https://www.courthousenews.com/georgia-r...ee-border/

I have been following this off and on for several years. Here is an example of a Government body who has the means to get all the water they could ever want but would rather try and take land from another state because it is cheaper.

Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  https://www.courthousenews.com/georgia-r...ee-border/

I have been following this off and on for several years. Here is an example of a Government body who has the means to get all the water they could ever want but would rather try and take land from another state because it is cheaper.

Georgia has access to a thing called the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

There has been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

A lot of states SHOULD have built desalination tanks decades ago. California is one of them. There should have been more foresight back in the 60's. I know there are a few cities and towns in Florida (Cocoa, I believe for one) that built some back in the 70's and 80's.

IMO, this is one major reason why Florida (which the exception of South Florida) doesn't have the drought or water restrictions that some other states do.

My get rich plan requires a lot of money and work but in a nutshell, I think companies should form that follow super storms across the country and somehow capture and tank water that falls from these storms. They can then truck it around the country to areas that need the water the most, selling it for a decent profit.

I'm convinced storms will get more and more powerful as the climate extremes become more pronounced. In Hawaii earlier this year, one city broke Alvin's long-standing (1979) USA record of most rain to fall in a single (it was something like 44-45 inches?). Last year with Harvey, most of Houston received 30-40 inches of rain over a 3-4 day period. And even this year, Houston was starting to creep back into drought-like conditions after a pretty dry spring but on Monday, parts of north Houston got 5-6 inches of rain in the afternoon, and then over the past two days, my neighborhood has received 4 inches of rain.

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  https://www.courthousenews.com/georgia-r...ee-border/

I have been following this off and on for several years. Here is an example of a Government body who has the means to get all the water they could ever want but would rather try and take land from another state because it is cheaper.

Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

Well it is actually Georgia's land. A surveyor error put it in Tennessee. Georgia has been protesting for 150 years.

And the reason Georgia has some difficulties with water is because Alabama wants Georgia's water for the 1 barge a year that travels down a channel and Florida wants to blame Georgia for their mismanagement of Apalachicola Bay fisheries.

(05-22-2018 07:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  https://www.courthousenews.com/georgia-r...ee-border/

I have been following this off and on for several years. Here is an example of a Government body who has the means to get all the water they could ever want but would rather try and take land from another state because it is cheaper.

Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

Well it is actually Georgia's land. A surveyor error put it in Tennessee. Georgia has been protesting for 150 years.

True, but it wont help. The courts already ruled in these type of disputes and the ruling is as follows: Historically, the Supreme Court has been hesitant to get involved in such disputes. In 1893, in a similar case - State of Virginia v. State of Tennessee, the court ruled "A boundary line between States which has been run out... and afterwards recognized and acquiesced in by them for a long course of years is conclusive...".

https://patch.com/tennessee/chattanooga/...see-border

It won’t happen.

It’s a waste of time and money.

Georgia should seek relief elsewhere.

They can form and the commissions they want. There is no benefit to TN to do this and they would never win in Court. File this one away to talk about in another 10 years

(05-22-2018 08:02 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 07:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  https://www.courthousenews.com/georgia-r...ee-border/

I have been following this off and on for several years. Here is an example of a Government body who has the means to get all the water they could ever want but would rather try and take land from another state because it is cheaper.

Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

Well it is actually Georgia's land. A surveyor error put it in Tennessee. Georgia has been protesting for 150 years.

True, but it wont help. The courts already ruled in these type of disputes and the ruling is as follows: Historically, the Supreme Court has been hesitant to get involved in such disputes. In 1893, in a similar case - State of Virginia v. State of Tennessee, the court ruled "A boundary line between States which has been run out... and afterwards recognized and acquiesced in by them for a long course of years is conclusive...".

https://patch.com/tennessee/chattanooga/...see-border

Not likely that there would be any change.

Although Georgia HAS been protesting for well over a century. They never really acquiesced.

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

That was one of the major plot points in the last Mad Max movie.

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

I think TN has by far the stronger argument here, but that is a frivolous suggestion. Desalination is a hugely expensive process, even for a small amount of water.

(05-22-2018 08:25 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  There have been talks for sometime that WWIII will be over fresh water. It might be true.

That was one of the major plot points in the last Mad Max movie.

Can’t we just settle this on the football field, like civilized people?

Seriously, it is a shame that state boundaries were not created by reference to the various watersheds. So much strife and wasted time/money could’ve been avoided.

Desalinization is a problem for Atlanta because of distance inland, but more because of attitude. Pumping water uphill gets expensive pretty quickly.

It makes a lot more sense for California. Three major metro areas are on the coast (San Diego, LAX, SFO) and the fourth (Sacramento) is inland but basically at sea level. IIRC, parts of Sacramento are below sea level.

(05-22-2018 07:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  My get rich plan requires a lot of money and work but in a nutshell, I think companies should form that follow super storms across the country and somehow capture and tank water that falls from these storms. They can then truck it around the country to areas that need the water the most, selling it for a decent profit.

I'm convinced storms will get more and more powerful as the climate extremes become more pronounced. In Hawaii earlier this year, one city broke Alvin's long-standing (1979) USA record of most rain to fall in a single (it was something like 44-45 inches?). Last year with Harvey, most of Houston received 30-40 inches of rain over a 3-4 day period. And even this year, Houston was starting to creep back into drought-like conditions after a pretty dry spring but on Monday, parts of north Houston got 5-6 inches of rain in the afternoon, and then over the past two days, my neighborhood has received 4 inches of rain.

