It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


North China is dying...and the solution that may scar a planet.

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 05:05 AM
No suprises. China is immature about the consequences of tampering with mother nature and still arrogantly believes it can control it. The west has been doing it for far longer and even now sometimes refuses to acknowledge that fighting nature is a mistake. In the UK we have only just decided to stop building houses on flood plains!!!!! The US is about to reap the rewards from screwing with the Mississippi delta region.

Note how the problem is water not oil. Access to clean water will be the biggest problem we will have in the next couple of decades.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 05:24 AM
Heaven and earth are not humane. 天地 不仁
They ride roughshod over all things. 以萬物為芻狗 -Tao Te Ching 道德經

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 06:26 AM
reply to post by loam

To me this is a perfect case of over-population....

Why should the majority of people suffer just because others couldn't/didn't bother to think about the future?

And don't come telling me that 'over-population' is a myth because cleary in this story you can see that it isn't!!

I've said before many times that there are just way too many buildings in this World.... Nature needs space not buildings!!!!
edit on 6-6-2011 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 06:29 AM
reply to post by loam

Hi there,
Great thread as always Loam . well done

very interesting read, and a topic that is not normally discussed.


posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 06:59 AM
Theres nothing to worry about here, the US will simply sell the Chinese a couple of the Great Lakes problem solved.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 07:44 AM
reply to post by seenitall

residual salts have a market too.

especially when we are talking about the chinese, they can sell every kind of industrial residuals lol

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 07:45 AM
Really interesting article S&F.

I'm sure somebody probably mentioned this already, I haven't read all the replies yet. But I wonder was China's interest in Libya not just for oil contracts, but also the Libyan's massive irrigation project?

To kick China out of Libya could therefore deal a double blow. Obviously it's all very well reading the notes, but as most people will tell you kinesthetic learning is always best!

Going to try and find out if there were any Chinese engineers involved in the project, or even funding by Beijing...

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 08:19 AM
Maybe China should talk to the King of Thailand and ask him to stop stealing their rain.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 08:34 AM
Man-ruins a wet dream!

Too much food for the FAT
Too little (or none) for the Starving

Too Little Water to GROW the crops
Too Much (flooding) When we need to harvest (or plant)

Too Many "Pills" for the so-called "educated" and wealthy ("Let's get high man" so they hide from living)
Too Few Pills (or any medical care) to the "Dirt Poor" billions of people

Too Hot
Too Cold

Too Much $$$ for those who have always been GREAT THIEVES (some call them "Leaders")
Too Little Money for the others

Too much "lovin" for the rich & powerful (they pay -one way or another for it - or just brutally take it) ---- read the news which just touches on it
Too little for many others as they are forced to toil for 12-16 hrs daily just to find food, or water to survive

Yep --- man sure is wise and smart ---
Dinosuars lasted 100s of millions of years
Man will last for only a few 100,000 of them------

We will sometime (if we even rate highly enough in the grand scheme) to be a wing in some museum of the aliens that find our bones.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 08:44 AM
reply to post by loam

It has been observed thru recent times that the Chinese have made unnatural advancements within nature. Advancements like the 3 gorges dam that in itself is an amazing construction build but its effect down stream and even on how the earth moves is not a natural thing. When I first was reading this artical I was thinking maybe they need to use these weather making devices to somehow make fresh rain water to refill any areas possible but that also is a unnatural activity to perform. So this being said maybe sapiens sapiens need to lose their water borders and consider allowing people to live everywhere. yes I know I struck someones nerve. But instead of trying to keep population numbers as to have a country strength, maybe the logical thing is relieve some overpopulated areas of humans and move them else where so nature can regrow in these areas. But again the sapiens sapiens in fighting kinda prevents chinese overpopulated areas to be freed up for nature to regrow. So for now the answer is to redirect massive amounts of water and hope it works.

Like I said if ALL got along then people could be displaced and relocated anywhere on EA so areas no matter what country can have time to thrive again.

Be well and its very sad...

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Seagle
Maybe China should talk to the King of Thailand and ask him to stop stealing their rain.


I have two words for you.

Mekhong River

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 10:37 AM
reply to post by Imhotepsol

So you resort to calling him immature and stupid?!? Impressive sir, way to to take the high ground.

As for the OPs topic, amazing, simply amazing. The chinese never fail to go big when they undertake an engineering feat, but this doesnt look good, and will probebly just be a temporary fix at best, with massive reprocussions. Strange times we live in!
Jack in the Burg

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 10:52 AM

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

Meaning we need another asteroid that killed the dinosaurs for being too dominant and big.

