England Running Out of Water?

[Iain09 + 9]

7 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Meanwhile, across the pond...

New Jersey Governor Signs “Rain Tax” Bill; Residents Can Now BE TAXED When It Rains On Their Property

I think Mac Slavo just doesn't like taxes in general Tom !

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

The water agriculture uses in most cases doesn't come off the municipal supply

The 740L / head is basically all municipal supplied water which will include supply to businesses divided by population count. Its not a measure solely of domestic consumption

Don't know how England does it, but entire districts are on the same water system here.  So, ag, city are all rolled into the same.  Of course most of our cities are on wells and not on water districts being supplied from a large reservoir.  For the most part the really big cities are on reservoirs/water districts and all medium/small are not.  So, you would be correct to assume, that would include golf courses, side of road grass, waterparks, fountains, and households etc. 

[Oil_Engineer + 86]

On 3/19/2019 at 4:45 PM, NickW said:

Often you can read in the same newspaper how:

Brexit will destroy the meat industry by hindering exports

Brexit will cause widespread food shortages due to import issues

No one seems to see the possibility of the two issues cancelling each other out. 

 

Ok so I may not be able to get my regular supply of Kalamata olives but I can enjoy an extra Aberdeen Angus rump steak as we can no longer export it. 

Politicians can't count.  Economists can.

[Iain09 + 9]

5 hours ago, Oil_Engineer said:

Politicians can't count.  Economists can.

exactly

[CookieMonster + 1]

On 3/19/2019 at 2:04 PM, Enthalpic said:

Texas is already starting to put treated sewage back into the reservoirs.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/parched-texas-town-turns-to-sewage-water/

Ignore climate change and you might literally eat sh*t!

It is interesting that we trust in engineering so much when it comes to solutions except for solutions that are actually working.

That water is probably cleaner than water from an aquifer.  Tried it.  Drank it.  Bathed in it.  Lived to tell about it.

[NickW + 2,714]

7 hours ago, Oil_Engineer said:

Politicians can't count.  Economists can.

LOL - when did Economists ever get anything right?

They are cut from the same cloth as politicians

[WaytoPeace + 62]

The increasing catastrophic changes that will accompany un-mediated climate change are no laughing matter.  We are already experiencing significant impacts.  The lack of adequate drinking water is only one of them, and it is much worse in many other areas of the world than it is in Britain.  All of those impacts will be much greater in 12 years.  The problem is that it will likely take over a decade even with concerted action by all the major greenhouse gas emitting nations to cut net emissions to zero before things even stop getting worse.  If such action does not occur within the next 6 years, there will probably be as many as a billion people in the world 16 years from now who will be in real danger from more severe hurricanes, cyclones, sea level rise, floods, droughts, wild fires, and blizzards, or they will need to migrate great distances where conditions remain less impacted, at least for a while.  In many cases those people will need to emigrate, but there will be few countries willing to accept even a proportionate number of them.  The degree of hardship and misery will be unparalleled.  The longer it takes for world leaders to address this problem, the worse the impacts will be.  Don’t we care about all those people who are most vulnerable?  Do we really want to leave those challenges to our children and grandchildren?  

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

5 hours ago, CookieMonster said:

It is interesting that we trust in engineering so much when it comes to solutions except for solutions that are actually working.

That water is probably cleaner than water from an aquifer.  Tried it.  Drank it.  Bathed in it.  Lived to tell about it.

It's not a bad idea - just an unpleasant thought.

You are right that a good sewage treatment plant does an excellent job except for a few persistent organic substances (pharmaceuticals).  

It's not much different from what we are doing; we dump our effluent into the river - albeit downstream from the freshwater intake - so you could say the next city downstream is drinking an infinitesimally small amount of our effluent.

Edited March 23, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Iain09 + 9]

3 hours ago, CookieMonster said:

It is interesting that we trust in engineering so much when it comes to solutions except for solutions that are actually working.

