Desalinization vs. Reservoirs

[Intelligent Party]

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water. On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water. On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State. These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today. Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules

If it cost $10 Billion

The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant

It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.

If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.

We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year. Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.

We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.


If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.

Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
Maybe there are economies of scale?

If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water. However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.


If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

[Frank]

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
 Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

Might add that dam generates electricity where desalinization requires
electricity to run.

[Petzl]

Post by Frank

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.

Might add that dam generates electricity where desalinization requires
electricity to run.

Population of Sydney Australia in 2024 is 5,185,000
The final cost of it's desalination plant,was $1.803 billion.
Including wind generators providing (100%)38 megawatts of electricity
at full production of it's total of 140 megawatts from 67 turbines. I
Water from the Pacific Ocean operational from 2010 provides one third
of Sydney's water (91 gigalitres a year) and can be doubled for a lot
less cost of a "Tack on" plant.
Built by a Labor (Democrat type)Government.
Opposed by the opposition Liberal(Republican type) who want to recycle
shit instead of a much cheaper/safer/plentiful choice, the pacific
Ocean
Liberal reasoning for is political hatred that Labor did something
right.

I see California (Democrat) want Californians to drink shit as well,
instead of having the Pacific ocean along its cost as well.
--
Petzl
According to Dave Hodges' sources ...and he has excellent
sources...the real election results were: Trump: 103 million votes
Dementia Joe: 37 million votes Trump won 49 States, the dementia
patient won New York. The voting machines were so overwhelmed by the
number of votes for Trump, that's why they had to shut everything down
for several hours. Machines were programmed to switch votes but didn't
anticipate so MANY votes. Confirmed by @RealMikeLindell documentary,
'Absolute Truth' Pass it on.

[Peter Jason]

Post by Frank

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
 Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

Might add that dam generates electricity where desalinization requires
electricity to run.

From Wiki..

The Amazon River has an average discharge of about 215,000–230,000
m3/s (7,600,000–8,100,000 cu ft/s)—approximately 6,591–7,570 km3
(1,581–1,816 cu mi) per year, greater than the next seven largest
independent rivers combined. Two of the top ten rivers by discharge
are tributaries of the Amazon river. The Amazon represents 20% of the
global riverine discharge into oceans.[26] The Amazon basin is the
largest drainage basin in the world, with an area of approximately
7,000,000 km2 (2,700,000 sq mi).[3] The portion of the river's
drainage basin in Brazil alone is larger than any other river's basin.
The Amazon enters Brazil with only one-fifth of the flow it finally
discharges into the Atlantic Ocean, yet already has a greater flow at
this point than the discharge of any other river in the
world.[27][28].

This is a vast amount of water just waiting to be harvested.

Easily done via hydrostatics. Envisage a large inverted U-tube with
one end just outside and beneath the Brazilian Amazon mouth and the
other end at the Sahara.
Vis:
https://tinyurl.com/257bulpy
A small nuclear-powered pump at the Sahara end would discharge the
water into the desert, with the other end automatically filling from
the Amazon discharge. Likewise into other reservoirs.
If they could lay submarine cables across the Atlantic in the 1800s,
surely a large tube could be possible now?

[Rod Speed]

Post by Peter Jason

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of=
water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of =
water. On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet =

of

Post by Peter Jason

water. On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the =
Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the=
State. These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperate=

ly

Post by Peter Jason

needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in =
California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's t=

wo

Post by Peter Jason

largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 mill=

ion

Post by Peter Jason

today. Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to=

=

Post by Peter Jason

$10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam=

-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules

Post by Peter Jason

If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 =
billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desali=

nation_Plant

Post by Peter Jason

It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billi=

on

Post by Peter Jason

per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoove=

r

Post by Peter Jason

Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of wate=

r =

Post by Peter Jason

is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000=

,

Post by Peter Jason

3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in S=

an

Post by Peter Jason

Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion=

x

Post by Peter Jason

10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year. Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times =
182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plan=

ts.

Post by Peter Jason

If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.78=

5

Post by Peter Jason

time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the =
future?
Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion=

it

Post by Peter Jason

would be 178.5 times more water. However, we should not build damns=
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

Might add that dam generates electricity where desalinization require=

s

Post by Peter Jason

electricity to run.

From Wiki..
The Amazon River has an average discharge of about 215,000=E2=80=93230=

,000

Post by Peter Jason
m3/s (7,600,000=E2=80=938,100,000 cu ft/s)=E2=80=94approximately 6,591=

=E2=80=937,570 km3

Post by Peter Jason
(1,581=E2=80=931,816 cu mi) per year, greater than the next seven larg=

est

Post by Peter Jason
independent rivers combined. Two of the top ten rivers by discharge
are tributaries of the Amazon river. The Amazon represents 20% of the
global riverine discharge into oceans.[26] The Amazon basin is the
largest drainage basin in the world, with an area of approximately
7,000,000 km2 (2,700,000 sq mi).[3] The portion of the river's
drainage basin in Brazil alone is larger than any other river's basin.=
The Amazon enters Brazil with only one-fifth of the flow it finally
discharges into the Atlantic Ocean, yet already has a greater flow at
this point than the discharge of any other river in the
world.[27][28].
This is a vast amount of water just waiting to be harvested.
Easily done via hydrostatics. Envisage a large inverted U-tube with
one end just outside and beneath the Brazilian Amazon mouth and the
other end at the Sahara.
https://tinyurl.com/257bulpy
A small nuclear-powered pump at the Sahara end would discharge the
water into the desert, with the other end automatically filling from
the Amazon discharge. Likewise into other reservoirs.
If they could lay submarine cables across the Atlantic in the 1800s,
surely a large tube could be possible now?

