COMMENTS: 47
We're Paying the Price Today for Decades of Relentless Dam Building
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
Dams fragment, divert and subjugate the world's rivers. In one long lifespan, beginning with the inauguration of Hoover Dam in 1936, the engineering marvel of the 20th century, civilization has altered the most important function that makes the earth work, water. Thus, transmuting humanity into something foreign to the earth it inhabits -- a stranger to the very system which gave rise to our species.
The late Carl Sagan was among precious few visionary humans who shared the extraordinary ability to differentiate between deep thought and deep nonsense and recognized the persistence of a satisfying delusion to perpetuate the latter. Dr. Sagan wrote, "We go about our daily lives understanding almost nothing of the world. We give little thought to the machinery that generates the sunlight that makes life possible, to the gravity that glues us to an earth that otherwise sends us spinning off into space or to the atoms of which we are made and on whose stability we fundamentally depend."
Without some sense, some outline of how the earth works and our relationship to it, one is deprived of knowing, let alone of asking, the really important questions that promote regenerative life and prevent massive-scale destruction and degeneration.
It is only in blindness that ignorance can find engineering arrogance and feed the certainty of human expediency -- that millions of dams can exist worldwide strangling the lubricant of life itself. It is true that dams have created a seemingly unlimited oasis in arid and semi-arid regions of the world and have produced unimaginable population centers in water-stressed locations, made possible food production on marginal arid lands, and provided cheap taxpayer subsidized water and artificial lakes aplenty for fishing, camping and boating.
It seems a good thing, yet, what isn't accounted for is the short-term duration and ecological costs. It has created this artificial bonanza by short-circuiting the natural system of limitations much as the one time wonder of fossil fuels has short-circuited and driven the industrial revolution. The debts of temporary prosperity are all due and payable in the 21st century.
In the present state of affairs, water, energy, population, war, global economic expansionism, and failing ecological systems are sending shockwaves throughout the vulnerable global community while staggering the biosphere which keeps us among the living tentatively.
Earth Recycling
The world's water budget is a fixed volume and has remained unchanged for roughly 2.2 billion years in its present state. About 1 percent of the world's total water circulates as freshwater while oceans represent 97 percent of the world's stores and the remaining 2 percent is tied up in glaciers and polar ice caps. This finite water pie divides ever more thinly as population, agriculture and the industrial economy expands.
The uninterrupted Earth is a dynamic solar and geothermal energy system which powers the hydrologic and rock cycles. It conducts and convects energy flows from the earth's 10,000 degree iron core outward through the mantle and lithosphere (crust) generating plate collisions that move continents and trip earthquakes. Magma driven plate collisions uplift mountain ranges and setoff volcanoes recycling lava and gases on land and underwater replenishing both with life-producing minerals.
Solar energy evaporates surface water primarily from oceans to atmosphere to land as water or snow. Erosive rainfall or expanding ice in rock crevices tears down mountains as fast as they rise. The Earth's lumpy land surface is a massive drainage system. From high to low, meandering and networked creeks and rivers drive the rock and mineral cycle. A river system operates on the principle of erosion and deposition. As a river gains water volume and speeds up it erodes and picks up rock and sediment. As it loses volume and slows down it drops some of its load. Large pulses of water flush sediments onto the rivers floodplain creating fertile soil before arriving at its delta entry to the sea.
Remaining sediments combine with the heavy basalt sea floor at the shoreline which is being subducted under the lighter continental plate from volcanic spreading forces at the Mid-Oceanic Ridge. This continuous underwater volcanic ridge runs like the seams of a baseball throughout the world's oceans. Everything cycles like a big conveyor; from Mid-Oceanic Ridge pushing the sea floor towards continental plates where it subducts back into the mantle to raise a mountain or explode through a volcano over geologic time. Dams, known as nickpoints, interrupt and distort the natural transport machinery between land and sea.
River Interrupted
Dams quiet the waters and backfill canyons forming massive lakes that produce and release vast amounts of methane from rotting vegetation underwater. The energy-deprived river unloads its rock and sediment load filling the reservoir, predicting its eventual self-cancellation by virtue of sedimentation fill. The only question is how will it end and what will civilization do when it does? What engineering-dominate options remain to further alter, manipulate or control the world?
