SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Hurricanes, heavy rains are critical for Hawai'i's groundwater supply:
Dores and a team of scientists from SOEST and the Hawai'i Department of Health collected rainfall around the island of Oahu and analyzed the stable isotopes of rainwater, chemical signatures in the water molecules. They compared the chemical signatures in rainwater to those of groundwater to determine the source of water in the aquifers—event-based rainfall or trade wind-related rain.
"Because windward and mauka showers are so common, it is easy to assume that is the main source of our drinking water," said Dores. "Also, large rainfall events such as Kona storms[*] result in significant runoff into the oceans. However, our research found that a lot of the rain from Kona storms makes it into our groundwater aquifers and is an important source of our drinking water."
[*] Kona Storms:
Kona storms (also called Kona lows) are a type of seasonal cyclone in the Hawaiian Islands, usually formed in the winter from winds coming from the westerly "kona" (normally leeward) direction. They are mainly cold core cyclones, which places them in the extratropical cyclone rather than the subtropical cyclone category. Hawaii typically experiences two to three annually, which can affect the state for a week or more. Among their hazards are heavy rain, hailstorms, flash floods and their associated landslides, high elevation snow, high winds which result in large surf and swells, and waterspouts.
In Hawaii, the rain must fall heavily upon the plain.
[Ed Note - For those who don't know, Hawaiʻi is the largest island located in the U.S. state of Hawaii.]
Journal Reference:
Daniel Dores, Craig R. Glenn, Giuseppe Torri, et al. Implications for groundwater recharge from stable isotopic composition of precipitation in Hawai'i during the 2017–2018 La Niña, Hydrological Processes (DOI: 10.1002/hyp.13907)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @09:06AM (1 child)
Stupid Ha'oles! "Kona" means "south" not west, because the winds of Kona storms blow from the South, when they Blow Big. Frigging malahinis and FOTPs, who haven't done their Covid-19 tests?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @02:48PM
Hey brudda, you stay lost! We say "Kona" - we think "leeward"... like John Cruz 'splain it:
On the Island, we do it Island Style
From the mountain to the ocean
From the windward to the leeward side
---
And save that stink-eye fo' you look in mirror!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @09:39AM (3 children)
As my grandpa likes to say, no shit Sherlock!
Now let's see some studies to finally determine if hot is warmer than cold, if feathers help birds fly, and if thunderstorms produce lightning.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @01:29PM (2 children)
That's not necessarily the case, around here a significant chunk of the groundwater comes from snow in the mountains melting over the course of the year. Yes, it's a bit colder here than in Hawaii, but it's hardly a given that the groundwater would be the result of rain in any area of the world. And in this case, it isn't even all rain, it's these specific storms that do appear to contribute disproportionately to the aquifers compared with more regular rain. Again, this is not necessarily a given, the water could be running off immediately and not being properly stored as is often the case when you get torrential rain, there's so much that it can't all be absorbed leading to flooding.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday October 14 2020, @04:30PM (1 child)
Have you seen the mountains in Hawaii? Just saying, their fresh "groundwater" didn't come from the ocean. Thus, it inevitably had to come from rain. I would have been surprised, if it wasn't replenished from rain.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @04:42PM
You're completely missing the point here. Just because it came from rain, doesn't mean that all rain is equal in that regard. A light misting might not contribute anything at all whereas too much and it just runs off without being absorbed.
This kind of research helps to understand where the water is coming from, so they can better estimate how quickly it can be used and what the zoning regulations should be to ensure that there's ample water under different possible climate change scenarios.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 14 2020, @09:41AM (31 children)
All of our drinking water, the world over, is dependent on rain. On an island, that dependency is more obvious than on a continent. All fresh water comes from precipitation, whether it has been stored for a few thousand years in a glacier, or maybe stored for millions of years in an aquifer. When the glaciers are gone, and the aquifers have been pumped dry, it will become exceedingly obvious that we all depend on the rain for drinking water.
