[Kylon]

I was thinking that in order to prevent the Ogallala Aquifer from drying up, or drying up as fast, we should divert the Mississippi into that aquifer.

If we were to dig a hole for the Mississipi to enter into the Aquifer, dig a canal, and dam up the Mississipi, we could divert all that water into the Aquifer in order to keep it from depleting, or depleting as fast.

What do you think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kylon', 'I')f we were to dig a hole for the Mississipi to enter into the Aquifer...
What do you think?

[basil_hayden]

Yeah we don't need any of that there ecolgy south of, say, St. Louis, anyhow.

Why do people insist of borrowing from Peter to pay Paul?

[emersonbiggins]

Water depletion in the Ogallala isn't as bad as I originally thought...'bad' being a relative term and all.
[web]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ogallala_changes_in_feet_1980-1995_USGS.gif[/web]

Obviously, depletion at 40% in 15 years is alarming to say the least, but most of the aquifer dropped little to none at all in that timeframe.

[Kylon]

{Threads merged by emersonbiggins.} My, my, isn't someone fixated on the Ogallala?...

The solution is simple. Dig a large hole into the Ogallala Aquifer, and have a system to regulate water coming into the system(to ensure if something like the oil spill in the coffee vill happens it won't contaiminate the aquifer), then whenever it rains really, really hard, it will simply regenerate the Aquifer which is rapidly being depeleted of water.

Two birds one stone.

This way, whenever it floods it regenerates the aquifer, and with the extra water, during times of drought water can be drained out of the ground, or if you need extra water for crops, it could also be sucked out of the ground.

What do you think?

[I_Like_Plants]

I don't think the aquifer works that way, it's way underground, under pressure, and the water has to seep in over long periods to time to be clean anyway.

But, how 'bout building houses etc on stilts in expectation of flooding, area under house is where you keep your chickens etc when it's not flooded which will be most of the time, and yearly or semi-yearly floods make for some very nice fertile land, good for hunting/gathering or horticulture or farming.

It's all good!

[smallpoxgirl]

Yeah. I think the biggest problem is that flood water is anything but clean. Health departments go to a lot of trouble to keep aquifers from being contaminated by ground water. Abandoned water wells are a common contamination conduit.

[Ludi]

The Edwards Aquifer, which supplies San Antonio and Austin, does have some recharge holes where the water goes from seasonal creeks directly into the recharge area. You can look down these holes and see an underground river rushing past, pretty amazing. The recharge zone is supposed to be protected from pollutants, but, of course, it's being built up with homes, golf courses, etc.


There are recharge intakes on our land into our part of the Trinity Aquifer. The water enters our land, and seeps rapidly into the ground, below which are probably caves or porous limestone formations.

[bobaloo]

There's only one way to recharge it, and it's simple. Quit pumping and wait 10,000 years.

[Falconoffury]

Maybe we need to deplete the human population, which is depleting the aquifer?

[Ludi]

A rapid recharge aquifer (Edwards) can be recharged during our lifetime, but not a "fossil" aquifer (Oglalla). That's pretty much a one-shot deal.

[caliginousface]

There is no solution to Ogallala. Diverting water would lead to more idiotic environmental damage to the habitats that depend on the river water.

[frankthetank]

Wait wait wait. Why not reroute Mississippi River FLOODWATER (it happens almost every year up here, and causes a mess because someone had the bright idea to build half a city in the flood zone) into a large lake (deep) somewhere in the middle of the country and use that water DIRECTLY for crops. Sure its not the cleanest water, but hey, its better then using groundwater. Only problem is elevation. MS River sits pretty low compared to the areas that use Ogallala water. I bet you could water a lot of Illinois corn crop with floodwater alone.

[frankthetank]

How much of the water that is put on crops makes it back into the deep ground??? How much is lost to evaportation? I bet hardly any is actually used by the plant.

[wisconsin_cur]

You say "Luddite" as if it were a bad thing.

And to blame the messenger for the general populace's unwillingness to wake up and face their addiction is kind of like blaming the drug counselor for his patient's relapse after being discharged from treatment.