The National Inventory on Dams shows the United States has constructed 79,000 dams large enough to require state and federal monitoring. These higher risk categories are often located near enough to population centers to pose a direct safety risk to human life and property. Worldwide, there are 800,000 similarly sized dams that are regulated and present equal challenges. Inventoried or not, total dams in the US may exceed 2.5 million and perhaps tens of millions worldwide. They interrupt and fragment the rock cycle and flow of more than 60 percent of the world's major rivers with one or more large dams.
The International Commission on Large Dams reveals 45,000 dams of the world are mega-whoppers with heights up to 1,000 feet and volume capacities exceeding many million acre feet (MAF) of water.
A recent study measured the volume capacities of 29,484 large reservoirs throughout the world. It determined their storage capacity was about 8.7 billion acre feet (BAF) of freshwater. That's enough water to make a nine foot lake out of Alaska, Texas, California, Montana, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada combined. This immense artificial above-ground storage is counter intuitive to nature's freshwater storage system which stores only .016 percent of all the circulating freshwater in all natural lakes, rivers, streams, creeks and atmosphere combined -- preferring instead to store 80 percent to 90 percent of the world's circulating freshwater underground free from evaporation and sedimentation.
Still more revealing is the loss of artificial reservoir stores through evaporation. Although evaporation rates vary from region to region, a 1998 U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) study of California's reservoirs in all nine major hydrologic regions recorded 2,342,800 AF of evaporation, about .06 percent of California's 40 MAF of reservoir storage. Using a back-of-the-envelope estimation applying .06 percent evaporation rate to the world's 8.7 BAF of reservoir stored water yields 522 MAF of evaporation which is about 2.5 years of total California rainfall and 16 years of California water draws for agriculture. That's water that doesn't infiltrate as groundwater to feed wells or perennial streams, or grow food, or evapotranspire through wetlands, grasslands, woodlands, and forests, or provide water for wildlife (aquatic and terrestrial) and the billion humans on the planet who don't have access to unpolluted water.
The World Commission on Dams estimates that 3.1 billion acre foot of freshwater is withdrawn (as opposed to total stores) from lakes, rivers, and aquifers annually. That equals the total discharge of 7 Mississippi Rivers, or 22 Columbia Rivers, or 221 Colorado Rivers. Here again it would cover with 3 foot of water the above mentioned seven states totaling 1 billion surface acres and is 93 times the amount of water drawn from all California reservoirs by agriculture annually -- a lot of water. The 3.1 billion acre foot number is still more revealing when one considers that over and above storage and withdrawals, most nearly 65 percent of all rainfall evaporates before it can become part of either surface or groundwater stores.
Aside from warming atmospheric conditions, and considering only current global population additions (80 million per year), the equivalent of adding a new Germany annually, and factoring rising water consumption rates which triple with each population doubling, all of human enterprises will consume and significantly pollute 90 percent of all the available freshwater by 2025 leaving a scant 10 percent to support the earths dwindling water-dominant ecosystem.
Are we playing against ourselves?
When 1964 American Nobel Prizing-winning physicist Charles Townes down-played his break-out laser technology with reporters he demurred, "When I hear that kind of thing, it reminds me of what the beaver told the rabbit as they stood at the base of Hoover Dam: 'No, I didn't build it myself, but it's based on an idea of mine.'"
In the 1960's, the age without limits, this telling remark reflects how little was known and understood about the natural world and the accumulative impacts of dams. Since the idea of the beaver wasn't to dam major rivers but build small organic dams on its many tributaries. And then these temporary ecosystems evolved and produced abundant life. They reduced flooding and erosion, enhanced groundwater penetration, created the valley's precious topsoil and fed a radiant food web including decomposing bacteria, amphibians, fisheries, insects, birds, herbivores and carnivores. Comparing a beaver to Hoover Dam is like comparing life to death. Aldo Leopold, the legendary and visionary U.S. Forest Service land manager of the 1920s, 30s, and 40s said dams make the land sick and provide only a temporary prosperity followed by tremendous vulnerability. This ecological reality is incontrovertible -- all dams have an end date.
California leads the list with dams near self-cancellation. Within the next generation, 85 percent of all U.S. dams will have degenerated to the point of exhausting their operational lifespan of fifty years requiring decommissioning or massive repairs and upgrades. Now consider that every sweet spot in every geologically sane canyon that might reasonably hold a dam already has an aging dam, what then?
Let's pause for just a moment and ask some relevant questions. What will it cost to maintain, repair, upgrade, and build new dams to replace those that fail or are decommissioned, and restore dysfunctional watersheds impacted by dams? Let me proffer a worldwide estimate to maintain the current population of 6.7 billion without any further additions.
