When Phoenix's Population Dies

okfine

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2019
31,411
20,853
1,790
Gold Coast
Constant temps at 100+ and 90 at night, who will survive but only those that can afford to cool themselves.

What will happen to most of the 1.6 million who live there is easy to figure out.

1659899674829.png


"In terms of when a point might be reached where Phoenix is downright uninhabitable, Ross told Salon that "some might say that a limit is reached when the temperature no longer falls below 100° F on a given night, but that would not be 'official.' For others, the point of no return might be when Arizona's reduced share of the Colorado water impacts city dwellers."

 
You build a city in the dessert? Yeah, eventually, the population growth, is going to come up against limits of the surrounding natural resources, and there will be a string of hot years and pressure on the urban infrastructure.

It isn't like it should surprise anyone at all that knows history.
 
You'd be surprised to see how many homeless people are here. I don't see any A/C units under their tents.
I imagine if you are homeless, it is easier to live in an area where the temperature does not drop below freezing, than in an area where it is necessary to need A/C to survive.

If it really become a risk to life and limb, I suppose they will just move to slightly better climes, that are still see no freezing weather.

Cold weather is still more lethal, generally.
 
It has always been a hot & dry area.
They can't do anything about the heat but they can divert water from areas with an abundance if they just had the intestinal fortitude to take on the eco-fascists who always try to stop the type of massive project it would require to pipe in the water supplies
 
You build a city in the dessert? Yeah, eventually, the population growth, is going to come up against limits of the surrounding natural resources, and there will be a string of hot years and pressure on the urban infrastructure.

It isn't like it should surprise anyone at all that knows history.
Agreed, and demanding to drain resources from other regions of the country to sustain life in a unsustainable environment is only going to cause more problems.

It would be nice if we could figure out the transporter theory and why?

Take a moment and you work in Phoenix but live in a place where you don’t need your water transported because of the harsh conditions of Phoenix…

Or

Transport that will commute you at the speed needed to make this possible.

As it is now Phoenix can not sustain that many people and let me be clear what would be required to make it work is a Genesis style terraform that does not exist in reality and to do it properly would take years to even start…
 
It has always been a hot & dry area.
They can't do anything about the heat but they can divert water from areas with an abundance if they just had the intestinal fortitude to take on the eco-fascists who always try to stop the type of massive project it would require to pipe in the water supplies

It really doesn't even have a lot to do with, "eco-fascism," at all.

Just a simple understanding of ecology and the free market, is all it takes, to understand, if you take large amounts of fresh water from one area, and pump it to another, you will critically disrupt the lives, economies, and ecology of where tens of millions of people live and work, just to try to maintain the lives of others.

And, in the process, probably lose a lot of that resource along the way.
 
It has always been a hot & dry area.
They can't do anything about the heat but they can divert water from areas with an abundance if they just had the intestinal fortitude to take on the eco-fascists who always try to stop the type of massive project it would require to pipe in the water supplies
What does water have to do with the sustained temperature? The reason is pavement and concrete that doesn't dissipate. It absorbs.
 
It has always been a hot & dry area.
They can't do anything about the heat but they can divert water from areas with an abundance if they just had the intestinal fortitude to take on the eco-fascists who always try to stop the type of massive project it would require to pipe in the water supplies
Yep and those same eco-fascists are just fine with China strip mining the world bare to get the materials they want for "Green Energy" (LOL!) EVs. Liberals have truly lost their minds.
 
What does water have to do with the sustained temperature? The reason is pavement and concrete that doesn't dissipate. It absorbs.
Because it's pretty obvious it will be water shortages that may doom the giant desert cities, not the heat.

Like I said, the heat can't be stopped & natural water sources are scarce. That's just the desert climate but they can pipe in more water
 
It really doesn't even have a lot to do with, "eco-fascism," at all.

Just a simple understanding of ecology and the free market, is all it takes, to understand, if you take large amounts of fresh water from one area, and pump it to another, you will critically disrupt the lives, economies, and ecology of where tens of millions of people live and work, just to try to maintain the lives of others.

And, in the process, probably lose a lot of that resource along the way.
Finally someone get the reality of the stupidity of some!

As Tao said if you disrupt the flow of a river the ramifications of when that river adjusts back to it natural flow will be disastrous.

When people live in regions like Phoenix they can’t expect the people in Illinois to supply them water or even those in Nevada or you will cause damage that can be reversed but it take a long ass time!
 
Finally someone get the reality of the stupidity of some!

As Tao said if you disrupt the flow of a river the ramifications of when that river adjusts back to it natural flow will be disastrous.

When people live in regions like Phoenix they can’t expect the people in Illinois to supply them water or even those in Nevada or you will cause damage that can be reversed but it take a long ass time!
How far from the river do you have to live before you will cause a disaster by taking its water?
 
How far from the river do you have to live before you will cause a disaster by taking its water?
I am writing about taking from the Mid-West to feed a society in Phoenix which is not rational nor should be considered ever.

Phoenix is not a region that sustains heavy amount of life and to think we should divert water to that region is ridiculous because as stated by another poster you are not just delaying what will need to be done but you are draining a resource from another area.

So why have a massive city in a region like Vegas, Phoenix and so on when you know the population can not be sustained there unless you draw from other areas of the country and the required resource to build what is needed to pump the amount of water needed is something you are not willing to pay via taxes.
 
Finally someone get the reality of the stupidity of some!

As Tao said if you disrupt the flow of a river the ramifications of when that river adjusts back to it natural flow will be disastrous.

When people live in regions like Phoenix they can’t expect the people in Illinois to supply them water or even those in Nevada or you will cause damage that can be reversed but it take a long ass time!
I grew up in Michigan, and I have, all my life, been around folks that either owned boats, or had owned property on the Great Lakes.

Every year, they have reports on the lake levels for the past year, and expected precipitation and levels for the coming year.


That affects property owners, and the amount of shipping that can be done on the Great Lakes. Which, like a knock-on affect, chain reaction, will affect how cheaply goods from the entire interior of the nation can be shipped out of Chicago. There are two ways out, either out through the St. Lawerence Sea-Way, or down the Mississipppi. Otherwise, everything has to go out by rail, which is much more expensive.

It also affects the wildlife on the lakes.
In my life, I have known a captain of a tanker of one of these giant freighters, and I have known an wildlife ecologist.

Just the slightest change in the water levels, we are talking, inches ever year, which of course, is hundreds of millions of gallons, has huge impacts, on the ecology, and the economy, all along every town, industry, the wetlands, and the tourism along thousands of miles of shoreline.

Anyone can do a search for tankers on the Mississippi. This type of thing affects folks like them, in major watersheds in the Mississippi, Ohio and Missouri river basins as well. Any talk of diverting that resource? Seems to me, short sighted. But then, I am no expert. The interior does flood nearly every year, so there might be some leeway. But is that flooding necessary to revitalize the soil?

:dunno:

oil-tankers-on-the-mississippi-picture-id1076785838


I have no doubt, any significant withdrawals from these watersheds, would likewise, affect the property owners, the wildlife, and shipping along these waterways as well.

I do know, there is a very old law, the Great Lakes Compact, which prohibits the sort of thing, a lot of the folks out west and in the south-west want to do.

The only exception to it, that I know, was the Chicago exception. If Chicago needs increased needs, it is exempt. I can see, sometime in the next century, NYC trying to get in on that same exemption, since NY is part of the compact.

 

Forum List

Back
Top