Bill Richardson On Great Lakes Water
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 03.22.08
Alex Brandon/Associated Press
Bill Richardson is all over the news these days for his endorsement of Barack Obama; He was all over TreeHugger last year for his suggestion that "I believe that Western states and Eastern states have not been talking to each other when it comes to proper use of our water resources...States like Wisconsin are awash in water."
And how did Wisconsin respond? Essentially by saying "Take it, Bill" by screwing up on the Great Lakes Compact. In Ohio they have wrestled with the same issue, with what has been described as a "lunatic fringe" trying to "hijack" the process of protecting the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Compact passed in the House but the President of the Senate tried to change it. The Cleveland Plain Dealer wrote in an editorial:
"Since Ohio Senate President Bill Harris and many of his colleagues apparently don't understand the importance of protecting northern Ohio's most precious asset, perhaps they should heed the words of Bill Richardson.
The New Mexico governor recently had the audacity to suggest publicly what many in the Southwest think privately: That diverting water from the Great Lakes might help the nation's dry spots.
Richardson quickly recanted, but his words should send a clear message to statehouses in Columbus and nine other capitals: If the Great Lakes states and provinces don't take decisive action to prevent the raiding of the Earth's largest supply of fresh water, the water rustlers will continue seeking ways to steal it. Eventually, they may find one.....
How can Harris not understand that if the lunatic fringe is allowed to hijack the process of protecting Great Lakes water, there is no chance it will ever win the necessary approval of all eight states, Ontario and Quebec?" ::Cleveland Plain Dealer
See also The Plain Dealer on State Senator Tim Grendell pushes his version of Great Lakes water pact, TreeHugger on US Presidential Candidate From New Mexico Thirsty For Wisconsin ..., Don't You Dare Touch Our Water and The Great Lakes Are Under Threat and Wisconsin Fiddles
Let's not forget about some Georgia State Senators trying to move the state boundary a mile north so that part of the TN River would be in GA and thus available for raiding for a thirsty Atlanta... it is not just the southwest that are perpetrating the water stupidity.
Lunatic fringe is probably a mischaracterization. The struggle that underlies is very similar to the one in Atlanta Georgia,where we saw the Georgia legislature pass a measure to expropriate land overlapping a river in adjacent Tennessee.
They are trying to keep the suburban and exurban growth engines going while running out of water.
Because Lake Michigan's direct drainage area is quite small, suburbs of Milwaukee, Chicago, and so on are actually out side of the Michigan basin and the groundwater they have is of poor quality.
The respective electoral districts are served by persons who care more about their campaign coffers than the lake that serves the water of most persons in their region.
Foolish and greedy are better.
The West has nearly depleted one of the world's largest aquifers, the Ogallala. I don't think it takes a large leap of reason to worry that the same fate may befall one of the world's largest fresh water systems, The Great Lakes. I can't believe that there is waivering support for The Great Lakes Compact. Perhaps our legislative system is "awash."
Las Vegas, Phoenix and LA need THEIR water, so hand it over, pronto. And don't forget to smile. It was always theirs. They just let you play with it for a while.
So what if the St Lawrence no longer runs to the sea from all the withdrawls? Some times a few eggs get broken on the way to Progress.
This is an interesting issue. In California, we have diverted water from north to south and from east to west.... and we are still not finished. Now, the big move is to de-salt the ocean of course, and just to continue with our "way-of-life". Do you know what we water with that fresh drinking water? Lawns. The second biggest water guzzler are our toilets... and most of the communities just toss THAT into the ocean. Except Orange County - they have built a huge reverse osmosis plant on the end of a reclamation plant for their drinking water - smart!
Conservation and thoughtful design for food crop irrigation is the only way to go.... and perhaps not using water as a tool for dredging and mining might help, too.
good post for world water day...i am sure that the casinos in vegas like bill very much for talking this way.
Okay, exactly what's wrong with sharing all of our nations' water resources amongst our selves?
@g: Ever heard of a thing called localization? Something about taking water from one place and bringing it essentially across the country doesn't seem to make sense.
What New Mexicans should be doing is working toward a more sustainable lifestyle there, while us Michiganders work on doing the same thing here.
One of the main sources of all problems in the world today is this basic flaw in thinking: for millions of years species—whether they were humans or fish, bumblebees or bears—adapted to change to their environments, but now, somehow, we've come to think it's OK to change our environments to adapt to us. This is just another shining example of this thinking.
Quoted text-----
Okay, exactly what's wrong with sharing all of our nations' water resources amongst our selves?
-------------------
The fact that our local environment depends on our water table remaining where it is. I've noticed several wetlands conservation projects going on locally. Farmers around here depend on having a reasonably saturated ground for their crops. Things like that.