Factoring ecological restoration, maintenance, repair, decommissioning, and replacement cost of the world's developed water infrastructure as it's currently engineered would likely be a cost greater than all the energy expended on all engineering projects from the beginning of civilization and this cost would recur every fifty years or so. Now factor in a population adding 1 billion every thirteen years?
Is it even possible at this stage of civilization to convince people to care about a time on earth that many will not have to live in?
These statistics and trajectories have no caution value to a species front-row seated as the primary agent of geologic change on Earth. For example, in three long lifespans, Europeans have altered a continuous American wilderness into a networked, layered, and interwoven mass of asphalt-spreading, carbon-coughing, concrete-lining, pipeshed-connecting, aqueduct-flowing, levee-bunkering, grid-generating, wireless-transmitting, urban-sprawling, mall-cloning, river-damming, and resource-consuming experiment in human unconsciousness.
Dams provide that tempting illusion of prosperity whose short-term gains literally vandalize the future of civilization and natural terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity. This reality remains an abstraction to a developed and developing world breast-fed on cheap energy, cheap water, and unconscious consumption of finite resources.
The tenant of the economic element states clearly that the natural state of soil, rainfall, creeks and streams, forests, valleys, wetlands, deserts, mountains, etc. have no intrinsic value in and of themselves. And only those aspects that can be justified as an economic benefit to mankind first (logging, mining, damming, intensive agricultural production, urban development, or recreation) are redeemable and can be supported in so far as they produce artificial wealth through income generation. Commodification of elements cycling and recycling from the basement of time, as its sole recognized value displays an arrogance not intended by nature or nature's god.
If the current growing population of 6.7 billion is considered a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If the vulnerability of dense populations downstream of dams is a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If agricultural production on arid lands that require large volumes of water that salinate the soil and demand large inputs of fossil-fuel based fertilizers and pesticides that runoff and pollute groundwater is considered a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If the displacement of 80 million people from their homelands to accommodate dams is a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If the destruction of life-supporting ecosystems and fishery resources is a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If the inequitable sharing of benefits and costs is a benefit to mankind, than dams are beneficial. If debt burden, cost overruns, deferred maintenance costs and the impoverishment of people is a benefit to mankind, than dams are the most beneficial engineering endeavor of human history second only to nuclear weapons. If that's the guess then God help us, because common sense hasn't.
Â
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ahmlco on Sep 18, 2008 2:28 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ummm. No. The bottom of many lakes is quite cold, and rather effectively prevents decomposition. In fact, many lakes are being forested for well-preserved old-growth trees that have been submerged for decades.
I also find it amusing that the author thinks any design process done by man is any less capricious than that done by nature. Let one pebble erode this way instead of that in a mountain stream, and suddenly this valley receives water and that one does not. The river forms here and not there.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oh please
Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Oh please
Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Oh please
Posted by: mommaterra
» Better that organic matter enter ocean to prevent Global Warming
Posted by: abatto
» Cow Farts
Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Cow Farts
Posted by: Dartagnan
» RE: Cow Farts
Posted by: zipoka
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Libsrule on Sep 18, 2008 8:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now one can indeed wonder what the world would be like had we NEVER built a single dam.
Any ideas?
I've oft wondered about those who believe every dam in America should be torn down and damn the consequences to the millions of people who rely upon the energy, water and recreation derived from said dams.
Especially the drinking water part. Oh and the energy part too. I can do without the recreation if necessary.
So tell us oh wise one, WHAT is your solution to tearing down all the dams and how do we recoup the energy and water?
Well?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: And your solution is.....what?
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: And your solution is.....cheap shots?
Posted by: greenPuker
» RE: And your solution is.....what?
Posted by: sirios
» RE: And your solution is...not to worry?
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 19, 2008 4:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are leaving the age of Pisces and entering the age of Aquarius...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 19, 2008 4:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Indeed, except for one or two high profile engineering snafus, damming waters and harnassing their power - without burning fossil fuels - is a pretty good idea. There should be a dam in every place that can support it. Heck, the beavers do it. Your kitchen sink is a dam, and the comcept has great utility. Yes, they have downsides, but what doesn't? Are they worse than the dozens of new coal fired power plants that are spring up across the country?
