Its Time To talk About Water...

1234689

Comments

  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    Mestophar wrote:
    You call it fresh drinking water... and refer to the creek water as not fit for human consumption, where the hauled water you get at the bush place is.


    YUP! And that would be because the creek water has been tested and we've been advised that it's not fit for human consumption as opposed to the water that is brought in which also has to be tested and approved as fit for human consumption.

    Seriously do you even have a point? I mean aside from deciding that you'd like to have a go at me today and being a condescending piece of work?
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    Jeanie wrote:
    YUP! And that would be because the creek water has been tested and we've been advised that it's not fit for human consumption as opposed to the water that is brought in which also has to be tested and approved as fit for human consumption.

    Seriously do you even have a point? I mean aside from deciding that you'd like to have a go at me today and being a condescending piece of work?

    Do you drink it or not?
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Mestophar wrote:
    Desalination is not going to be a viable alternative. It is very expensive, requiring huge water pressures, large amounts of energy, precise membrane technologies, and a shit ton of servicing. As well it is slow, a large plant still produces very little potable water.

    In North America it will be mandated in the near future that you need duel flush toilets that use very little water to flush away #1. Storage type hot water heaters will be replaced with demand style. Grey water recycling systems will be required. ETC. All this stuff has been around for a very long time, its just typical that North America is one of the last to admit/deal with the problem.

    Water is wasted by pollutants. Any above ground water source, like lakes and rivers, are far more polluted than rain water and below ground sources. When water is taken from a lake it is taken from a specific layer of the water/pollutant mixture. As water is used chemicals are added that are naturally coherant to the water molecule, making them more dense and sinking to the bottom. The opposite occurs with molecules that repel the water molecule, they float unless they are naturally more dense. Water treatment facilities work to floculate, scrub or skim most of these impurities out, but the shear amount of waste created makes it impossible for the quality of waste to be where it should be.

    The majority of fresh water, recent rain or snow melt, is being used by agriculture. Fresh water lakes are drying up, aquifers are drying up, the glaciers are melting(becoming salinated)... A big ditch is going to be built from Northern Canada to the Eastern USA soon. Maybe along the American Union highway...

    ever hear of distillation? i've seen several solar distillers which are passive and don't use energy. they're not even expensive.
    the water used for agriculture is from wells. we cannot use polluted water for agriculture because the crops will absorb the pollutants. even if it's hay to feed cattle; the cattle then absorb it. check any states fishing regulations and you'll find a safe limit of fish that can be eaten. some lakes you can't eat anything out of.
    the problem with many of these chemicals is when you distill the water; the steam must rise 32" to remove these chemicals.
    rain water and snow is polluted. don't forget it passed through a polluted atmosphere and collected those pollutants as it fell.
    it's late so i'm just throwing out facts. i'll elaborate tomorrow if you wish.
  • hippiemom
    hippiemom Posts: 3,326
    onelongsong wrote:
    DUDE; you have no idea about the mess we're about to enter. look at las vegas. fountains all over yet they don't have water. vegas is trying to take water from up north and is putting in a pipeline.

    here's my question:
    our fish and game departments regulate the size of the herds based on the resourses and habitat available. if they don't; ALL the animals will starve.
    so why can't we regulate growth in cities and states? in the past; arizona and nevada sold water to california. now those states have grown and need that water so california cannot support it's population. that's why there's a big push in california to distill sea water.

    too bad it's so late. i've got a lot of information on this subject. once again; you know the water situation. why do you need the government to tell you to conserve? people are plain stupid (not referring to you). again, look at vegas. people know they have a water problem yet they're building houses like there's no tomorrow. if you know there's no water; why are you building there?
    We need the government to regulate it because most people ARE just plain stupid. You answered your own question .... they're building like crazy in cities that already have water shortages and no idea how to solve them. Left to their own devices, greedy developers will keep building, and stupid people will keep buying.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    Mestophar wrote:
    Do you drink it or not?

    Why do you want to know? Plan on blaming me for something?
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Mestophar wrote:
    Salt water being a solution is the underlying principle of the problem... You asked.

    Scientists from every century of human existence have been trying to remove salt from water and have found no efficient way of doing so. It really has been at the top of scientific matters, and if a breakthrough were found would change the course of human existence forever. But nothing has been found... How many people have died from thirst while floating on top of a gigantic mass of water?

    maybe I have a little more confidence in human determination to figure it out. just because a perfected method hasnt been discovered doesnt mean people have stopped trying.

    and I'm sure every person who was caught floating out on the ocean has died. pocket size Desalination machines havent been invented yet. but great question, glad you asked.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Jeanie wrote:
    Why do you want to know? Plan on blaming me for something?

    POOP drinker!!!! :D:D
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    jlew24asu wrote:
    POOP drinker!!!! :D:D


    Oh you shut up! ;):p:D
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    onelongsong wrote:
    ever hear of distillation? i've seen several solar distillers which are passive and don't use energy. they're not even expensive.
    the water used for agriculture is from wells. we cannot use polluted water for agriculture because the crops will absorb the pollutants. even if it's hay to feed cattle; the cattle then absorb it. check any states fishing regulations and you'll find a safe limit of fish that can be eaten. some lakes you can't eat anything out of.
    the problem with many of these chemicals is when you distill the water; the steam must rise 32" to remove these chemicals.
    rain water and snow is polluted. don't forget it passed through a polluted atmosphere and collected those pollutants as it fell.
    it's late so i'm just throwing out facts. i'll elaborate tomorrow if you wish.

