News   Jan 09, 2025
 428     0 
News   Jan 09, 2025
 298     0 
News   Jan 09, 2025
 593     0 

Star: Future mass migration to Great Lakes area?

Warming

I do think that if we do enter an era of relative energy scarcity and discordant weather patterns with generally hotter temperatures, that the future for Phoenix et al will not be bright. I don't see them moving to Cleveland, however.
 
Irrigating the desert to grow lettuce that gets wasted by the ton in restaurants is a lot more unsustainable than Phoenix McMansions.
 
Sure but farmers have a right to that water don't they? Can't see them giving that up.

As for Cleveland there's no reason if they were smart that they couldn't capitalize on this. Water is an important resource. Having a cheap and abundant supply is a major plus for this region.
 
I do think that if we do enter an era of relative energy scarcity and discordant weather patterns with generally hotter temperatures, that the future for Phoenix et al will not be bright. I don't see them moving to Cleveland, however.

The electricity problem is solved by political will and a nuclear reactor station. The water becomes the central problem - regardless of temperature concerns. As desert or semi-desert city populations grow, they draw on an already scarce resource at an ever greater rate. Since these cities are inland, the option for piping in water for desalination also becomes more costly (due both to the distance and the effort to make desalinated water).

Aquifers will get replenished, but it takes time.
 
Aquifers will get replenished, but it takes time.

Lots of time and it takes rain. These areas are getting less rain making it harder to replenish.
 
You're exactly right, Ed. These aquifers aren't going to replenish in our lifetimes, or those of anyone we know.

It doesn't mean that people are going to leave the southwest, though. The fact is that water is such a minuscule cost of living for anyone in North America, including in the middle of the desert. If the price went up two or even five times, it really wouldn't make an appreciable dent in people's overall cost of living. They'd likely consider water efficiency improvements and xeriscaping, and they might cut back in other areas like their vehicle, but you're not going to see people retiring to Cleveland just to save a few hundred bucks a year on their water bill. At five times the cost, you could pump in desalinated sea water from just about anywhere, or make farmers an offer they cannot refuse for their water rights.

If you feel like solving the electricity crisis with nuclear power, you may as well use it for desalination, too. Also, you don't have to desalinate just sea water: many desert areas have near-limitless brackish aquifers nearby.
 
Future growth may be curtailed as someone who plans on retiring to a sunny spot with a huge lawn, a pool, an outdoor mister, and 30 golf courses nearby may choose to stay in Ohio or go to Myrtle Beach or wherever instead, but, no, people won't leave the SW any time soon because of a lack of water...there's just way too much that can be done to cut back on water usage to feed municipal/residential demand. In drier cities like Albuquerque, people undertake efficiency measures voluntarily, but in higher consumption cities like Vegas and Fresno and Phoenix, it'll require more tough choices. For one thing, Vegas has virtually no parks or green spaces, so golf courses and lawns are the only respite from concrete and dust and they'll willingly pay much higher water rates to keep their level of consumption/lifestyle. The megaresorts are xeriscaping quite a bit, if only for public relations purposes, especially since they're frequently seen as a scapegoat for rampant water usage when they really don't use that much. Millions of square feet of grass have been removed in Vegas in recent years, saving billions of gallons of water per year.
 
If you feel like solving the electricity crisis with nuclear power, you may as well use it for desalination, too. Also, you don't have to desalinate just sea water: many desert areas have near-limitless brackish aquifers nearby.

Then maybe the entire article is a concern over nothing.
 
so is this how they're trying to sell all that swampland in detroit as beach front property?
 
How are the water supplies in the south*east*--especially the non-coastal areas? Remember how places like Atlanta are booming, and the whole TVA reservoir etc factor...
 
Florida's not looking so great for water. Inner areas are better off than Vegas but still suffer supply worries to the point that massive growth plus a decade of drought could spell big trouble. Atlanta gets most of its water from surface sources - I don't know what the underground supply is like - and the Chattahoochee's really low flow. I do know they estimated that about $100 billion in water infrstructure would be needed to sustain growth while letting people basically waste water (metro area, though, which is up to...28 counties now?). Still, grass has a chance of surviving in the SE without a zillion gallons of added water since it actually rains once in a while.
 
The biggest impact of water scarcity will be felt in the changing nature of economic activity in the areas. Tourism will not be effected but agriculture, manufacturing and resource industries could easily become unviable.
 
Watch for the (slow) return of Buffalo: water + cheap energy. Plus it's small enough that its' social fabric can be repaired much more easily than vast wastelands like Detroit.
 
I could see that though they need to do something about the Thruway. Buffalo has got to be the only major US city where the only major highway access is a tollway.
 
Although the I-90 is still tolled, as of early this year the I-190 into Buffalo is no longer tolled.

Rochester, similarly is reached by the tolled I-90. Not that I have time to check, but there must be some other major cities reached by tolled expressways.

42
 

Back
Top