Nope, dope. Cables are MUCH more flexible than a pipe, stupid.

[Peter Jason]

Post by Peter Jason
From Wiki..
The Amazon River has an average discharge of about 215,000–230,000
m3/s (7,600,000–8,100,000 cu ft/s)—approximately 6,591–7,570 km3
(1,581–1,816 cu mi) per year, greater than the next seven largest
independent rivers combined. Two of the top ten rivers by discharge
are tributaries of the Amazon river. The Amazon represents 20% of the
global riverine discharge into oceans.[26] The Amazon basin is the
largest drainage basin in the world, with an area of approximately
7,000,000 km2 (2,700,000 sq mi).[3] The portion of the river's
drainage basin in Brazil alone is larger than any other river's basin.
The Amazon enters Brazil with only one-fifth of the flow it finally
discharges into the Atlantic Ocean, yet already has a greater flow at
this point than the discharge of any other river in the
world.[27][28].
This is a vast amount of water just waiting to be harvested.
Easily done via hydrostatics. Envisage a large inverted U-tube with
one end just outside and beneath the Brazilian Amazon mouth and the
other end at the Sahara.
https://tinyurl.com/257bulpy
A small nuclear-powered pump at the Sahara end would discharge the
water into the desert, with the other end automatically filling from
the Amazon discharge. Likewise into other reservoirs.
If they could lay submarine cables across the Atlantic in the 1800s,
surely a large tube could be possible now?

I append...
What appalling negativism!

The rapid deployment of earth tunneling machines shows what might be
done. They would have been laughed at 30 years ago.

Pipe stitching has been known for a long time.........
https://tinyurl.com/27fveaqt
https://tinyurl.com/5233prsf
Perhaps an old Yankee aircraft carrier could be utilized for the job,
with SS-steel plate forming the pipe in situ?
Are you stooopid or somethin'?

[Rod Speed]

Post by Peter Jason

Post by Peter Jason
From Wiki..
The Amazon River has an average discharge of about 215,000=E2=80=9323=

0,000

Post by Peter Jason

Post by Peter Jason
m3/s (7,600,000=E2=80=938,100,000 cu ft/s)=E2=80=94approximately 6,59=

1=E2=80=937,570 km3

Post by Peter Jason

Post by Peter Jason
(1,581=E2=80=931,816 cu mi) per year, greater than the next seven lar=

gest

Post by Peter Jason

Post by Peter Jason
independent rivers combined. Two of the top ten rivers by discharge
are tributaries of the Amazon river. The Amazon represents 20% of the=
global riverine discharge into oceans.[26] The Amazon basin is the
largest drainage basin in the world, with an area of approximately
7,000,000 km2 (2,700,000 sq mi).[3] The portion of the river's
drainage basin in Brazil alone is larger than any other river's basin=

.

Post by Peter Jason

Post by Peter Jason
The Amazon enters Brazil with only one-fifth of the flow it finally
discharges into the Atlantic Ocean, yet already has a greater flow at=
this point than the discharge of any other river in the
world.[27][28].
This is a vast amount of water just waiting to be harvested.
Easily done via hydrostatics. Envisage a large inverted U-tube with
one end just outside and beneath the Brazilian Amazon mouth and the
other end at the Sahara.
https://tinyurl.com/257bulpy
A small nuclear-powered pump at the Sahara end would discharge the
water into the desert, with the other end automatically filling from
the Amazon discharge. Likewise into other reservoirs.
If they could lay submarine cables across the Atlantic in the 1800s,
surely a large tube could be possible now?

I append...

Bugger off, appendix.

Post by Peter Jason
What appalling negativism!

We'll see...

Post by Peter Jason
The rapid deployment of earth tunnelingmachines shows what might be =
done.

The difference is that no one uses them for
anything even remotely like the distance
between the Amazon and the Sahara, stupid.

And it isnt even feasible with one that long to
drill everything to check what the rock etc is
like in the route for your proposed tunnel anyway.

Post by Peter Jason
They would have been laughed at 30 years ago.

Mindless pig ignorant bullshit. The
first one was actually done in 1825
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_boring_machine#History

Post by Peter Jason
Pipe stitching has been known for a long time.........

Pity about getting it past stuff like ocean trenches.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanic_trench

Post by Peter Jason
https://tinyurl.com/27fveaqt
https://tinyurl.com/5233prsf
Perhaps an old Yankee aircraft carrier could be utilized for the job,
with SS-steel plate forming the pipe in situ?

Pity about getting it past stuff like ocean trenches.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanic_trench

Post by Peter Jason
Are you stooopid or somethin'?

