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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LiberalAndProud

(12,799 posts)
41. Perhaps you are not familiar with the Ogallala Aquifer.
Fri Sep 7, 2012, 10:49 PM
Sep 2012
Make no mistake. You screw with the Ogallala Aquifer and you screw with this nation's heartbeat. Twenty percent of the irrigated farmland in the United States depends upon it. Pumping the water from it is all that has kept the Dust Bowl from coming back, year after year. Any damage to it fundamentally changes the lives of the people who depend on it, their personal economies, the overall national economy, and what we can grow to feed ourselves. Absent the aquifer, and the nation's breadbasket goes back to being a prairie, vast grasslands that the people who first crossed them referred to as a desert. You end up with dry-land corn and some dry-land wheat. And the aquifer is far easier to empty than it is to fill. The technology to fully exploit it has existed only since the 1950's, and portions of it are already dangerously low. It won't be fully recharged until the next Ice Age.

Water is the next big fight in this country. By now, we are used to the big fights over energy reserves, over coal and oil. There are even some new ones, over fracking for natural gas and over things like the XL pipeline, which we will get to shortly. But there haven't been serious fights over water for a while. Now, they seem to be coming thick and fast. A report by the Congressional Budget Office as far back as 1997 said that, particularly in the West, conflicts over water would take many forms — farmers vs. cities, sportsmen vs. developers, environmentalists vs. practically everyone else. The report concluded:

First and foremost, western rivers provide water to agriculture to grow crops. They also help cities meet municipal and industrial needs for water and generate electricity. Other benefits that rivers provide — such as habitat for fish and wildlife, recreation, and cultural values for Native Americans — were historically ignored in the water equation but increasingly are considered legitimate and valuable uses. Demand for water by existing agricultural and urban users outstrips available supplies in many cases, however, so demand for water for public purposes or for increased urban supplies necessarily conflicts with existing patterns of water use.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/ogallala-aquifer-6531527


He made the right call. But you just keep on keeping on, bless your heart.
Maybe he is just a smart man? Autumn Sep 2012 #1
In this case, Obama does care about the environment. RC Sep 2012 #52
More oil for export is good for us? NYC_SKP Sep 2012 #2
Bloom Box... flyguyjake Sep 2012 #8
Well, if T Boone thinks it's a good idea Robb Sep 2012 #12
T Boone will make a KILLING! Auntie Bush Sep 2012 #27
Wrong. Gas is a finite resource, a fossil fuel. NYC_SKP Sep 2012 #37
Until our government makes a strong commitment former-republican Sep 2012 #10
That pipeline was to move oil to the gulf to ship overseas from Canada. n/t Bonhomme Richard Sep 2012 #3
So would it have created jobs in the US? flyguyjake Sep 2012 #5
It's already our largest export. former-republican Sep 2012 #22
Ok I get environmental concerns... flyguyjake Sep 2012 #4
The oil from the Keystone Pipeline is going to be sold overseas Angry Dragon Sep 2012 #11
The pipeline proposal was Republican BS Shankapotomus Sep 2012 #21
So because the oil companies have shown how much they can't be trusted jsmirman Sep 2012 #23
few jobs and exported oil. that gives. spanone Sep 2012 #6
Pipelines produce oil? Strelnikov_ Sep 2012 #7
They just need to move the portion in Nebraska so that it's not over the Sandhills tammywammy Sep 2012 #9
Well for one thing , it's not our oil former-republican Sep 2012 #13
Not overseas... flyguyjake Sep 2012 #14
It seems to be a misconception among many here that Obama doesn't support it tammywammy Sep 2012 #16
I am going to go out on a limb here and say you don't worked in the oilfields. Arctic Dave Sep 2012 #15
It needs to be re-routed jberryhill Sep 2012 #17
This isn't over yet. I've already made the prediction that if it's close or PBO's behind... cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #18
Because he has a soul and doesn't absolutely hate the earth jsmirman Sep 2012 #19
Because ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2012 #20
President Obama wouldn't approve it until the studies were completed bigbrother05 Sep 2012 #34
Oil would be leaving us shores nadinbrzezinski Sep 2012 #24
The fact that it's leaving doesn't matter much when what's exported isn't US-produced anyway Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #29
Since 1973 when the us reached national peak oil nadinbrzezinski Sep 2012 #55
Since 1970 Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #58
No, it wouldn't Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #25
You answered your own question. "More oil on our Soil!" Think spill! Auntie Bush Sep 2012 #26
Right now Canadian Oil goes to US refineries. The pipeline would let us export it. NutmegYankee Sep 2012 #28
ok so we need oil... flyguyjake Sep 2012 #30
The pipeline would go over water aquifiers Nancy Waterman Sep 2012 #36
Oil & gas production is higher than under Bush bigbrother05 Sep 2012 #39
Thinking you missed the speeches. Actually, under Obama we have MORE US oil production progressivebydesign Sep 2012 #53
I know we're not allowed; but this is a trolling question. vaberella Sep 2012 #31
Whats trolling? flyguyjake Sep 2012 #33
One method of trolling is asking questions designed to produce dissent Major Nikon Sep 2012 #40
so much for casual conversation flyguyjake Sep 2012 #43
If you manage to stay around long enough, you'll know why Major Nikon Sep 2012 #46
ok so I've learned what trolling is... flyguyjake Sep 2012 #48
That's why I'm trying to explain this to you Major Nikon Sep 2012 #51
Use the tools here. vaberella Sep 2012 #59
Why don't you ask the Republican governor who begged Obama to hold off on zbdent Sep 2012 #32
Never used the word "Killing" flyguyjake Sep 2012 #38
Here's an amusing video where TransCanada weasels around... joshcryer Sep 2012 #35
thank you for that video flyguyjake Sep 2012 #42
Perhaps you are not familiar with the Ogallala Aquifer. LiberalAndProud Sep 2012 #41
What gives? Your entire OP is a lie. Ikonoklast Sep 2012 #44
OMG seriously flyguyjake Sep 2012 #45
Seriously, thanks for asking. LiberalAndProud Sep 2012 #47
There is a stupendous amount of information out there available at the click of a mouse. Ikonoklast Sep 2012 #49
He wouldn't push it through without environmental, engineering and safety reviews bhikkhu Sep 2012 #50
Obama didn't support the pipeline because America took all the liability of a spill.... DrewFlorida Sep 2012 #54
Well, there IS the pesky little problem of the EC Sep 2012 #56
This is the reason of my thread former-republican Sep 2012 #57
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why didn't Obama support ...»Reply #41