That's not to say that we won't share— we just sorta hope that anyone wanting to share actually decides to live here. Come on up. Most of us are friendly. Honest.
(Bring some environmentally-friendly jobs with you, too. We could use a few more around here.)
What's wrong with sharing our nations resources.
Nothing, what's wrong with us all sharing your bank account. The West and South West have been completely irresponsible when it comes to water. Now you want to reward them by taking ours. . When the west and southwest ban watering lawns and golfcourses and fountains and outdoor misting to keep things cool then maybe I'll consider sharing. Until then plan on any water diversion being destroyed.
As a Michigan resident, I'd say if the Southwest stops wasting water on lawns and other commodities, I would CONSIDER sharing Great Lakes water. But if you are asking us to destroy a natural resource, and a source of great pride and beauty, so that you can have a green lawn, dream on.
What the Southwest is asking of the Great Lakes states is the equivalent of mountain top removal mining. It's just wrong.
As a Michigan resident, I'd say if the Southwest stops wasting water on lawns and other commodities, I would CONSIDER sharing Great Lakes water. But if you are asking us to destroy a natural resource, and a source of great pride and beauty, so that you can have a green lawn, dream on.
What the Southwest is asking of the Great Lakes states is the equivalent of mountain top removal mining. It's just wrong.
As a Michigan resident, I'd say if the Southwest stops wasting water on lawns and other commodities, I would CONSIDER sharing Great Lakes water. But if you are asking us to destroy a natural resource, and a source of great pride and beauty, so that you can have a green lawn, dream on.
What the Southwest is asking of the Great Lakes states is the equivalent of mountain top removal mining. It's just wrong.
Ummmm "g" primarily cause it's not just your nations' water... it is a shared resource with Canada.
If it was used because Americans needed (not just wanted) drinking or food based farming water Canadians would be more than willing to allow the American people greater use of this shared resource, but since that's not it's primary purpose ... well let's just say we're not going to make it easy for you to take the water.
Dear "g".
The hydraulic residence time of Lake Michigan is in excess of 100 years. That means if the lake were drained fully today, it would take more than a century (without drought) to refill to normal level.
The implication for sharing is that withdrawal rates are already barely sustainable. Add this thought to the shared boundary with Canada and you should be able to grasp why it is foolhardy to think of spending billions to pump water to where they have not learned to live sustainably.
As in the dustbowl days, should a true emergency arise, people will move to Chicago much faster than Chicago water can be piped to them.
Most of Lake Superior's water is leftover from the glaciers. We are already drawing from it faster than it's replenished. The dock at my camp has already moved over a meter out from the shore in the last several years.
Bill Richardson and the rest of the People of the South West should think about why they moved to a part of the country that can not sustain a population as large as it has today.
We already have a War for natural resources going on. Do you really want another?
Bill Richardson and the rest of the People of the South West should think about why they moved to a part of the country that can not sustain a population as large as it has today.
We already have a War for natural resources going on. Do you really want another?
You know, I have to agree that it's a little bit wacky trying to bring water all the way from the Great Lakes to the Southwest, but if you ever saw the condition of the water around the area you can see how the idea got started.
When I first moved to Alamogordo, NM the first thing I noticed was the bottled water, dozens of stores selling nothing but bottled water and jugs of water, that's it. I wondered at first how on these stores managed to attract business, but after a while I simply shrugged it off until they found traces of E. Coli in the water...again.
Yes, again, this was not the first time nor was it to be the last time the city would end up with E. Coli in the water. Hopefully over the years the city has improved this problem.
Thankfully, the city has improved it's water conservation program, so that the daily per capita water use in gallons is 155, not bad considering the number for Denver is 220 gallons. I wonder what that number would be for someone around the Great Lakes area?
So before we try and shoot down Bill and his proposal, as strange as it may be, try and put yourself in someone else's shoes.
Some years back when Jesse Ventura was gov a private consortium tried to float this idea. They pitched it to more than one state, and were eventually willing to go up through the Dakotas into Canada. The result was the Great Lakes Governor's Association, including the Provincial governors. Ostensibly formed to protect the Great Lakes watershed, they even went up to Vermont, even though they just border the St. Lawrence river. Subsequent elections bring new leaders, but we can hope they'll stick to their premise.
The greatest human migrations in history are coming, and they'll be about water. If we think we're going to be or should be immune to this, then we haven't come far enough in addressing our own hubris.
Unsustainable band-aid policies should be avoided. Deserts can be utilized for energy, and it's pretty certain we'll need a lot of that.
Sure you can have the water. Right after you send me a few of your mountain tops. I want to build a castle.