Just ignorant in your case

[unknown]

Post by Frank

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in
California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860
million today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today,
closer to $10 billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1
billion to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25
billion per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water
is 325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water
3,258,509,400,000, 3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in
San Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25
billion x 10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or
500,000,000 gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times
182.5 billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization
plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the
future?   Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion
it would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build
damns that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

Might add that dam generates electricity

A reservoir requires rain. The reservoir dries up in drought years. Sea
water is an unlimited resource.

Post by Frank
where desalinization requires electricity to run.

Electricity can come from solar, wind or nuclear. Use the excess
capacity during low-demand hours for desalination.

[Intelligent Party]

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water. On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water. On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State. These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today. Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year. Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water. However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

We have to consider capacity vs. yield.

This 1979 New York Times article states:
https://www.nytimes.com/1979/01/18/archives/us-may-add-200-feet-to-a-coast-dam-cheaper-alternative.html


"Many possibilities for tapping more water from the rushing northern
rivers are under consideration. An increasingly plausible one, engineers
say, would be to add about 200 feet to the height of Shasta Dam. That
would triple its storage capacity to 14 million acre‐feet, more than
one‐third of the state's annual consumption, and would increase the
reservoir's annual yield of four million acre‐feet some 25 percent."
January 18, 1979

This states a 300% increase in capacity, but only a 25% increase in yield!

This may not be the same for the Klammath River, which is dumping water
into the ocean, but the Desalinization numbers above are all yield!

Dams also give hydroelectric power which desalinization doesn't.

"The study even advances the possibility, by adding 300 feet to the
dam's height instead of 200, of increasing the storage capacity more
than sixfold, to 27 million acre‐feet."


"The 200‐foot addition would double the area of Lake Shasta, to 90
square miles."

"The 45-square-mile lake is California's biggest reservoir, storing the
equivalent of more than one‐tenth of the state's annual consumption of
water."

"The study is only a prospectus. If considered promising, it would be
followed by a four‐year feasibility study, two years of public review
and Congressional consideration, four years of design work, six years of
construction time, and four years of filling the reservoir to its
planned operating level. Actual operation, then, would be at least 20
years away." - 1979


33 year old Dam then, is now 78 years old now. Hoover Dam in Nevada is
93 years old.

California uses is 40 million acre feet of water per year, and this has
not increased in 50 years, even as the population has doubled.
See chart on 2nd page:
https://cwc.ca.gov/-/media/CWC-Website/Files/Documents/2019/06_June/June2019_Item_12_Attach_2_PPICFactSheets.pdf


"The dam, 3,400 feet across its rim, impounds in Lake Shasta 4.5 million
acre feet of water, normally releasing it at the staggering rate of
79,000 cubic feet a second. An acre‐foot is some 325,000 gallons, equal
to an acre of water a foot deep."

4.5 million acre feet = 1.46 Trillion gallons.

[Lil dwarf Rudey]

Post by Intelligent Party
4.5 million acre feet

Governor Swill /Rudy Canoza/Lou Bricano/J Carlson/Michael A
Terrell/Chris Ahlstrom and a dozen other socks wrote:

Multiple death threats against Trump:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path:
eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.netnews.com!netnews.com!s1-4.netnews.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Governor Swill <***@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics,alt.politics.usa,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.elections
Subject: Re: Triumphant Trump Photo After Assassination Attempt
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
References: <***@earthlink.com>
<***@185.151.15.160>
<ONIkO.102541$***@fx11.ams4> <***@185.151.15.190>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 55
X-Complaints-To: ***@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 10:38:43 -0400

Oh poor me I got shot at ...

Swill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Path:
eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!border-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.netnews.com!s1-3.netnews.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Governor Swill <***@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics,alt.politics.usa,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.elections
Subject: Re: Triumphant Trump Photo After Assassination Attempt
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
References: <***@earthlink.com>
<***@185.151.15.160>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 31
X-Complaints-To: ***@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 10:37:51 -0400


Cheer up, maybe someone else will try.

Swill

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: J Carlson <***@gmx.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.immigration,alt.politics.nationalism.white,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: AP Lies by Ommission About Identity of Invaders Charged with
Rape, Murder of 12-Year-Old
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:35:52 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <v5f66o$1mps9$***@dont-email.me>
References: <v54h6j$39cuk$***@dont-email.me> <v54hrs$38mfs$***@dont-email.me>
<moKcnZP3dbqUm-***@giganews.com>
<v58c4f$6squ$***@dont-email.me>
<v5df1n$1caue$***@dont-email.me> <v5edju$1hv3p$***@dont-email.me>
<***@4ax.com>
<v5erpf$1jkrf$***@dont-email.me>
<O9acnRiefIZol-***@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 21:35:53 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me;
posting-host="f3de9d0c1e618b255237332494133eec";
logging-data="1795977";
mail-complaints-to="***@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX195k8uMNmZfnyDG9tQmsu21WqljX3bfQxM="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PNoPW9d+9gKJj0fX+YCk+YFslQg=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <O9acnRiefIZol-***@giganews.com>
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.politics.immigration:383549
alt.politics.nationalism.white:10913 talk.politics.misc:1295918
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:3024985

Post by Intelligent Party
No. I am a patriotic American who wants the country and its people to

thrive. Getting rid of Trump permanently

Post by Intelligent Party
is an important step to getting there.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That constitutes a DEATH THREAT against a former President, Rudey:


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/871
18 U.S. Code § 871 - Threats against President and successors to the
Presidency
U.S. Code
Notes
prev | next
(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail
or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any
letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any
threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon
the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice
President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office
of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or
knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the
President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the
order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years,
or both.
(b)The terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” as used in
this section shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful
candidates for the offices of President and Vice President,
respectively, as ascertained from the results of the general elections
held to determine the electors of President and Vice President in
accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 1 and 2. The
phrase “other officer next in the order of succession to the office of
President” as used in this section shall mean the person next in the
order of succession to act as President in accordance with title 3,
United States Code, sections 19 and 20.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 740; June 1, 1955, ch. 115, § 1, 69
Stat. 80; Pub. L. 87–829, § 1, Oct. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 956; Pub. L.
97–297, § 2, Oct. 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1318; Pub. L. 103–322, title
XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

9-65.200 - Threats Against the President and Successors to the
Presidency; Threats Against Former Presidents; and Certain Other Secret
Service Protectees
The Counterterrorism Section of the National Security Division has
supervisory authority over 18 U.S.C. §§ 871 and 879 cases. As great
caution must be taken in matters relating to the security of the persons
protected by 18 U.S.C. § 871, United States Attorneys are encouraged to
consult with the Counterterrorism Section (CTS) of the National Security
Division when they have doubts on the prosecutive merit of a case. For
the same reason, dismissal of complaints under 18 U.S.C. § 871, when the
defendant is in custody under the Mental Incompetency Statutes (18
U.S.C. §§ 4244, 4246), requires approval from CTS. In other cases,
United States Attorneys must consult prior to dismissing a count
involving, or entering into any sentence commitment or other case
settlement involving a § 871 charge.


https://www.secretservice.gov/newsroom/releases/2024/01/phoenix-man-arrested-making-online-death-threats-against-president-and

PHOENIX –David Michael Hanson, 41, of Phoenix, was arrested on Wednesday
for making online threats against the President and Vice-President.
Hanson was charged by Federal criminal complaint on Tuesday with five
counts of Threats Against the President and Successors to the Presidency
and five counts of Interstate Communication of Threats.

The complaint alleges that in November and December of 2023, while
living in Arizona, Hanson used a social media platform to post threats
to murder the President and Vice President of the United States. On
November 19, 2023, Hanson posted online a series of threatening
statements including one that stated, “#joeAndKamala I’m asking you to
resign on Monday your alternative is death brutally murdered.” After the
U.S. Secret Service spoke to Hanson and warned him that it was a Federal
crime to post such threats, on December 23, 2023, Hanson posted another
series of similar threats aimed at the President and Vice-President.

Each count of Threats Against the President and Successors to the
Presidency carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, a fine of
up to $250,000, and up to three years of supervised release. Each count
of Interstate Communication of Threats carries a maximum sentence of
five years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, and up to three years of
supervised release.

A complaint is simply a method by which a person is charged with
criminal activity and raises no inference of guilt. An individual is
presumed innocent until evidence is presented to a jury that establishes
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The United States Secret Service is conducting the investigation in this
case. The United States Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, is
handling the prosecution.


Those can be reported here:

https://tips.fbi.gov/home

https://www.justice.gov/action-center/report-crime-or-submit-complaint

https://www.secretservice.gov/contact

https://www.dhs.gov/see-something-say-something/reporting/california


Fellow citizens, won't you join in ending Rudey's terrorism here?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Alan]

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
 Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

A dam doesn't create more fresh water.

It only stores it.

So if demand for water exceeds what the dam's watershed supplies, the
store will disappear.

A desalination plan actually creates fresh water.

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan
A desalination plan actually creates fresh water.

No - the water is pre-existing and filtered to purity (not "created")
you abstruse bot.

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
A desalination plan actually creates fresh water.

No - the water is pre-existing and filtered to purity (not "created")
you abstruse bot.

In the context of being something one cannot drink, or use to irrigate
crops, desalinating is creating "fresh water".

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
A desalination plan actually creates fresh water.

No - the water is pre-existing and filtered to purity (not "created")
you abstruse bot.

In the context of

Dismissed!

The water pre-exists the plant and process.

Next!

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
A desalination plan actually creates fresh water.

No - the water is pre-existing and filtered to purity (not "created")
you abstruse bot.

In the context of

Dismissed!

Yes: you regularly dismiss facts.

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan
Yes: you regularly dismiss facts.

Dismissed!

The water pre-exists the plant and process.

Next!

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
Yes: you regularly dismiss facts.

Dismissed!
The water pre-exists the plant and process.

A dam doesn't increase the amount of available fresh water.

A desalination plan increases the amount of available fresh water.

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
Yes: you regularly dismiss facts.

Dismissed!
The water pre-exists the plant and process.

A dam doesn't increase the amount of available fresh water.

Non sequitur, you lose again.

https://chemistry.illinois.edu/news/2007-12-31t163909/scientists-discover-new-way-make-water

Scientists at the University of Illinois have discovered a new way to
make water, and without the pop. Not only can they make water from
unlikely starting materials, such as alcohols, their work could also
lead to better catalysts and less expensive fuel cells.