That water is probably cleaner than water from an aquifer.  Tried it.  Drank it.  Bathed in it.  Lived to tell about it.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2009/11/drinking-water-cocaine-environment/

[WaytoPeace + 62]

The increasing catastrophic changes that will accompany un-mediated climate change are no laughing matter.  We are already experiencing significant impacts.  The lack of adequate drinking water is only one of them, and it is much worse in many other areas of the world than it is in Britain.  All of those impacts will be much greater in 12 years.  The problem is that it will likely take over a decade even with concerted action by all the major greenhouse gas emitting nations to cut net emissions to zero before things even stop getting worse.  If such action does not occur within the next 6 years, there will probably be as many as a billion people in the world 16 years from now who will be in real danger from more severe hurricanes, cyclones, sea level rise, floods, droughts, wild fires, and blizzards, or they will need to migrate great distances where conditions remain less impacted, at least for a while.  In many cases those people will need to emigrate, but there will be few countries willing to accept even a proportionate number of them.  The degree of hardship and misery will be unparalleled.  The longer it takes for world leaders to address this problem, the worse the impacts will be.  Don’t we care about all those people who are most vulnerable?  Do we really want to leave those challenges to our children and grandchildren?  

[WaytoPeace + 62]

The increasing catastrophic changes that will accompany un-mediated climate change are no laughing matter.  We are already experiencing significant impacts.  The lack of adequate drinking water is only one of them, and it is much worse in many other areas of the world than it is in Britain.  All of those impacts will be much greater in 12 years.  The problem is that it will likely take over a decade even with concerted action by all the major greenhouse gas emitting nations to cut net emissions to zero before things even stop getting worse.  If such action does not occur within the next 6 years, there will probably be as many as a billion people in the world 16 years from now who will be in real danger from more severe hurricanes, cyclones, sea level rise, floods, droughts, wild fires, and blizzards, or they will need to migrate great distances where conditions remain less impacted, at least for a while.  In many cases those people will need to emigrate, but there will be few countries willing to accept even a proportionate number of them.  The degree of hardship and misery will be unparalleled.  The longer it takes for world leaders to address this problem, the worse the impacts will be.  Don’t we care about all those people who are most vulnerable?  Do we really want to leave those challenges to our children and grandchildren?  

[Janet Alderton + 124]

On 3/19/2019 at 5:13 AM, Rodent said:

I always sucked at science, so maybe that's why I can't wrap my head around this problem. 

Did this sneak up on the UK and that's why they don't have enough desalination plants? Where does the water go once it is used? I legitimately claim utter ignorance. No need to answer that if my ignorance suggests there is no way I could comprehend the science of this in a paragraph or less.

The jaws of death description seems a bit melodramatic, but perhaps that is the only way to get people's attention nowadays. There are far too many "causes" these days. I suppose one must prioritize them. It would be great if people could agree on which cause should be placed in the forefront. 

Because honestly, if everything is a cause, nothing is a cause. I grow weary.

 

 

 

They have a lot of leaky pipes that can be replaced.

If they can move beyond the Brexit nonsense. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

20 hours ago, Iain09 said:

I think Mac Slavo just doesn't like taxes in general Tom !

Yep. But it gave me an excuse to post a link from shtfplan.com as an alternative to the MSM clowns.

[Iain09 + 9]

6 hours ago, Janet Alderton said:

They have a lot of leaky pipes that can be replaced.

If they can move beyond the Brexit nonsense. 

Not quite sure what brexit has to do with 40 to 50 year old leaking pipes ? enlighten me ? Do we buy the new ones from France or something ? We can dig them up with JCB's so we should be all right getting to them !!

[Al G + 2]

On 3/19/2019 at 7:30 PM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Israel did it. Desperate times; nothing is impossible. 

Right! Singapore as well.

England ought to reduce down to 20% their water spillage. Mass disciplining education to reduce water use may work except for human consumption of course such as drinking, cooking, and food manufacturing and any vital utility service.

[txlonghorn 0]

On 3/23/2019 at 3:13 AM, Iain09 said:

Not quite sure what brexit has to do with 40 to 50 year old leaking pipes ? enlighten me ? Do we buy the new ones from France or something ? We can dig them up with JCB's so we should be all right getting to them !!