Well i think that will happen anyway given that asteroid strikes come and go and we are unfortunately overdue for a strike!

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 11:04 AM

Guess where our government has spent the most money per person in the least populated area?

A classic read "Cadillac Desert".

From Grand Coulee, to Mono Lake, and the CAP water that has made Pheonix, AZ. possible.

Regards and Nameste,


posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 11:05 AM
I wasnt gonna post anything but as i was reading through the first comments its seems like this became a hate thread. I understand what the thread is about but I guess some people have to hate the Chinese and deny there racism.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 11:14 AM
What constantly amazes me on this site is the absolute rejection of global warming because the proposed measures will apparently impact the 3rd world significantly, increase the cost of living and prevent the 3rd world from developing. Yet when it comes to issues like this people are all suddenly up in arms about it even though rejecting things like the Three Gorges Dam will massively negatively impact the development of China. It's a double standard. One standard is applied to hydroelectric dams in China, one standard is applied to global warming.

Is it because it's in China so you can blame all the problems on them?

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 11:20 AM
I don't care how much money you have, you cannot control nature like this to fix a problem that was made by man, until you fix the problem of man. In this case that problem would be too much population by the water sources. It isn't so much overpopulation as it is a non-existent population dispersement plan. Go ahead and move the water sources all you want. If you don't move the population away from the water sources, the problem is going to continue.

How the Chinese officials cannot see something as basic on a 2nd grade level as this is beyond me. It really does go to show that you don't have to be smart to be rich.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 11:26 AM

Originally posted by Imhotepsol
Good and well thought out post aside from your last comment.

You seem to forget that the Western World has damaged more of the entire planet for oil, minerals, power even #s and giggles sometimes then China ever has. Although I do not agree with their ideas to divert massive bodies of water to struggling areas I would not be so quick as to call them idiots. Especially with the track record the Western World has in regards to the environment and mother earth.

I was going to flag and star but for your immature and stupid comment at the end I won't bother.

You are en expert in this matter, or is this just liberal guilt talking?

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 12:06 PM

Originally posted by thedeadwalkk
This doesn't look good.
Why are they trying to control nature, all the will get is a swift kick to the face.

We have the same problem with the Mississippi. It's always a distortion with the Status Quo having the most influence. This is a HUMAN problem, and not one that is merely a Chinese one; their's is just more obvious with more people and bigger rivers. The 5 Rivers Damn project is going to be massive -- HUGE, and I don't think anyone knows what will happen in China as a result, nor if it can be managed safely.

>> But back in the USA, If the Mississippi were allowed to change it's path, there would be no need for all the Levees and "rescue" of New Orleans. But the effort to keep it a River City, forces engineering to push rivers above rooftops. It does mean, however, that they'd have to create some "artificial river" for New Orleans to enjoy, and that there would be New Winners and Losers based on the path of the river. But, we can solve that by Government if we were civilized. Unfortunately, the culture in America is such that; "problems cannot be solved until Gawd pulls us all up into the sky." We've gone to the society that could "Put a Man on the Moon" to a society that "cannot meet with the Kyoto protocols because that would reduce business profits 10% for a dozen quarters." Not noticing, of course, that over a few hundred cities have already saved money by wasting less and surpassing the Kyoto protocols -- takes a lot of work to spread BS in this country to convince everyone that we cannot solve problems, right?

The sediment from the Mississippi also, creates marsh and swamplands, used to be a protection for the coast -- now it's pushed further out in the ocean and acts more as a pollutant, not benefitting the coast or habitats. I'm not the first to suggest these things -- but it seems to me the OBVIOUS solution, and it's only controversial and difficult because it would cost people who advertise on our corporate media their status quo positions. That seems to be what creates ALL CONTROVERSY. Anything in this world that seems like it is too difficult to solve - is almost always a problem that makes some rotten bastard a lot of money. Apartheid? Cheap Labor. Starvation? Cheap, unoccupied land. Energy Crisis? ENRON-sized profits. Budget Crisis? Tax breaks for billionaires. Pollution in water and air? Shifting the costs of industry to the lungs of the poor. Civil War? Weapons dealers selling to both sides. The fight between Pakistan and India? Keep the population distracted by a "bad guy and forever war." Mexico or Pakistan border problems? Cheap Labor.