“We found that unconventional metal hydrides can be used for a chemical
process called oxygen reduction, which is an essential part of the
process of making water,” said Zachariah Heiden, a doctoral student and
lead author of a paper accepted for publication in the Journal of the
American Chemical Society, and posted on its Web site.

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan
Yes: you regularly dismiss facts.

Dismissed!
The water pre-exists the plant and process.

A dam doesn't increase the amount of available fresh water.

Non sequitur, you lose again.
https://chemistry.illinois.edu/news/2007-12-31t163909/scientists-discover-new-way-make-water
Scientists at the University of Illinois have discovered a new way to
make water, and without the pop. Not only can they make water from
unlikely starting materials, such as alcohols, their work could also
lead to better catalysts and less expensive fuel cells.
“We found that unconventional metal hydrides can be used for a chemical
process called oxygen reduction, which is an essential part of the
process of making water,” said Zachariah Heiden, a doctoral student and
lead author of a paper accepted for publication in the Journal of the
American Chemical Society, and posted on its Web site.

There are lots of ways to produce water from other substances, but that
is a totally different conversation.

This thread is about:

"Desalinization vs. Reservoirs"

Reservoirs store water that ends up in them from streams and rivers and
that water ended up in those streams and rivers from precipitation. You
can only get as much water--on long-term average--from a reservoir as
precipitation delivers into the reservoir. In short, a reservoir doesn't
increase the amount of fresh water available.

Desalination ("desaliniZATION" isn't really a word) increases the amount
of fresh water available by taking from what is the reservoir of the
entire world--the oceans--and gives you a greater supply of fresh water
than you had without it.

Why can you not be an adult about things like this, Loser-2?

[Mittens Romney]

Your absurd claim that:

"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."

Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.

You lose again, bot.

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

A desalination plant gives you fresh water you didn't have before it
"treated" it. It creates FRESH water from SALT water.

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

You lost again, bot.

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

You lost again, bot.

Nope.

I pointed out facts...

...you played semantic games.

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

You lost again, bot.

Nope.
I pointed out facts...
...you played semantic games.

Is it painful to you having your own argumentation obfuscation strategy
run back on you?

You LOST!

Oh how that must gall you...

[Alan]

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

You lost again, bot.

Nope.
I pointed out facts...
...you played semantic games.

Is it painful to you having your own argumentation obfuscation strategy
run back on you?
You LOST!
Oh how that must gall you...

<yawn>

[Mittens Romney]

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney

Post by Alan

Post by Mittens Romney
"A desalination plan actually creates fresh water."
Water \creation/ is not their business, water /treatment\ is.
You lose again, bot.

Semantics.

You lost again, bot.

Nope.
I pointed out facts...
...you played semantic games.

Is it painful to you having your own argumentation obfuscation
strategy run back on you?
You LOST!
Oh how that must gall you...

<yawn>

🛎️ ding!

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860 million
today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today, closer to $10
billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1 billion
to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water is
325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water 3,258,509,400,000,
3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times 182.5
billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the future?
 Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion it
would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

**What the fuck are "gallons", "acres" and "feet"?

NO ONE on this planet uses those measurements, except an insignificant
5% of the planet's population. Please use accepted international
measurements and re-post so everyone can understand.

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 10:17:30 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.
On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water. On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State. These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860
million today. Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today,
closer to $10 billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1
billion to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25 billion
per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the Hoover
Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot of water
is 325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water
3,258,509,400,000, 3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in San
Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25 billion x
10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year. Or 500,000,000
gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times
182.5 billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization
plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be 1.785
time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the
future? Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion
it would be 178.5 times more water. However, we should not build damns
that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

**What the fuck are "gallons", "acres" and "feet"?
NO ONE on this planet uses those measurements, except an insignificant
5% of the planet's population. Please use accepted international
measurements and re-post so everyone can understand.

What a terminal fuckwit you have always been.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Rod Speed
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 10:17:30 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water.  On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water.  On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State.  These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in
California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

   The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860
million today.  Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today,
closer to $10 billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
 If it cost $10 Billion
 The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1
billion to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
 It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25
billion per year.
 If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the
Hoover Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot
of water is 325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water
3,258,509,400,000, 3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
 We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in
San Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25
billion x 10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year.  Or
500,000,000 gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
 We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times
182.5 billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization
plants.
  If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be
1.785 time more water to have damns.
 Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the
future?   Maybe there are economies of scale?
 If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion
it would be 178.5 times more water.  However, we should not build
damns that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
  If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

**What the fuck are "gallons", "acres" and "feet"?
NO ONE on this planet uses those measurements, except an insignificant
5% of the planet's population. Please use accepted international
measurements and re-post so everyone can understand.

What a terminal fuckwit you have always been.