    Traditional distillation is about as viable as desalinization. Solar power has its limits and I would assume that these limits pertain to the solar distillers as well.

    My family drinks 2 gallons of water a day, do you know how many square feet of panel I would need(assuming the sun as shining) to saciate our thirst?
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Jeanie wrote:
    YUP! And that would be because the creek water has been tested and we've been advised that it's not fit for human consumption as opposed to the water that is brought in which also has to be tested and approved as fit for human consumption.

    Seriously do you even have a point? I mean aside from deciding that you'd like to have a go at me today and being a condescending piece of work?

    i don't think the bloke knows what he's talking about. that seems to be the problem. he states mandates and laws nobody has ever heard of. and taking water from a specific layer of a lake??? the inlet pipe is placed so sediments don't get into it. nobody goes out and tests layers of a lake. lakes turn-over due to temperature changes. lakes do have thermal layers but they are constantly changing. i don't want to knit-pick all the rediculous things he's said here. i say just ignore him love. just like a mosquito; he'll go away.
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    i'll drink and use recycled water after everyone from the prime minister down does it.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Maybe if we each ate a little teeny amount of shit a day we could evolve with a tolerance to e.coli.
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    gue_barium wrote:
    Maybe if we each ate a little teeny amount of shit a day we could evolve with a tolerance to e.coli.

    well obviously there are people out there that do it cause there sure is a hell of a lot of people regurgitating it and talking shit.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Mestophar wrote:
    Traditional distillation is about as viable as desalinization. Solar power has its limits and I would assume that these limits pertain to the solar distillers as well.

    My family drinks 2 gallons of water a day, do you know how many square feet of panel I would need(assuming the sun as shining) to saciate our thirst?

    solar has no limitations. i've been 100% solar for a long time and i've not been limited in any way. the problem is educating the public to get those ideas about the older solar applications out of their heads and introduce them to the modern solar applications.

    a simple single basin passive solar distiller can provide you with 4 gallons of distilled water each day. (taken from "SOLARIZE YOUR HOME; PAGE 56.) it's a small unit; about 2" x 4' you place in the sun. because you store the extra water; that is what you use when the sun isn't shining.
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    i don't think the bloke knows what he's talking about. that seems to be the problem. he states mandates and laws nobody has ever heard of. and taking water from a specific layer of a lake??? the inlet pipe is placed so sediments don't get into it. nobody goes out and tests layers of a lake. lakes turn-over due to temperature changes. lakes do have thermal layers but they are constantly changing. i don't want to knit-pick all the rediculous things he's said here. i say just ignore him love. just like a mosquito; he'll go away.


    :) I am unconcerned. The initial response was from a reply I made to Scott anyway regarding the government plan to pump recycled effluent (recycled by reverse osmosis) into the natural drinking supply. Scott knows my thoughts on the government. And I've already clarified regarding my issues with the plan. I suspect tis just boredom and a desire to be noticed.

    Anyway, it's a really interesting subject which I feel strongly about and I'd just be happy to see governments around the world acknowledge there is a problem and come up with sensible REAL solutions.

    We can play this reverse osmosis bullshit at a later date and as I said to scott, let's use that water for all the other possible uses before we get to drinking it. AND no need to be pumping it into the natural supply. Sort those things and I'll consider it. Find a way for me to reverse osmosis my own effluent and I'll consider it further. Otherwise I'm against it.
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • Yoyoyo
    Yoyoyo Posts: 310
    onelongsong wrote:
    i don't think the bloke knows what he's talking about. that seems to be the problem. he states mandates and laws nobody has ever heard of. and taking water from a specific layer of a lake??? the inlet pipe is placed so sediments don't get into it. nobody goes out and tests layers of a lake. lakes turn-over due to temperature changes. lakes do have thermal layers but they are constantly changing. i don't want to knit-pick all the rediculous things he's said here. i say just ignore him love. just like a mosquito; he'll go away.

    Maybe you should "think" again... Every state/county/municipality are making water conservation laws. Right right...and nobody takes water samples thats right.
    No need to be void, or save up on life

    You got to spend it all
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    gue_barium wrote:
    Maybe if we each ate a little teeny amount of shit a day we could evolve with a tolerance to e.coli.


    :D You first gue! ;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    jlew24asu wrote:
    maybe I have a little more confidence in human determination to figure it out. just because a perfected method hasnt been discovered doesnt mean people have stopped trying.

    and I'm sure every person who was caught floating out on the ocean has died. pocket size Desalination machines havent been invented yet. but great question, glad you asked.

    actually; solar pocket desalination units are a part of most survival packets for those that may be stranded at sea. they've been around for a long time.
  • Jeanie
    Jeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    actually; solar pocket desalination units are a part of most survival packets for those that may be stranded at sea. they've been around for a long time.


    Yeah, it's hard to tell, (he has such a great poker face! :p ) but me thinks little jlew was being sarcastic with this post. :D

    Not that there's anything wrong with that! ;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Mestophar wrote:
    Maybe you should "think" again... Every state/county/municipality are making water conservation laws. Right right...and nobody takes water samples thats right.

    water samples are taken every day. and municipailties ARE making conservation laws FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. i can't imagine a MANDATE where i have to rip out my loo and replace it before the toilet police get here.
    every lake is tested and thus the eating restrictions i talked about earlier. but if you want to stress your point; how thick are these layers? if i am in a lake; how do i identify a layer? can you back up this layer theory with a scientific link that proves water is taken from these layers? if it's true; it should be easy to find.

Categories