1ºRuth Nader I’m in arizona. Last year we had too much water this year not enough. That happens every so many years. It’s normal cycle. None of us are flooding or drying more than normal. My Michigan stomping grounds is also not drowning from lakes being over full nor are the shore lines receding. If the glaciers are indeed melting water levels should be going up somewhere. Anything we put on the ground filters back through the ground and works it’s way into aquifers. Yes, if you fully irrigate a region and then stop the water supply it had been using they will dry up. Just like a garden would. But, if you cut off the water supply somewhere else should be pooling the excess water. It has to be somewhere
2ºStacie Renee glacier water is being dumped into the oceans when they calve. The loss of glaciers have affected weather patterns along with higher temperatures resulting in droughts and changed weather patterns. Here in Ohio we’ve been fortunate to have enough rain. Nevada recently is getting much more than usual during the monsoon season. Massachusetts is experiencing an unprecedented drought. Israel is an arid region, as is much of the Middle East. When they invaded Lebanon and stole the main water head, they cut off water to the Litani valley, drying it out and destroying fruit trees and crops. That land was not meant to support the excess population in recent times.
3ºGage Barnes, imagine this… Wind Turbines using the excess energy generated at night time to
1. Charge Tesla Batteries
2. Pump desalinated water to Lakes/ underground aquifers used for farming communities.
The whole point is to not use dirty energy like coal that contributes to climate change. When it comes to Coal and Diesel, there is no clean coal, clean diesel, clean natural gas, etc… to burn without affecting our atmosphere and raising our global temperature.
You could also replenishing inland lakes with water from rivers further downstream. Double benefit, which is to generate Hydroelectric power. All by using excess clean energy to pump water from where it’s not needed to where it’s needed. The US would need to invest more in Solar, Wind and Wave technology.
4ºIf we take a look at Chemistry the Principal conservation of matter says " Matter cannot be created or cannot be destroyed , but can be changed from one form to another". so which means that if the water levels are going down in the seas/ Lakes then it follows that evaporation is taking place during the hot days and the water molecules are escaping into the atmosphere when condensation & precipitation happenes in the atmosphere the same water droplets are will enventually form the clouds which are going to rain. and the exact amount of water that went into atmosphere will be the same when it comes back to the earth when it rains.
5ºChad Stewart 1) if we had been acting on the problem 50 years ago, we wouldn't have had to do anything extreme. It is only the inaction that has put us in this pickle. 2) If the US had acted like a world leader, and made the case of the needed action by all nations for 50 years, I think it would have been very likely that the pending disaster would have been avoided. 3) At this point, we are talking about minimizing, not avoiding, the pending disaster. Given that, anything anyone does will make it better. If everyone else is polluting and you don't, it is better for the environment than you polluting along with everyone else. You don't need to wait for everyone else to act, and you don't have to think that you have to "change things around the world".