**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

[Rod Speed]

On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed
On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 10:17:30 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Intelligent Party

Raise Lake Shasta 200 Feet and thereby add 10 million acre feet of water.
Put in the Ah Pah Dam and thereby add 15 million acre feet of water. On
the Klamath River and form a scenic lake.
Put in the Dos Rios Reservoir and thereby add 7 million acre feet of
water. On the Eel River
Do these projects and then there will be enough water for the Peripheral
Canal, and a fledgling UC Fresno.
These would be Federal Water Programs, and there is runoff for the
State. These are huge projects like the Hoover Dam, yet desperately
needed if we are to have an Empire of 40 million people in California as
we have.
The farmers are 80% of the water, and are Federal water.
The homes are 20% of the water, and are State water.
There is runoff from Federal to State.
For comparison purposes, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the nation's two
largest reservoirs are 25 million Acre Feet of water each.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ca.water/y5tkrEW4Gkk

The Hoover Dam cost $49 million to build in 1930, equal to $860
million today. Per Quora, we think it would cost much more today,
closer to $10 billion.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-it-cost-to-build-the-Hoover-Dam-from-scratch-in-todays-dollars-and-under-todays-construction-rules
If it cost $10 Billion
The San Diego County Carlsbad Desalinization plant cost about $1
billion to build
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant
It produces 50 million gallons of fresh water per day or 18.25
billion per year.
If a dam allowing storage of 10 million acre feet, such as the
Hoover Dam cost $10 billion to build, we calculate that 1 acre foot
of water is 325,851 gallons, and 10 million acre feet of water
3,258,509,400,000, 3.2 Trillion gallons of stored water.
We also calculate that 10 such desalinization plants as the one in
San Diego County, costing $10 billion total, would produce 18.25
billion x 10, 182.5 billion gallons of fresh water per year. Or
500,000,000 gallons x 365 days, also 182,500,000,000 gallons yearly.
We thus conclude, that because 3.2 trillion gallons is 17.85 times
182.5 billion gallons, dams still make more sense that desalinization
plants.
If you were storing only 1 million acre feet, it would still be
1.785 time more water to have damns.
Maybe we can build desalinization plants more efficiently in the
future? Maybe there are economies of scale?
If you stored 10 million acre feet, and the dam only cost $1 billion
it would be 178.5 times more water. However, we should not build
damns that fail, and it should be a Federal project.
If there is anything wrong with this analysis, please correct it.

**What the fuck are "gallons", "acres" and "feet"?
NO ONE on this planet uses those measurements, except an insignificant
5% of the planet's population. Please use accepted international
measurements and re-post so everyone can understand.

What a terminal fuckwit you have always been.

**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements

What a terminal fuckwit you have always been.

[Joe]

On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

**I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity, etc)
are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

[Rod Speed]

On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:02:41 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity, etc)
are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

Aircraft aren't one tiny pocket, fuckwit

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Rod Speed
On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:02:41 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

 There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity,
etc) are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

Aircraft aren't one tiny pocket, fuckwit

**Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that Airbus Industries use
Imperial measurements when they build aeroplanes?

I call bullshit on that. The Frogs would NEVER use Imperial measurements
for their products.

However, it would appear that Boeing still use Imperial measurements,
but General Motors has been specifying Metric parts for many years.

That said, those companies are NOT nations. Only 5% of the planet's
population uses Imperial measurements. EVERYONE else uses the Metric system.

[Rod Speed]

On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 14:08:44 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed
On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:02:41 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity,
etc) are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

Aircraft aren't one tiny pocket, fuckwit

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that Airbus Industries use Imperial
measurements when they build aeroplanes?

Nope, that the ENTIRE FUCKING INDUSTRY except for the
russian military uses FEET for altitude, KNOTS for airspeed
and TONS for fuel, and MILLIBARS for QNH fuckwit.

I call bullshit on that. The Frogs would NEVERuse Imperial measurements
for their products.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that
you have never ever had a fucking clue, ever.

However, it would appear that Boeing still use Imperial measurements,

And so does RR, GE and P&W engines.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Rod Speed
On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 14:08:44 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed
On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:02:41 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

 There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may
encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity,
etc) are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

 Aircraft aren't one tiny pocket, fuckwit

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that Airbus Industries use
Imperial measurements when they build aeroplanes?

Nope, that the ENTIRE FUCKING INDUSTRY except for the
russian military uses FEET for altitude, KNOTS for airspeed
and TONS for fuel, and MILLIBARS for QNH fuckwit.

**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile is a
radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Trevor Wilson
I call bullshit on that. The Frogs would NEVERuse Imperial
measurements  for their products.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that
you have never ever had a fucking clue, ever.

**Nonetheless, a fact to prove you wrong.

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Trevor Wilson
However, it would appear that Boeing still use Imperial measurements,

And so does RR, GE and P&W engines.

**Again: A piddling 5% of the planet bothers with imperial measurements.
EVERYONE else uses Metric.

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 07 Sep 2024 07:33:16 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed
On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 14:08:44 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed
On Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:02:41 +1000, Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Joe
On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 16:29:53 +1000

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Just a reminder moron: I am not the one trying to use
measurements
that no one on the planet uses, except Americans. Australia, like the
rest of the planet, uses Metric measurements.

There are still many electronic components, even those made in the Far
East, that fit a 1/10" grid. If you actually use measurements in real
life, you need to be able to deal with any system you may
encounter. It
is also not unusual to see dimensions quoted in a strange number of
millimetres which turns out to be an exact number of inches. And don't
bother trying to find a metric screw to fit a photographic mount,
anywhere in the world.

I am well aware of legacy products that are still in Imperial
measurements. Plumbing and, as you say, old school electronic
components. However, common-place measurements (distance, capacity,
etc) are now Metric all over the planet. Except for one, tiny, pocket.

