Could Water Levels in the Great Lakes be Raised?

[Muffin]

What, you don’t use a Nalgene bottle and bring it home at the end of the day?

[Qadgop_the_Mercotan]

@Muffin

What, you don’t use a Nalgene bottle and bring it home at the end of the day?

I’d wear a stillsuit first.

[Ludovic]

@Muffin

I’m still concerned about political pressure for out-of-basin diversion once the plains go dry. Fortunately, due to the far greater population in the Great Lakes states when compared to the dry-land states, I expect that the lakes will be preserved from this fate.

Is there a lot of pressure for this? Don’t the farm states on the Eastern side of the Mississippi have plenty of water, and isn’t it technically infeasible to redirect the Great Lakes water to the Western midwest states? ETA: which isn’t to say the Compact is not a good idea, for future reasons exactly like this.

[Musicat]

@Ludovic

Is there a lot of pressure for this? Don’t the farm states on the Eastern side of the Mississippi have plenty of water, and isn’t it technically infeasible to redirect the Great Lakes water to the Western midwest states? ETA: which isn’t to say the Compact is not a good idea, for future reasons exactly like this.

You can take my Lake Michigan water only if you pry it out of my cold, wet hands!

[Muffin]

@Qadgop_the_Mercotan

I’d wear a stillsuit first.

Come to think of it, I actually do use a Nalgene bottle – when I’m tenting in the summer I don’t like to step outside into the voracious mosquitos and black flies, and when I’m tenting in the winter I don’t like to step outside into the snow.

[Muffin]

@Ludovic

Is there a lot of pressure for this? Don’t the farm states on the Eastern side of the Mississippi have plenty of water, and isn’t it technically infeasible to redirect the Great Lakes water to the Western midwest states? ETA: which isn’t to say the Compact is not a good idea, for future reasons exactly like this.

Here’s a list: A Brief History of Great Lakes Diversion Projects | Undercurrents: beneath the obvious

[Don_HO]

Thanks for all of the insightful comments and links. A temporary reduction of the flow at Port Huron would not make much differance given that evaporation rate accounts for many more times the overall volume of water lost.

[Learjeff]

@Musicat

In '64, no one had heard of global warming. Indeed, a decade later, some scientists were saying we were headed for global cooling.

Actually, some journalists were saying that. Few scientists were.

Today’s low lake levels are often blamed on global warming, but that wasn’t the reason in '64, why is it now?

Normal variation! (I’m not a denyer, but not all phenomena are caused by GW. However, it could be GW. But note that levels have been remarkably – unusually – stable since 2000.)

Our state seems to have solved that by defining the required building setback referenced to the “Ordinary High Water Mark,” not the current water level. Supposedly the OHWM is determined by a Planning & Zoning Dept. geologist, if they have one, but it can be subject to considerable guesswork on shores with sand dunes. An elevation map might not give you the correct answer, either, which is why I keep pictures just in case I am ever challenged by P&Z.

That’s true on our beach too, but it’s done by eyeball and the lackey they send out. Who really likes scotch, I’ve heard. In any case, things probably changed after the trouble in '64.

A neighbor recently replaced a cottage with a mansion. I remember him saying what the guy said his setback had to be, and it was well behind the 100 yr mark, based on obvious vegetation etc (plus my > 50 years’ experience). Way behind. Yet now that I look at the completed manse, it’s a lot closer than what I thought he said at the time. I suspect the scotch principle was involved.