This blog will apparently post any rediculous knee-jerk fluff it can. This is the kind of thing that makes liberals look like a bunch of whack jobs to middle of the road people.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: hoppingfrog
» c'mon, I'm as green as you are
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: daniel347x
» what do you know about me?
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hoppingfrog on Sep 19, 2008 5:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And your stupid "well beavers do it" comment, WOW, I mean WOW, what a load of crap. You should probably wash you brain out after make such a moron comment. I can't wait for your next one "Well the sun irradiates Iran (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan), So we are just doing the same with our nuclear bomb and DU weapons"
I hope this comes across as a smack down, you received the brunt for all of the previous comments
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WOW,
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: WOW,
Posted by: ciccio
» RE: WOW,..Knot_Rich lies!
Posted by: greenPuker
» thanks
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 5:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dams of course change the environment - there are costs and benefits to everything.
If your family has been living in a fertile valley for generations and some power comes along and builds a dam and floods your valley you are unlikely to be very happy.
However most dams have been built in mountainous areas where population is extremely sparse and where very little can grow because it is too cold and the soil is too poor.
Dams offer enormous benefits - they provide a store of fresh water for protection from drought. Without them many cities throughout the World simply could not survive even short periods of drought.
Of course in some areas dams are completely inappropriate and have been built for completely the wrong reasons and their existence has had an overwhelmingly negative impact.
For example if authority decided to build a massive dam across the Thames Valley to flood the entire area of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire soley to produce cheap hydro electricity for the City of London - it would be completely inappropriate.
Such similar madness may well have occurred is some poor third world countries due to the financial corruption endemic in rich Western Nations raping and pillaging with the help of organisations such as the World Bank and the IMF. But not all such schemes have a negative effect. Its a matter of taking a reasonable fair and objective view with regards the benefits versus all the real costs to human and all life affected.
Dams can significantly improve the health of the entire eco-system if built in appropriate places.
The eco-system of the UK has improved dramatically despite us having built 2500 large raised reservoirs. Without them we could only support around 10% of the current population and such things as clean water and sewage would be impossible throughout much of the country.
The argument that they have caused overall ecological damage - simply doesn't wash.
The UK has largely cleaned up its act. The water quality of rivers, seas, natural and artifical lakes has improved enormously - even within my own lifetime. It is far better than it has been for hundreds of years.
Many environmentalists of course think the world is massively overpopulated by the virus of the human race - and such population growth cannot continue.
They can't however discuss the impacts of their solutions - because it would mean the mass genocide of over 90% of the human race.
Now, I'm not arguing that there are too many human beings having too many children - and that continued population growth is not sustainable. I just think we should be discussing sensible measures of education and empowerment such that our population can decline gracefully over coming generations rather than the currently planned mass cull.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dams Are Integral To Human Civilisation - We've Had Them For Thousands of Years
Posted by: mommaterra
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jeff Greef on Sep 19, 2008 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chrisbarb on Sep 19, 2008 8:36 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF? What are you asking for mass starvation to save a few fish?
As for dams having a 50 year life span. That is bull, many dams have been in continual operation for hundreds of years. they may have a license for 50 years, but that license could be renewed and the dam keep going with little effort or change for many many cycles.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "if dams are bad everyhting is bad"..the unthinking has been heard from!
Posted by: greenPuker
» RE: "if dams are bad everyhting is bad"..the unthinking has been heard from!
Posted by: chrisbarb
» not well written
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sirios on Sep 19, 2008 8:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: OVERPOPULATION
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: OVERPOPULATION
Posted by: sirios
» RE: OVERPOPULATION Addressed
Posted by: greenPuker
» Then blow your brains out
Posted by: billwald
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gellero1 on Sep 19, 2008 9:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps she should visit areas of the world where they don't have hydropower and see how they live..............girls her age foraging for wood ( if there's any left ), cooking over open fires.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: So Typical.....
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: linecrosser on Sep 19, 2008 10:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did get a little lost in, the rivers losing their power and then filling with sediment.
Science has done its best to make life better, but there are and have always been trade-offs. The biggest, fly in the ointment, that causes science more problems than anything else is mankind's nature to, not only want to control mother nature, but other humans also. We're all doomed, by time anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 2:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And hardly seen anyone
Its like there was this mass of food growing across an enormous area of territory - and there was hardly anyone there
Supposedly in one of the most highly populated Countries in the World
So I am not convinced
I keep an open mind and find out how the World really is by travelling and finding it for myself
Tony
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 3:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: judyfood on Sep 19, 2008 7:48 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fortunately the president of Chile may be coming to her senses and exploring solar energy as a route for her country to take instead of ruining Patagonia. If anyone is interested check out this website for more information on the destructive practice of damming rivers and what fate could await Patagonia as well as many other areas of the world.
www.internationalrivers.org.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: samosamo on Sep 20, 2008 9:10 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would say that the free flow of waters all over the planet are part of the living 'gaia' organism that it is so dependent on and the real effects of manipulating it will certainly lead to some very drastic results and is actually doing so right now.