Aircraft aren't one tiny pocket, fuckwit

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that Airbus Industries use
Imperial measurements when they build aeroplanes?

Nope, that the ENTIRE FUCKING INDUSTRY except for the
russian military uses FEET for altitude, KNOTS for airspeed
and TONS for fuel, and MILLIBARS for QNH fuckwit.

A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement.

Corse it is, guess who invented it.

Pity about the other units I listed.

Post by Trevor Wilson
The Imperial measurement of speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile
per hour. A nautical mile is a radial measurement equivalent to one
minute of arc.

Still not metric, fuckwit.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Trevor Wilson
I call bullshit on that. The Frogs would NEVERuse Imperial
measurements for their products.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that
you have never ever had a fucking clue, ever.

Nonetheless, a fact to prove you wrong.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken fantasys.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Trevor Wilson
However, it would appear that Boeing still use Imperial measurements,

And so does RR, GE and P&W engines.

Again: A piddling 5% of the planet bothers with imperial measurements.

Wrong with the aircraft and shipping industry, you pathetic excuse for a
bullshit artist.

Post by Trevor Wilson
EVERYONE else uses Metric.

Wrong with the aircraft and shipping industry, you pathetic excuse for a
bullshit artist.

[Daniel70]

Trevor Wilson wrote on 7/9/24 7:33 am:

<Snip>

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile is a
radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??

That seems stupid!!

[Rod Speed]

Post by Daniel70

Post by Trevor Wilson
A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile is
a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??

Nope, because he left out the fact that that is at the equator.

Post by Daniel70
That seems stupid!!

[Daniel70]

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Daniel70

Post by Trevor Wilson
A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile
is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??

Nope, because he left out the fact that that is at the equator.

AH!! So with a knot being 6,057'ish feet per hour, and there are 24,901
(statue??) miles around the equator (131,477,280ft approx) or 21,706
knots around the equator.

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Daniel70
That seems stupid!!--

Daniel

[Ördög]

Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile is
a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently we
have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's ???)
feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P

Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

At least the Chinese (and the Russians???) have seen the light and now
use km/h for speed and metres for altitude in aviation too.
That must be a huge motivation to wage a nuclear war on them urgently,
eh? :-P

Engineering and and manufacturing for aviation and the ship-construction
industry outside the US uses the metric system exclusively. They must
know something their septic counterparts have never understood!

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile
is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently we
have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's ???)
feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

**Not really. One not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mile is
the distance described by one minute of arc.

[Ördög]

Trevor Wilson

Ördög

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile
is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently
we have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's
???) feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

**Not really. One  not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mile is
the distance described by one minute of arc.

I am not disputing its definition. What I dispute is its rusted on usage
in the 21st Century given the almost universal adoption of the SI
measurement system globally.
For all practical purposes it should make absolutely no difference for
the average sailor if their boats'/ship's speed was measured in km/h
instead of knots and the distanced travelled were measured in kilometres
not nautical miles. It would still take the same time to get from point
A to point B over the ocean, wouldn't it ????
But hey, why make life easier when we could keep it hard?!
;-)

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Ördög

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement
of speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical
mile is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently
we have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's
???) feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

**Not really. One  not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mile
is the distance described by one minute of arc.

I am not disputing its definition. What I dispute is its rusted on usage
in the 21st Century given the almost universal adoption of the SI
measurement system globally.
For all practical purposes it should make absolutely no difference for
the average sailor if their boats'/ship's speed was measured in km/h
instead of knots and the distanced travelled were measured in kilometres
not nautical miles. It would still take the same time to get from point
A to point B over the ocean, wouldn't it ????
But hey, why make life easier when we could keep it hard?!
;-)

**For ships, perhaps, but for aeroplanes, it makes perfect sense, as it
provides for accurate location and speed over the planet's surface.
Whilst the knot and the nautical mile may be archaic terms, there
meaning is not. And once more for Roddles: They are NOT imperial
measurements.

[Rod Speed]

On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 11:00:05 +1000, Trevor Wilson =

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

=D6rd=F6g

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement=

=

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög

Post by Rod Speed

of speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical=

=

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög

Post by Rod Speed

mile is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish water=

s =

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög

Post by Rod Speed
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around =
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden'=

s =

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recentl=

y =

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög
we have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's=

=

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög
???) feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey, =
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits di=

e =

Post by Rod Speed

Post by Ördög
hard.

**Not really. One not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mil=

e =

Post by Rod Speed

is the distance described by one minute of arc.

I am not disputing its definition. What I dispute is its rusted on =
usage in the 21st Century given the almost universal adoption of the =

SI =

Post by Rod Speed
measurement system globally.
For all practical purposes it should make absolutely no difference fo=

r =

Post by Rod Speed
the average sailor if their boats'/ship's speed was measured in km/h =

=

Post by Rod Speed
instead of knots and the distanced travelled were measured in =
kilometres not nautical miles. It would still take the same time to g=

et =

Post by Rod Speed
from point A to point B over the ocean, wouldn't it ????
But hey, why make life easier when we could keep it hard?!
;-)

For ships, perhaps, but for aeroplanes, it makes perfect sense, as it =

=

provides for accurate location and speed over the planet's surface.

