2006-12-06 09:53:31 · 10 answers · asked by pamela_jake 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Geography
They don't have locks on the Panama Canal because one ocean is higher than the other, they have them because the land is higher in the middle--85 feet higher, to be exact. As I have explained in the past, the level of the sea is more or less uniform throughout the world, making the concept of "sea level" possible.
But that's not to say you wouldn't get any flow from one ocean to the other if somebody dug your "mile-deep trench" from coast to coast. Scientists studying the feasibility of a sea-level canal (not a mile deep, but deep enough) have found that the Pacific at Panama is about eight inches higher than the Atlantic on average due to currents and such. In addition, tidal variation on the Pacific side of Panama is much greater than on the Atlantic side--20 feet vs. 1 foot.
That means the Pacific would flow into the Atlantic through the sea-level canal, producing currents that could reach nearly 6 MPH. While that wouldn't cause flooding, it would definitely complicate navigation.
But that's the least of the problems a sea-level canal would present. It would also allow Pacific and Atlantic marine species to mingle, with unpredictable but probably bad consequences for the environment. Worse, constructing it would require either (1) tens of billions of dollars or (2) nuclear explosives. So don't expect it any time soon.
2006-12-06 10:45:34 · answer #1 · answered by Brain 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can't actually destroy the Panama canal. It's already a huge pit. The worst that could happen was to destroy the man made locks and that would just slow the canal because more water would be needed to fill the section before the ship could get to the next lock.
2006-12-06 10:09:07 · answer #2 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Construction workers would need to rebuild the panama canal and in that time, ships would need to sail around the continents (around North America and South America) and that would take a way longer time than just going straight through.
2006-12-06 10:43:07 · answer #3 · answered by ShaDoW 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would take longer for ships to get to the west coast and the east coast as well. It would have to go along the dangerous Cape Horn in South America, where weather is very unpredictable. Plus all the world powers would start builiding it over again and the people who destroyed it will be executed
2006-12-06 11:49:43 · answer #4 · answered by SteamedCopper 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
definite and all hell could destroy loose for delivery. The locks are substantial so as that ships and such can get via while not having to rigidity approximately water ranges and tides and stuff like that.
2016-12-13 04:07:25 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ships would need to start "rounding the Horn" again to get to the East Coast....or they'd have to take an even longer route : they would have to circumnavigate the globe to get there !
2006-12-06 10:00:09 · answer #6 · answered by Ricvee 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More people would go and restore the canal ....
2006-12-06 09:56:04 · answer #7 · answered by RedCloud_1998 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Economic collapse for the US until it was repaired
2006-12-06 12:41:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would build a newer, wider one.
2006-12-06 11:53:26 · answer #9 · answered by TAHOE REALTOR 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
HOW?
ITS A LONG CANAL..
ANYWAY WE WOULD REBUILD IT.
2006-12-06 10:00:59 · answer #10 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