Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2naSalit

(97,339 posts)
9. So...
Wed Dec 28, 2022, 12:25 PM
Dec 2022
As of Dec. 19, 1.43 million gals/sec of Atchafalaya River water was simply going into the Gulf of Mexico without producing electricity or supporting commercial shipping.


What I want to know is, has the author actually considered the environmental impacts of such a project?

This sounds like a desperate appeal to, once again, frantically go full scream ahead with a massive project that hardly considers the long term impacts where the temporary quick fix will cause more harm than it is supposed to be relieving.

Desperate thinking is rarely a good way to solve a problem of our own creation which we didn't put much forethought into in the first place.

No, just NO. It's the same desperate thinking that proposes piping water from the great lakes.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Interesting idea Blues Heron Dec 2022 #1
What is the cost of not doing SOMETHING - we are in dire straights in the asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #4
That was then. mahatmakanejeeves Dec 2022 #2
Seems the author of article has thought through some of the costs.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #6
What I'm getting at is, back in the middle of WWII, no one wasted time with mahatmakanejeeves Dec 2022 #16
Well, you make a good point..been there, done that.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #18
No, just no. It's a bandaid fix. It will start at 7% and Phoenix61 Dec 2022 #3
AZ and other states cannot afford to let the Dams go dry..ALL proposals on deck .. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #5
Politicians from the southwest aren't known for their Eyeball_Kid Dec 2022 #8
We have a new sheriff in town, (Phoenix), who is a life long resident..loves her state..surely asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #14
This is the result of unchecked development. Phoenix61 Dec 2022 #25
A few decades ago, Arizona petitioned Illinois and Chicago to siphon off Eyeball_Kid Dec 2022 #7
A few decades ago..hummm..the map at the article seems too good to be true.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #10
mostly cuz it's forbidden by treaty w canada tho. mopinko Dec 2022 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Dec 2022 #30
So... 2naSalit Dec 2022 #9
I hope my email to the authors will shed more light on the subject.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #11
I don't like their creds at all... 2naSalit Dec 2022 #21
Right there with you. Phoenix61 Dec 2022 #27
I used to... 2naSalit Dec 2022 #28
The more they get the more they will spend. Overspending is what got them were they are today! Chainfire Dec 2022 #12
I agree..but, who is going to stop the building..have you seen West of Phoenix.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #13
We see the same thing here in Florida. Chainfire Dec 2022 #15
The building within AZ is so shortsighted..I keep asking where are we getting the water?? asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #26
Water prefers to run downhill. bluedigger Dec 2022 #17
I love all the comments..will surely include in my letter to the authors at the asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #19
If a lunkhead like me can raise objections, imagine what an engineer could come up with. bluedigger Dec 2022 #22
Feast your eyes on what Ducey proposed.. asiliveandbreathe Dec 2022 #24
probably be cheaper to ship the more recent (less than 50 years?) back home Kali Dec 2022 #23
Phew. Ptah Dec 2022 #29
... Kali Dec 2022 #31
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Arizona»Move Water By Pipeline Fr...»Reply #9