For that reason, I believe that we should be pushing desalination, now. With enough desalination, we could green the Sahara, and our own Salton Sea. A lot of barren desert land could be greened up nicely, if we took our water directly from the sea, and pump that water where it is most needed. California's agriculture could be made sustainable, while the rivers are allowed to return to their natural state. And, the list goes on . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @10:29AM (21 children)
That would require a tremendous amount of energy. More than is currently available. It could be done with cheap fusion, or large scale orbital solar. Stuff that's possible within our lifetime, if people get out of the way and let it happen.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:10AM
If the job is to irrigate the sahara, then right there is a huge amount of sunshine. No need to launch panels into space!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 14 2020, @12:11PM (17 children)
You're right on one score, at least. Converting the Sahara into cropland would be a seemingly impossible, and overwhelming task, that no almost no one would get onboard with. Let's start, instead, with irrigating only fifty miles along the western edge of the continent. That would be entirely possible with resources at hand, and/or reasonably at hand in the next few decades. Fresh water constantly being pumped into the land, to be absorbed into the sand, or evaporated into the atmosphere, or to be taken up by crop plants. A fifty mile wide strip of land from Senegal to Morocco, turned into cropland.
How many hungry people will all of that food feed? Only that small of a start will go a long way toward alleviating world hunger.
And, when that first fifty miles has stabilized, stopped absorbing crazy amounts of water, that corridor can be widened to sixty miles. When the concept is proven, start another project that includes a fifty mile strip on the eastern side of the continent.
Alternatively, imagine the Qattara Depression being filled with 100 feet of water. Land within 10 or 15 miles of the water's edge would become fertile again, even without further irrigation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @01:22PM (2 children)
We could do that in the US and solve unemployment overnight. Put every unemployed idle hand to work landscaping in the desert and planting food forests. A few tens of millions of people on make-work projects like that would probably make a larger substantive difference than any of the half-assed climate agreements.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @01:31PM (1 child)
That's the point of the Green New Deal, it addresses two problems at once, and probably others indirectly, it gets people to work and it works to fight emissions. It's also why we're not going to get it without removing the corrupt politicians from congress as they don't want that as it dose two things they don't want, gives regular people a living wage and cuts into oil industry profits.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Thursday October 15 2020, @09:58PM
Oil companies are starting to rebrand themselves as energy companies and are expanding into the renewable energy production.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @02:05PM (1 child)
It's not like there is a food *production* shortage on earth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @02:58PM
That's a detail that gets ignored when it's inconvenient. We have massive food distribution issues, but no real shortage of food globally. It's just allowed to collect in certain areas for various reasons. Water though, is a bigger issue due to it being harder to move around, store and is easier to permanently contaminate.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @02:57PM (11 children)
Oh Great and Wise Runaway, what would be the effect on the climate? Shirley such a large undertaking would effect the climate for good or bad.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @03:06PM
Pay no attention to the [little] man behind the curtain.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 14 2020, @03:45PM (9 children)
Quite obviously, the humidity would increase throughout the Sahara desert. Rain would likely increase very very slightly in some parts of the downwind desert. This would all be in keeping with the stated goal of greening the Sahara. Maybe I should point out that it is very unlikely that any extinctions would take place. In the driest areas where there is no life, no extinctions could take place. Life elsewhere that might be threatened by increasing humidity would migrate toward the driest areas, where those lifeforms were unable to exist previously.
Life would change in the desert, of course.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @10:14PM
Where will the sandniggers go? In Nevada?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:30PM (4 children)
So you're saying it wouldn't affect global circulation patterns?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 15 2020, @12:06AM (3 children)
I said no such thing. I said humidity will increase in the region. As humidity increases or decreases, we can expect weather changes and even climate changes if the changes are big enough. Changes could even be problematic. You skeered? You shouldn't be worried too much. These drastic changes aren't going to happen overnight. Maybe your grandchildren, 20 or 50 generations removed will have reason to bitch. Then again, think of the real estate opportunities. If you buy in now, you could make those grandkids rich!
BTW, you do realize that the Sahara has been expanding for hundreds of generations? It's time to stop that expansion, at the least.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 15 2020, @01:50AM (1 child)
It is expanding for reasons you don't comprehend.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 15 2020, @02:23AM
This is your opportunity to do a thesis.
