The South needs more water, I know it does sound crazy and costly but water is needed...it will not help the dry terrain though
2007-12-16 22:16:40 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Conservation
It's not needed. Droughts are part of the way of life. They have happened before, they will happen again.
The weather will change and we'll get more rain to end the drought.
These cycles go on about every 10 years or so.
2007-12-16 22:50:52 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
2 major problems: transportation, and salinity. There is no easy way to transport water or ice from melting ice caps to where people actually need the water. Water is heavy, and moving any significant quantity of it would use up a lot of resources. And, well... the water we need for drinking, farming, etc is fresh water. Human and animal kidneys, plants, etc don't handle salt water well. The water in the oceans is all salt water, and unless we somehow transport the Arctic ice to desert areas as actual ice, or at least put it in a sealed container while it's still ice, it will be salt water by the time it gets anywhere
2016-05-24 07:53:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nature has a way to take care of its own....that does not mean man should interfere by sending the Great Lakes down river to the south, southwest or any where else. The Great Lakes are in danger and agree or not they are the last of the giant fresh water reservoirs out there...don't mess with them
2007-12-18 04:23:12 · answer #3 · answered by maria z 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course we could build canals. Engineering wise, it's not a problem. The problem would be first, the cost. It cost over 2 billion dollars in 1963 to build the CAP (Central Arizona Project) to pump Colorado River water to Phoenix/Tucson. It's a LOT farther from the Great Lakes to Atlanta. The second problem is political. Nothing gets done unless it goes through Congress. Enough said about that!
2007-12-17 07:05:06 · answer #4 · answered by IplayadoconTV 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Did you think through this question before asking it?
Seriously, did you?
The Great Lakes are not an infinite source of water.
Also, it would break a treaty we have with Canada. I live close the the border and I do not want to end up on the front lines of a mounty invasion.
2007-12-18 18:34:45 · answer #5 · answered by Still Learning 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Great Lakes are already dropping thier levels at a alarming rate every year.This is the largest source of fresh water in the world, we need to take care of it and quit taking so much water from it already. It already provides water for cities. We need to protect these waters.
2007-12-17 02:21:41 · answer #6 · answered by Babe 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They have already tried stuff like this. The might Colorado River is only a trickle by the time it reaches the Pacific ocean due to all the divirsion of water from it. People need to realize that this in not the way to go. The way to do things is to work with nature and not against it. We really do not need plush golf courses and lawns in the desert. People should stop watering their lawns!
2007-12-17 02:03:51 · answer #7 · answered by countryguyhfc 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They can but would it really be a good idea to mess with mother nature. It could affect all sorts of things like the temp and rainfall. a long time ago, they were going to flood Death Valley with ocean water but found out that it could trigger an ice age because the water would evaporate and re-condense in the desert. Messing with the world's water supply isn't a smart thing to do.
2007-12-16 22:50:04 · answer #8 · answered by David M 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ummmm, wouldn't it be easier to pipe water from the Mississippi river? It's a lot closer after all!!
2007-12-17 08:59:37 · answer #9 · answered by brddg1974 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a slippery slope. Any county, state, or region doesn't have any claim to water outside their watershed.
2007-12-20 21:14:49 · answer #10 · answered by Samuel 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