I think what Janet is trying to say is that you all are too preoccupied with Brexit to deal with other issues such as leaky pipes

**not my opinion**

 

[Iain09 + 9]

1 hour ago, txlonghorn said:

I think what Janet is trying to say is that you all are too preoccupied with Brexit to deal with other issues such as leaky pipes

**not my opinion**

 

No worries pal, I suppose I should give a serious comment then. Yes we have a problem with underground pipes that leak. Not sure how we rank with other countries but yes we have a problem there for sure. A lot of the pipe infrastructure is quite old especially in rural areas, also the cost of digging up old pipes and replacing them is expensive. If we take into account that the water companies have shareholders to please then I would assume the leaking water issue is less expensive than replacing the pipes in most cases, its not damaging the environment like an oil leak or something along those lines, the balance sheet is the most important thing to corporates otherwise nobody would invest in shares and capital would shrink. As for being too occupied with brexit ?? lol ! ahem okay, I don't think the water companies are too bothered as they are not exporting or importing, their customers are already here 🙂 Unless they lead a double life as politicians (who are voted in) or they work in the media perhaps then no I don't think the water companies are too pre-occupied with Brexit ! Please do not think were all running around with our heads in our hands thinking the world is going to end because quite honestly most people that I speak too (remain or leave) have quite simply had enough of it and the shambles our so called politicians have created and have a what will be will be attitude. Just to be clear, leaking pipes was a problem for water leakage way before Brexit was on the horizon, in fact it was a problem before we even joined the European Union. On the brightside, or grey cloudy wet side, we have plenty of rain over long periods of time which allows water to seep down to underground river and resevoir systems, especially in the north and western regions of the UK. Obviously in hotter climates the rain can evaporate quicker and a succesful system would involve some level of capturing the water which we also do to some extent. We have a lot more people here now than 40 years ago so its just maths in terms of consumption and water companies are slow to invest in big infrastructure repairs when it literally rains every week and it returns to the system, but if it's going to stop raining and we are going to run out of fresh water in 25 years (PMSL) then maybe they will change that stance. To be honest I've always wanted to live in a hot place like California for instance so I could get used to it 🙂 I will also do my bit for the tourist board now - why dont you come and visit and see how much water there is, don't forget your raincoat and your wellies 🙂

[Iain09 + 9]

22 hours ago, Al G said:

Right! Singapore as well.

England ought to reduce down to 20% their water spillage. Mass disciplining education to reduce water use may work except for human consumption of course such as drinking, cooking, and food manufacturing and any vital utility service.

nice idea, wouldn't work. we live in a throw away society, like it or not and water is something we have lot, and lots, and lots, and lots of 🙂 Anyone fancy a cup of tea ?

Edited March 25, 2019 by Iain09

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

11 hours ago, Iain09 said:

Just to be clear, leaking pipes was a problem for water leakage way before Brexit was on the horizon, in fact it was a problem before we even joined the European Union. On the brightside, or grey cloudy wet side, we have plenty of rain over long periods of time which allows water to seep down to underground river and resevoir systems, especially in the north and western regions of the UK. Obviously in hotter climates the rain can evaporate quicker and a succesful system would involve some level of capturing the water which we also do to some extent. We have a lot more people here now than 40 years ago so its just maths in terms of consumption and water companies are slow to invest in big infrastructure repairs when it literally rains every week and it returns to the system, but if it's going to stop raining and we are going to run out of fresh water in 25 years (PMSL) then maybe they will change that stance. To be honest I've always wanted to live in a hot place like California for instance so I could get used to it 🙂 I will also do my bit for the tourist board now - why dont you come and visit and see how much water there is, don't forget your raincoat and your wellies 🙂

Iain, 

I find a that a common problem with politicians (and I guess the voters that elect them) these days is that nobody seems to care about or discuss the longterm. I don't know anything about the current situation with water in UK save what I read in that article, but generally I am pro reducing spillage; waste to energy etc. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 3/22/2019 at 6:53 PM, WaytoPeace said:

The increasing catastrophic changes that will accompany un-mediated climate change are no laughing matter.  We are already experiencing significant impacts.  The lack of adequate drinking water is only one of them, and it is much worse in many other areas of the world than it is in Britain.  All of those impacts will be much greater in 12 years.  The problem is that it will likely take over a decade even with concerted action by all the major greenhouse gas emitting nations to cut net emissions to zero before things even stop getting worse.  If such action does not occur within the next 6 years, there will probably be as many as a billion people in the world 16 years from now who will be in real danger from more severe hurricanes, cyclones, sea level rise, floods, droughts, wild fires, and blizzards, or they will need to migrate great distances where conditions remain less impacted, at least for a while.  In many cases those people will need to emigrate, but there will be few countries willing to accept even a proportionate number of them.  The degree of hardship and misery will be unparalleled.  The longer it takes for world leaders to address this problem, the worse the impacts will be.  Don’t we care about all those people who are most vulnerable?  Do we really want to leave those challenges to our children and grandchildren?  

Utter nonsense. Climate has always changed. Humanity has thrived more and more each decade. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 3/22/2019 at 8:58 PM, Janet Alderton said:

They have a lot of leaky pipes that can be replaced.

If they can move beyond the Brexit nonsense. 

Brexit is the will of the people. The elites are defying the majority vote of the people. That is tyranny. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

15 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Brexit is the will of the people. The elites are defying the majority vote of the people. That is tyranny. 

Great Britain Stories

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QdcOTTrbFyKFYBJOzEHvKUrkdq_A7QyWwAgZXt5ybi0/edit#

[mad-trader + 25]

delete me/

Edited March 26, 2019 by mad-trader
trying to delete

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 3/22/2019 at 7:10 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Meanwhile, across the pond...

New Jersey Governor Signs “Rain Tax” Bill; Residents Can Now BE TAXED When It Rains On Their Property

 

And here's the actual document.

Then again, the bleated cry of outrage published in that article that Tom references had a fascinating little quip at the bottom, which I now reproduce in its entirety for the readership here to contemplate:

What makes this interesting is that large segments of the Greater New York moneyed class lives in Northern New Jersey, including lots and lots of bankers and (of course) the thieves of Wall Street.  And NJ extends down to Philadelphia, separated from PA and Philly only by the Delaware River. Perhaps to no surprise, the middle class workers of Philly do not actually live in Philly, they live in the suburban communities of Southern NJ and commute in over the Ben Franklin Bridge.  So there you have it: lots of rich people in Northern NJ, and lots of the middle-class workers in Southern NJ.  

You would think that, with this income mix, you would not get the result described by poster "21Bravo" described above.  Yet, that is exactly how New Jersey has evolved.  It is, indeed, a Marxist-run cesspool.  What fascinates me is how this very prosperous State could possibly have so totally crumbled into ruin and oblivion.  I consider myself a fairly astute observer of the political landscape, yet I must confess that I remain baffled.  

America:  never underestimate the abilities of politicians to totally wreck things.  It is a special talent.  Unreal.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

 

On 3/22/2019 at 7:14 PM, Enthalpic said:

It's not a bad idea - just an unpleasant thought.

You are right that a good sewage treatment plant does an excellent job except for a few persistent organic substances (pharmaceuticals).  

It's not much different from what we are doing; we dump our effluent into the river - albeit downstream from the freshwater intake - so you could say the next city downstream is drinking an infinitesimally small amount of our effluent.

It might be infinitesimally small by Canadian Standards, where you have these vast flows of fresh mountain snowmelt to blend in and dilute, but that is not quite the situation in Europe.  Germany uses the Rhine as a vast sewer, dumping all manner of atrocious stuff in there.  Then add whatever the bulging numbers of cargo and tourist boats are floating up and down.  All that sludge ends up in Holland, which - you guessed it - pumps that river water to use as their drinking water!   Aargh!  If all we had to worry about were the contents of old medications, you would not hear a peep of complaint.  It's all the other chemicals that really make it just awful. A good reason to emigrate, in my opinion.