One doesn't need to understand all the reasons for the expansion of the desert, to understand that adding water can make the desert fertile again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 15 2020, @12:25PM
20 or 50 generations? You're out of your mind. California and Florida might not even make it to 2100, and without either one, the US will fall apart, precipitating global war. Just imagine, Jerusalem under the sea, and end-times fundamentalists with nuclear warheads.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Thursday October 15 2020, @10:02PM (2 children)
Dust from the Sahara ends up being blown to South America, where it provides condensation nuclei for the conversion of clouds to rain. If soaking the Sahara reduces the amount of dust, South America could suffer.
-- hendrik
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 15 2020, @10:16PM (1 child)
South America is going to suffer anyway when the last of the glaciers have melted. They will already need to replace the glacier melt. Good thing that South America is surrounded by oceans, except for Panama! Desalination should work just as well there.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday October 16 2020, @12:34AM
True. And some of it will be flooded.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Wednesday October 14 2020, @08:38PM
Desalinated water costs about twice as much as other sources in California (https://www.californiadesalfacts.org/), according to a group opposed to it. I'm sure most of that cost boils down to energy expense and depreciation on the desalination plant. That's not really a show stopper, but it would be a shock for one's water bill to double.
As far as energy capacity goes, though, we are adding more all the time. It's not really a question of IF we have enough energy to purify the water, but whether it's a high enough priority. During the latest drought, it seemed like a really good idea to reduce water supply risk. Now, it's not as urgent, but it's already providing water to San Diego. Anyway, my point is just that desalination is already a viable technology, but it's more expensive than other sources of water. No space/reactor required.
The next step is, of course, to fight over the carbon footprint of the plant.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:22PM
100 sq kilometers (a square of 10km on the side) covered with solar panels of 10% efficiency** will get you 10GW. At an equiv of 6h/day full insolation, you get 60Gwh/d.
The energy cost for 1000l of desalinated water is 3kWh [abc.net.au]. 60GWh will get you 20Gl of water/day.
Pespective: total irrigation water for statewide Nevada in 2015 is about 3500Mg/d [usgs.gov] = 13.34Gl/d.
** The efficiency of current PV is well above that, but let's allow for other energy costs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @02:50PM (7 children)
Desalination is expensive. That's why it's used as a last resort.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 14 2020, @03:01PM (6 children)
The cost of solar panels is coming down, at the same time that efficiency is going up. Which means that desalination should be getting cheaper already, and will continue to get cheaper in the foreseeable future.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 14 2020, @05:20PM (1 child)
All those big ugly blocky concrete desalination plants on our nice coastline would look like hell. You should always minimize the human effort. Let nature do the desalination. Just harvest the results. Lots of rain falls out in the ocean. We can put gigantic inflatable pools to collect what falls freely from the sky.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:34PM
Giant inflateable floating pools would cut down the evaporation from those areas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:43PM (3 children)
What do you do with the Brine?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 14 2020, @11:50PM (2 children)
You haul it out to the Marianas Trench and dump it in the ocean for all the extremephiles to enjoy. Or, you just pipe it a few miles offshore to save on shipping.
You may cause a localized extreme concentration of salt but the salt came from the ocean, and the ocean will reabsorb it.
Unless, you find a way to separate some or all the salts, and put those salts to use.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 15 2020, @02:02AM (1 child)
It costs about 20K per day to operate a medium size ship so shipping elsewhere is not cost effective. Getting rid of the brine is only part of the problem. Perhaps you didn't spend enough time chipping and scraping to appreciate the corrosive properties of salt.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 15 2020, @02:21AM
Stainless steel, copper, glass, plastic. You'll have to do maintenance, yes, but choosing the proper materials will reduce maintenance.
BTW, salt water is corrosive, but it's not nearly so corrosive as salt water combined with abundant oxygen, especially in high temperature environments.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 14 2020, @06:38PM
A wonderful story for anyone that doesn't know about it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Planted_Trees [wikipedia.org]
The wiki article ends with a note from the author who eventually 'fessed up and admitted that the story was fiction.