And Carl Sagan's idea of everyone just forgetting the basics of what we are made of, what keeps us alive, why we don't just fly off the planet and the workings of the sun are just not taken seriously anymore because of modern tech has truly taken our attention away, far far away where nothing but today is important. How very obvious now the need for the elders to keep up a tradition of handing down valuable insight that only comes with age and experience. All of this by itself will surely at the least bring on depopulation of humans for the environment's sake
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 21, 2008 9:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hydorelectric, if done appropriately, is one of our best options. I understand that reality must be very hard for you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 21, 2008 9:14 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Johndrag on Oct 11, 2008 4:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ahmlco on Sep 18, 2008 2:28 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ummm. No. The bottom of many lakes is quite cold, and rather effectively prevents decomposition. In fact, many lakes are being forested for well-preserved old-growth trees that have been submerged for decades.
I also find it amusing that the author thinks any design process done by man is any less capricious than that done by nature. Let one pebble erode this way instead of that in a mountain stream, and suddenly this valley receives water and that one does not. The river forms here and not there.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oh please
Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Oh please
Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Oh please
Posted by: mommaterra
» Better that organic matter enter ocean to prevent Global Warming
Posted by: abatto
» Cow Farts
Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Cow Farts
Posted by: Dartagnan
» RE: Cow Farts
Posted by: zipoka
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Libsrule on Sep 18, 2008 8:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now one can indeed wonder what the world would be like had we NEVER built a single dam.
Any ideas?
I've oft wondered about those who believe every dam in America should be torn down and damn the consequences to the millions of people who rely upon the energy, water and recreation derived from said dams.
Especially the drinking water part. Oh and the energy part too. I can do without the recreation if necessary.
So tell us oh wise one, WHAT is your solution to tearing down all the dams and how do we recoup the energy and water?
Well?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: And your solution is.....what?
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: And your solution is.....cheap shots?
Posted by: greenPuker
» RE: And your solution is.....what?
Posted by: sirios
» RE: And your solution is...not to worry?
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 19, 2008 4:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are leaving the age of Pisces and entering the age of Aquarius...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 19, 2008 4:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Indeed, except for one or two high profile engineering snafus, damming waters and harnassing their power - without burning fossil fuels - is a pretty good idea. There should be a dam in every place that can support it. Heck, the beavers do it. Your kitchen sink is a dam, and the comcept has great utility. Yes, they have downsides, but what doesn't? Are they worse than the dozens of new coal fired power plants that are spring up across the country?
This blog will apparently post any rediculous knee-jerk fluff it can. This is the kind of thing that makes liberals look like a bunch of whack jobs to middle of the road people.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: hoppingfrog
» c'mon, I'm as green as you are
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: daniel347x
» what do you know about me?
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» RE: Just Took Enviro Science 101
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hoppingfrog on Sep 19, 2008 5:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And your stupid "well beavers do it" comment, WOW, I mean WOW, what a load of crap. You should probably wash you brain out after make such a moron comment. I can't wait for your next one "Well the sun irradiates Iran (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan), So we are just doing the same with our nuclear bomb and DU weapons"
I hope this comes across as a smack down, you received the brunt for all of the previous comments
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WOW,
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: WOW,
Posted by: ciccio
» RE: WOW,..Knot_Rich lies!
Posted by: greenPuker
» thanks
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 5:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dams of course change the environment - there are costs and benefits to everything.
If your family has been living in a fertile valley for generations and some power comes along and builds a dam and floods your valley you are unlikely to be very happy.
However most dams have been built in mountainous areas where population is extremely sparse and where very little can grow because it is too cold and the soil is too poor.
Dams offer enormous benefits - they provide a store of fresh water for protection from drought. Without them many cities throughout the World simply could not survive even short periods of drought.
Of course in some areas dams are completely inappropriate and have been built for completely the wrong reasons and their existence has had an overwhelmingly negative impact.