Now I'm all for hearing a real argument for why the historical situation is not as bad as some of us it to be. I have spent a lot of sleepless nights attempting to talk my self out of my "doomer moods." But don't blame the doomers for the way others respond to the message. Is the message true? That is the key question.

As for the response of the general populace I'd say spend some time studying cognitive dissonance theory. and then tell me why people would believe any articulation of the peak oil problem.

Finally, I would even argue that the doomers actually make a more convincing argument. not because it is necessarily correct but because it hits people on their panic button. It is a lot easier to go on with your normal suburban consumption lifestyle if it is just a small problem. A big problem gets people to plant gardens.

[NCLambert]

While I do not fully understand hydrology, and I admit it, to say or infer that the Ogallala is a fossil Aquifer would mean that ground water seepage has very little or nothing at all to do with the water it contains, wouldn't it? A fossil aquifer is like a body of water that came from an ancient source and is stored with (I thought) no contact from / with outside sources of water, isn't it? I thought the Ogallala contained both fossil water and ground seepage - and as I understand it, there are ways to tell the difference.

If we can build a transcontinental pipeline to carry crude oil, in Alaska to the sea, crossing tundra, permafrost and across peat-bogs, are we saying we can dig a hole or a ditch or build a pipeline from the Mississippi to several exit points in the Midwest, to the Ogallala? Somebody, didn't engineers use a super-sized ditch-witch to dig a tunnel from England, across the English Channel to Calais France?

Such a project, to divert water from the Mississippi to the Ogallala would be a massive undertaking and one would have to research it well - but I can say that I would like to work with the team of engineers that tackle it, complete it and show its possibilities to the world.

Since we can build both water and waste treatment facilities almost anywhere, couldn't the water diverted from the Mississippi be put through a series of treatment phases to clean it up before it goes into the Ogallala? Would such a process be so different from what we're already doing?

As for the needed electricity to help out the process, underwater current-based hydrokinetics could solve the needs.

I think, and it's just me, that this would be a wonderful green project to consider and work out the kinks.

[NCLambert]

Oh, one other idea... Why couldn't several rivers from the Midwest that flow to the Mississippi and the GoM, have a portion of their flow diverted to the Ogallala? It could provide shorter paths, less engineering and more paths for flood control. Just a thought.

[mkierans]

Recharging the Ogallala with water from the Mississippi or other rivers will never work because ( among other reasons) the downstream states will never go along with this diversion. They will be deprived of water. Witness how the Great Lakes states banded together to forbid water from being exported from the Great Lakes basin.

However, there is a solution to the Ogallala depletion and it lies in James Bay Canada! As I type this Reply approximately 2.5 Niagara Falls worth of fresh water flows into James Bay and is lost to Hudson Bay and the Artic Ocean. Canadian engineer and visonary Thomas Kierans has devised a plan called the GRAND Canal whereby this lost fresh water could be reclaimed. This water that is now being lost in Hudson Bay could be trapped by dikes and one-way dams connecting islands lying along the northern end of James Bay and create a huge new fresh water reservoir about the size of Lake Superior. The newly trapped fresh water could be then lifted over the hieght of land between James Bay and the Great Lakes by a series of pumping stations and canals and allowed to flow down the southern slope into the Great Lakes. From the Great Lakes the new water could be transfered by natural and man made canals to water needy areas all over Canada and the US, including the states now dependant on the Ogallala. The new water could be used to irrigate crops and replenish the aquifer. The Great Lakes states would not complain because their water levels would be stablized by the new water from James Bay. The GRAND Canal has been around for more that fifty years but has not been properly studied because of historical conflicts between the two countries and because of politcal reasons on both side of the border. It is time that Canada and the US manage thier most precious resource- water for the future and not the past!
Please look at: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recycling_and_Northern_Development_Canal] and
[http://web.archive.org/web/20091027035959/http://ca.geocities.com/grandcanal2005/index.htm]

[Ferretlover]

Solutions to Ogallala depletion? Deplete the number of humans and industries sucking it dry. OOps! Did I say that out loud?