When Houston flooded during the hurricanes, I thought it would make sense to have a fleet of several hundred tankers that could literally suction floodwater and truck it to a different area. They’d have to start where flooding wasn’t as bad and work their way towards worse flooding, but at least that would get some areas back to normal quickly, which makes it easier to facilitate cleanup of harder hit areas. Obviously you can’t suction nine trillion gallons of water with 11,600 gallon tankers, but making a few million gallons go away each day will greatly speed up the process.

The same could be done up north when tens of feet of snow fall. Melt the snow as it’s collected, and the disposal process becomes much more efficient.

(05-22-2018 09:03 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 07:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  My get rich plan requires a lot of money and work but in a nutshell, I think companies should form that follow super storms across the country and somehow capture and tank water that falls from these storms. They can then truck it around the country to areas that need the water the most, selling it for a decent profit.
I'm convinced storms will get more and more powerful as the climate extremes become more pronounced. In Hawaii earlier this year, one city broke Alvin's long-standing (1979) USA record of most rain to fall in a single (it was something like 44-45 inches?). Last year with Harvey, most of Houston received 30-40 inches of rain over a 3-4 day period. And even this year, Houston was starting to creep back into drought-like conditions after a pretty dry spring but on Monday, parts of north Houston got 5-6 inches of rain in the afternoon, and then over the past two days, my neighborhood has received 4 inches of rain.

When Houston flooded during the hurricanes, I thought it would make sense to have a fleet of several hundred tankers that could literally suction floodwater and truck it to a different area. They’d have to start where flooding wasn’t as bad and work their way towards worse flooding, but at least that would get some areas back to normal quickly, which makes it easier to facilitate cleanup of harder hit areas. Obviously you can’t suction nine trillion gallons of water with 11,600 gallon tankers, but making a few million gallons go away each day will greatly speed up the process.
The same could be done up north when tens of feet of snow fall. Melt the snow as it’s collected, and the disposal process becomes much more efficient.

It's a scale problem. You just couldn't get enough tankers to make a dent in the volume of water that came down. Plus you'd need some infrastructure to get the tankers loaded.

(05-22-2018 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 03:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  Georgia has access to the Atlantic Ocean. They just don't want to pony up the money for desalination.

I think TN has by far the stronger argument here, but that is a frivolous suggestion. Desalination is a hugely expensive process, even for a small amount of water.

Do it the way Israel has done it with reverse osmosis.

Probably going to need to bite the bullet and do that or just buy the water from Tennessee because Atlanta is just growing too fast.

States need to hire people like the ones we have in El Paso. Here we are in the desert and we have a desalination plant. That's what you call looking at the future. That plant turns brackish underground water to a drinkable one.

(05-22-2018 09:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 09:03 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 07:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  My get rich plan requires a lot of money and work but in a nutshell, I think companies should form that follow super storms across the country and somehow capture and tank water that falls from these storms. They can then truck it around the country to areas that need the water the most, selling it for a decent profit.
I'm convinced storms will get more and more powerful as the climate extremes become more pronounced. In Hawaii earlier this year, one city broke Alvin's long-standing (1979) USA record of most rain to fall in a single (it was something like 44-45 inches?). Last year with Harvey, most of Houston received 30-40 inches of rain over a 3-4 day period. And even this year, Houston was starting to creep back into drought-like conditions after a pretty dry spring but on Monday, parts of north Houston got 5-6 inches of rain in the afternoon, and then over the past two days, my neighborhood has received 4 inches of rain.

When Houston flooded during the hurricanes, I thought it would make sense to have a fleet of several hundred tankers that could literally suction floodwater and truck it to a different area. They’d have to start where flooding wasn’t as bad and work their way towards worse flooding, but at least that would get some areas back to normal quickly, which makes it easier to facilitate cleanup of harder hit areas. Obviously you can’t suction nine trillion gallons of water with 11,600 gallon tankers, but making a few million gallons go away each day will greatly speed up the process.
The same could be done up north when tens of feet of snow fall. Melt the snow as it’s collected, and the disposal process becomes much more efficient.

It's a scale problem. You just couldn't get enough tankers to make a dent in the volume of water that came down. Plus you'd need some infrastructure to get the tankers loaded.

just the weight alone of each tanker would destroy the existing roadway system(s) in no time.....

install a magnetism tranport system, and you could change that aspect.....

however, the cost due to scale of effort vs. recovery value only results in a pipe dream....maybe his came from one of mine....

(05-22-2018 10:56 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  States need to hire people like the ones we have in El Paso. Here we are in the desert and we have a desalination plant. That's what you call looking at the future. That plant turns brackish underground water to a drinkable one.

XACLY!.....tho ol' adage, "there's no time like the present" comes to mind.....

you simply have to bite the bullet in certain areas and cut out unnecessary funding along the way....

that's a problem when it comes to most local/state gubberment agencies....

(05-23-2018 05:56 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 10:56 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  States need to hire people like the ones we have in El Paso. Here we are in the desert and we have a desalination plant. That's what you call looking at the future. That plant turns brackish underground water to a drinkable one.

XACLY!.....tho ol' adage, "there's no time like the present" comes to mind.....

you simply have to bite the bullet in certain areas and cut out unnecessary funding along the way....

that's a problem when it comes to most local/state gubberment agencies....

Which is why Georgia has water wars with Florida and Alabama trying to keep Georgia from using its own water. Atlanta refused to contribute to building Lake Lanier in 1948, leaving its purpose kind of gray. As a result there have been decades long court battles over how much water the Atlanta area can take from Lake Lanier.

Atlanta is prime example of refusing to plan for the future, at least if they have to pay for it. The only reason they have their rail system is because Seattle turned it down. The feds were going to pay for most of two pilot rail lines. Seattle and DC were supposed to be the ones. On roads and water and transit since that initial construction, they do nothing.