities that demand green lawns and the ability to flush and shower 24/7...there are plenty of people who have been thinking about this for years

We're going to have to change how we think. I know people who like being able to have the things they desire always at the ready and in a condition they prefer are going to be the ones who have a hard time with restrictions, but restrictions it will be, and it won't be a communist plot. It will just be the way things have to be

I grew up with a well that ran dry from time to time. Our hardier ancestors survived the same or worse - as do many people right now in other places around the world that aren't America

Food and drinking water have to come first

edit to add: S&F for asking a really good question :-)
edit on 4/5/2015 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

I never said that they need to die.
I just think that they need to learn a lesson. Their bankrupt government out there allows the energy companies to frack even though the voters disapprove?
Sounds like they need to learn more than one lesson.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
2015 and humans still not able to desalinate effectively...pathetic







 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join