>> Sorry, I got off the main topic -- but to me, it's ALWAYS connected to the fundamental problems this world has always faced; Psychopaths get into power and then convince everyone we need to go on a Holy Crusade for King and Country. It's called "Castle Building." And if the peasants get upset over how plush the Castle is, and how dour their lives are, call your cousin in Spain and have them attack you; they'll feel better once those Castle walls protect them from arrows for a few months and then it's back to working the fields!

But it's easier and more "profitable" for some HAVES, to just grab more water, than to solve the more expensive problem of not polluting the water and wasting what you already have. The Glaciers that feed a lot of the Yellow River, are also not getting replenished due to affects of "warming" in that region. So they have to adapt. There is NOT more water in China next year than this year, there is only going to be re-routed water and those that waste it, not truly paying the costs.

>> Like, if Clean Coal were actually CLEAN it would cost a power plant too much to use it. Therefore, you ignore that it's making people around the plant die earlier than they would have, or all the holes in the ground you have to dig to get it.

>> What strangely, the solution is simple if not ironic, what REALLY needs to happen -- all over, is to DIG MORE HOLES. Stop trying to consolidate water for the biggest wasters, and try and KEEP more of the rainfall that falls on your land; everywhere. I doubt that most homes actually use more water from their aquifers than falls on their houses. So, instead of gutters, drains, trenches and roads that speed up the exit of water, we should all have more tiny ponds, cisterns, and self-control over our rainwater. Put some fish in them so that mosquitos don't get out of control. Enjoy the birds and frogs that hang our around them. Who doesn't like a pond or a cistern if they can afford it?

To do it yourself right currently is expensive -- but some sort of government-backed education and loan for the necessary equipment, could help homes everywhere STORE MORE WATER! Every time it rains, we slough off most of the water that falls. If we all turned off the water pipe for a month, and tried to recycle and use the water falling on our heads, we would have enough. We could start another "Public Works Project" and hire people to dig lots of holes, and give tax breaks for people who buy the filters and pumps (and solar panels) to fill cisterns or make a pond. More jobs! But ignore the people who talk about the costs -- those people don't understand economies anyway because they've been taught to think wrong. "COSTS" are almost always someone getting paid or a resource being compensated to the public -- you know, like, if we actually CHARGED mining companies it would COST MORE, but those rural cities would have MONEY for schools and JOBS. OK, done with the OBVIOUS economic lessons -- you either get it, or you've been treating information that conflicts with your world view as if it were lies from the Devil -- or maybe even "Socialist!"

>> Farming, also, needs to be reformed, and we need to start charging them more so they recycle their own run-off and use that wasted fertilizer. Our diets need to move from animals that take lots of energy and water to animals and plants that use less water. A vegetarian, for instance, uses thousands of gallons less water by NOT consuming meat each month.

Our dependence on Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Energy, is also a huge user of water. Another cost that is hidden by the debate over the status quo versus alternative energy. We will EVENTUALLY have to get all our power from alternative energy and the longer we wait to invest in this -- the more clean water and air we spoil.

>> So the "solution", is actually one that benefits MOST PEOPLE anyway; a decentralization of water and energy production. Why is this NOT something that is championed by so-called Libertarians and Conservatives? Why is it just a "Liberal" issue and not just one of common sense?

If we all had to drink our own waste-water, breathe the air that came out of our tailpipes, and support our own energy use by the amount that falls on our roofs -- it would be impossible for most of us CURRENTLY. However -- if we cannot, then it must be obvious that OUR LIVESTYLES ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE. Forget about the "Climate Change" debate, or this nonsense about "global economic competitiveness" -- there is no way that the planet can survive every human acting like people in the USA.

>> As China industrializes more, so that their people can live like Americans --- if they do not have a better standard for efficiency than WE DO, China will die, and they will be forced to grab resources from other countries at the barrel of a gun.

Of course, water scarcity, dependency, and big projects put control in a few hands -- that can turn off the spigot for those who don't comply. SHORT-TERM, it's a big win for the wealthy and those who own the spigot -- LONG TERM, we all breathe the same air (with current technology) and eventually, even if you live in a bubble, the starving and sick will be beating at your door.

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by SLAYER69

Further to your point, this article also appeared just yesterday:

Amid severe drought, Chinese government admits mistakes with Three Gorges Dam

edit on 5-6-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)

No doubt, that was just heartbreaking to watch that documentary on the building of that dam, and how much was destroyed because of it.

The reservoir will bury 13 cities, 140 towns, 1,352 villages and about 650 factories. It will raise the water level by 577 feet, submerging hundreds of ancient archaeological sites and much of the base of the granite and limestone cliffs that line the gorges and are among China's greatest tourist attractions.

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in