Bullshit it does given wind speed, fuckwit

Whilst the knot and the nautical mile may be archaic terms, there =
meaning is not.
And once more for Roddles: They are NOT imperial measurements.

Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that only a
tiny subset of the world doesnt uses METRIC measures.

[Ördög]

Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
Ördög

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Ördög

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement
of speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical
mile is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently
we have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's
???) feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

**Not really. One  not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mile
is the distance described by one minute of arc.

I am not disputing its definition. What I dispute is its rusted on
usage in the 21st Century given the almost universal adoption of the
SI measurement system globally.
For all practical purposes it should make absolutely no difference for
the average sailor if their boats'/ship's speed was measured in km/h
instead of knots and the distanced travelled were measured in
kilometres not nautical miles. It would still take the same time to
get from point A to point B over the ocean, wouldn't it ????
But hey, why make life easier when we could keep it hard?!
;-)

**For ships, perhaps, but for aeroplanes, it makes perfect sense, as it
provides for accurate location and speed over the planet's surface.
Whilst the knot and the nautical mile may be archaic terms, there
meaning is not. And once more for Roddles: They are NOT imperial
measurements.

Well, as China and Russia has already proven metric in aviation is quite
OK, specially given the current heavy duty reliance on GPS navigation.
There are clearly many pros and also some cons to changing to metric.
See the appropriate videos on this topic on the mentor pilot YouTube
channels;
<https://www.youtube.com/@MentourNow/videos>
<https://www.youtube.com/@MentourPilot/videos>

I firmly believe that a single system for all measurements planet wide
can only be a positive outcome. Even NASA had to find that out on their
failed Mars mission.

[Daniel70]

Post by Ördög
Daniel70

Post by Rod Speed
Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile
is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??
That seems stupid!!

Well, one feet represents the size of King Charles' feet (or Biden's
???), eh??? Things must getting a bit confusing now as just recently
we have measured the same thing based on Queen Elizabeth's (Trump's
???) feet... BOOM-BOOM!
:-P
Using knots in the 21st century is clearly stupid .... but hey,
Anglophone conservatives will never move on and their old habits die hard.

**Not really. One  not is one Nautical mile per hour. A Nautical mile is
the distance described by one minute of arc.

(as I think it was Rod that mentioned) .... by one minute of arc AT THE
EQUATOR!!

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daniel70
<Snip>

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile is
a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??

**No. It means that the distance travelled depends on the height above
sea level. A nautical mile at sea level is the same at (say) 10,000
Metres above sea level. However, the distance travelled in Metres (or
miles) is different.

Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement. It is a distance
equivalent to one minute of arc.

Post by Daniel70
That seems stupid!!

**Only to you and Rod. For those of us who understand the concepts, it's
not all that difficult.

[Daniel70]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daniel70
<Snip>

Post by Trevor Wilson
**A knot is NOT an Imperial measurement. The Imperial measurement of
speed is mph. A knot is one nautical mile per hour. A nautical mile
is a radial measurement equivalent to one minute of arc.

Really?? So that would mean doing a knot in Northern Scotish waters
would be a totally different speed to doing a knot down around
Portsmouth, wouldn't it??

**No. It means that the distance travelled depends on the height above
sea level. A nautical mile at sea level is the same at (say) 10,000
Metres above sea level. However, the distance travelled in Metres (or
miles) is different.

Sorry!! You reckon the term "NAUTICAL" can be used at anything above Sea
Level!! Really??

Post by Trevor Wilson
Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement. It is a distance
equivalent to one minute of arc.

Post by Daniel70
That seems stupid!!

**Only to you and Rod. For those of us who understand the concepts, it's
not all that difficult.

I find THAT hard to believe!!

[wiri]

Post by Trevor Wilson
miles) is different.
Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement.

This is incorrect. A knot is an imperial unit of measurement, useful for
mariners and aviators, and adopted around the world.

It is a distance

Post by Trevor Wilson
equivalent to one minute of arc.

This is correct.

[Daniel70]

Post by wiri

Post by Trevor Wilson
miles) is different.
Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement.

This is incorrect. A knot is an imperial unit of measurement, useful
for mariners and aviators, and adopted around the world.

Post by Trevor Wilson
It is a distance equivalent to one minute of arc.

'one minute of arc' .... at the Equator!!

Post by wiri
This is correct.

[%]

Post by Daniel70

Post by wiri

Post by Trevor Wilson
miles) is different.
Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement.

This is incorrect. A knot is an imperial unit of measurement, useful
for mariners and aviators, and adopted around the world.

Post by Trevor Wilson
It is a distance equivalent to one minute of arc.

'one minute of arc' .... at the Equator!!

Post by wiri
This is correct.

if you're an idgit

[Daniel70]

Post by %

Post by Daniel70

Post by wiri

Post by Trevor Wilson
miles) is different.
Again: A nautical mile is NOT an Imperial measurement.

This is incorrect. A knot is an imperial unit of measurement, useful
for mariners and aviators, and adopted around the world.

Post by Trevor Wilson
It is a distance equivalent to one minute of arc.

'one minute of arc' .... at the Equator!!

Post by wiri
This is correct.

if you're an idgit

.... which YOU are, %!!