For example if authority decided to build a massive dam across the Thames Valley to flood the entire area of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire soley to produce cheap hydro electricity for the City of London - it would be completely inappropriate.
Such similar madness may well have occurred is some poor third world countries due to the financial corruption endemic in rich Western Nations raping and pillaging with the help of organisations such as the World Bank and the IMF. But not all such schemes have a negative effect. Its a matter of taking a reasonable fair and objective view with regards the benefits versus all the real costs to human and all life affected.
Dams can significantly improve the health of the entire eco-system if built in appropriate places.
The eco-system of the UK has improved dramatically despite us having built 2500 large raised reservoirs. Without them we could only support around 10% of the current population and such things as clean water and sewage would be impossible throughout much of the country.
The argument that they have caused overall ecological damage - simply doesn't wash.
The UK has largely cleaned up its act. The water quality of rivers, seas, natural and artifical lakes has improved enormously - even within my own lifetime. It is far better than it has been for hundreds of years.
Many environmentalists of course think the world is massively overpopulated by the virus of the human race - and such population growth cannot continue.
They can't however discuss the impacts of their solutions - because it would mean the mass genocide of over 90% of the human race.
Now, I'm not arguing that there are too many human beings having too many children - and that continued population growth is not sustainable. I just think we should be discussing sensible measures of education and empowerment such that our population can decline gracefully over coming generations rather than the currently planned mass cull.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dams Are Integral To Human Civilisation - We've Had Them For Thousands of Years
Posted by: mommaterra
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jeff Greef on Sep 19, 2008 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chrisbarb on Sep 19, 2008 8:36 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF? What are you asking for mass starvation to save a few fish?
As for dams having a 50 year life span. That is bull, many dams have been in continual operation for hundreds of years. they may have a license for 50 years, but that license could be renewed and the dam keep going with little effort or change for many many cycles.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "if dams are bad everyhting is bad"..the unthinking has been heard from!
Posted by: greenPuker
» RE: "if dams are bad everyhting is bad"..the unthinking has been heard from!
Posted by: chrisbarb
» not well written
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sirios on Sep 19, 2008 8:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: OVERPOPULATION
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: OVERPOPULATION
Posted by: sirios
» RE: OVERPOPULATION Addressed
Posted by: greenPuker
» Then blow your brains out
Posted by: billwald
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gellero1 on Sep 19, 2008 9:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps she should visit areas of the world where they don't have hydropower and see how they live..............girls her age foraging for wood ( if there's any left ), cooking over open fires.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: So Typical.....
Posted by: greenPuker
Comments are closed-
Posted by: linecrosser on Sep 19, 2008 10:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did get a little lost in, the rivers losing their power and then filling with sediment.
Science has done its best to make life better, but there are and have always been trade-offs. The biggest, fly in the ointment, that causes science more problems than anything else is mankind's nature to, not only want to control mother nature, but other humans also. We're all doomed, by time anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 2:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And hardly seen anyone
Its like there was this mass of food growing across an enormous area of territory - and there was hardly anyone there
Supposedly in one of the most highly populated Countries in the World
So I am not convinced
I keep an open mind and find out how the World really is by travelling and finding it for myself
Tony
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: opmoc on Sep 19, 2008 3:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: judyfood on Sep 19, 2008 7:48 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fortunately the president of Chile may be coming to her senses and exploring solar energy as a route for her country to take instead of ruining Patagonia. If anyone is interested check out this website for more information on the destructive practice of damming rivers and what fate could await Patagonia as well as many other areas of the world.
www.internationalrivers.org.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: samosamo on Sep 20, 2008 9:10 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would say that the free flow of waters all over the planet are part of the living 'gaia' organism that it is so dependent on and the real effects of manipulating it will certainly lead to some very drastic results and is actually doing so right now.
And Carl Sagan's idea of everyone just forgetting the basics of what we are made of, what keeps us alive, why we don't just fly off the planet and the workings of the sun are just not taken seriously anymore because of modern tech has truly taken our attention away, far far away where nothing but today is important. How very obvious now the need for the elders to keep up a tradition of handing down valuable insight that only comes with age and experience. All of this by itself will surely at the least bring on depopulation of humans for the environment's sake
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 21, 2008 9:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hydorelectric, if done appropriately, is one of our best options. I understand that reality must be very hard for you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bluesmanjohnson on Sep 21, 2008 9:14 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Johndrag on Oct 11, 2008 4:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




