Aral Sea May Recover; Dead Sea Needs a Lifeline 131
An anonymous reader writes "It's a tale of two seas. The drying up of the Aral Sea is considered one of the greatest environmental catastrophes in history, but the northern sector of the sea, at least, is showing signs of life. A dam completed in 2005 has increased the North Aral's span by 20 percent, and birds, fish, and people are all returning to the area. Meanwhile, the Dead Sea is still in the midst of precipitous decline, since too much water is being drawn out of the Jordan River for thirsty populations and crops. To keep the sea from shrinking more, scientists are pushing an ambitious scheme called the 'Red-Dead conduit,' which would channel huge amounts of water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea. However, the environmental consequences of such a project may be troubling."
World Bank and governments (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Shhh, if you mention such words without expressions of indignation and fear of socialism, you're going to wake up the right-wing nut-jobs.
If not us, who? (Score:2, Troll)
Or we could have a brand new salt flats area for people to try driving really fast.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Actually the Dead Sea contains very little life [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fairly sure there is no life in the Dead Sea outside of small amounts of bacteria. That's why it's called the Dead Sea. The salt content prevents life from living there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If not us, who? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure; but the human population in the region is MORE worth preserving. If a choice must be made, bye-bye bacteria. Hopefully, a solution can be found that accommodates both.
Re:If not us, who? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
We've gotten pretty good at DNA sequencing lately. Would it be possible to sequence all the bacteria in the sea and store for later, or are there too many for that?
Re:If not us, who? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To provide that choice. :)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Well, it used to support tourist towns along its shore, but now those towns are miles from the sea, and the drop in water level has drained the water table and opened sinkholes all along the former seabed, keeping tourists from getting closer.
Re: (Score:2)
A good first step would be considering the humans there of equal worth. As opposed to giving some of them lots of money and weapons...
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Oh, except there is no human population around the dead sea. Just two tribes of very primitive animals that kill each other all day.
Bacteria is not a threat to them, self annihilation is.
In fact, considering the way both Palestinians and Jews have been acting against each other and against the rest of the world's population, and considering they have no respect for human life, the extremophiles on the dead sea are worth saving more than the 'human' population of the area. At least the bacteria is trying to
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Sure; but the human population in the region is MORE worth preserving."
Citation needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Or we send Sam Kinison down there with some U-Haul trucks to tell them to move where the food is. Populations have migrated before, what's stopping them now? OK, so Sam's dead and other countries probably have immigration policies, but otherwise it's a good plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the cancer that destroys earth and itself be worth more in any kind?
Sorry humans, you may be extremely egocentric and arrogant, but you are NOT special!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm fairly sure there is no life in the Dead Sea outside of small amounts of bacteria. That's why it's called the Dead Sea. The salt content prevents life from living there.
There's quite a bit of life in the form of a fair number of tourists which are quite important to the area (on both banks) which apart from that is quite a hellhole (an interesting one to visit though if you ever go in the area).
The Dead sea is more than 400m below sea level and there are huge temperature extremes in the area which gets very little precipitations and has few springs. It's a great natural wonder and definitely worth a few days for it's ruins, it's fauna and the vista, but really not a great
then let the people ruining it fix it (Score:5, Insightful)
The Dead Sea is being ruined because people divert water from its natural inflows for agricultural use. Since they are destroying it, let them pay for fixing it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Plenty of other possible tourist attractions in the area. Just the problem that tourists don't tend to want to go to warzones.
Re:If not us, who? (Score:5, Interesting)
It is tempting to want to "save" things from natural effects of modern life, people are using the water so people should fix it. But once that water entered the dead sea, it too died, better it be used for something. In the end this is just as big a waste of money as trying to protect a city that is below sea level but situated by the ocean... one day it will be game over.
As to a tourist destination, well they could Monty Python the signs and call it:
The Really Dead Sea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Glen Beck hasn't featured salty water on his program yet. (Except maybe tears.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So the question is, if they can channel 'huge' amounts of water from the Red Sea, why don't they use that for irrigation?
That's what they're planning to do; they're going to desalinate the Red Sea to provide water to communities instead of using the Jordan River. What's left-over from the desalination process will be pumped into the Dead Sea to increase it's level. It's, you know, all in TFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Almost certainly that's not what they're going to do.
Leaving aside the political benefits of beggaring your neighbour by taking all the water you can from the river that forms your mutual border, the basic geography is against desalinating Red Sea water and shipping it to the north of Israel and the Palestinian West Bank : the Red Sea only contacts the southernmost extremity of Israel. If the Israelis w
Re:If not us, who? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Brawndo it's got what plants crave!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So what are saltwater algae then?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Something tells me that if it currently holds water, it's probably not flat.
Re: (Score:2)
Dead Sea Desalination Potential (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Red-Dead? (Score:1)
They sound like a bunch of Rockstars to me...
Re: (Score:2)
Makes me worried for other environmental problems (Score:3, Interesting)
The Aral Sea is a horrifying and very visible example of the scale of what humans can do when their policies end up destroying the environment. A major lake, once the fourth largest in the world, reduced to almost nothingness in just a few decades. Unlikely to ever fully recover.
While I remain skeptical (but not outright dismissive) of many of the claims of the environmental movement, particularly the global warming and carbon footprint stuff, it's stuff like this that really makes me worried. If on a small scale people can do this, I really do worry what might happen on a larger scale.
Re: (Score:1)
While I remain skeptical (but not outright dismissive) of many of the claims of the environmental movement, particularly the global warming and carbon footprint stuff, it's stuff like this that really makes me worried. If on a small scale people can do this, I really do worry what might happen on a larger scale.
Right, think about it a bit more: some people's actions over one region can dry up a major lake because these people need the water for their well-being. Now, imagine what the entire humankind can do for our well-being, which requires releasing gases into the atmosphere in amounts that haven't been present there for millennia.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I've thought about it, and I'm OK with it.
What does all that water do for me (the armchair antagonist) sitting in a big hole in the ground called the Aral Sea or the Dead Sea, when it could be providing me with fresh crops, healthier livestock, clean drinking water, and high-tech factories?
[Disclaimer: I live near enough to the Great Lakes in the US that I should really give a shit about both them and other similar things, but I just simply don't. I see them all as resources.]
Re:Makes me worried for other environmental proble (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Rock on!
Can we customize cars with rusty iron spikes and race around in crazy homemade armor to defend our city powered by pig offal?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Makes me worried for other environmental proble (Score:4, Insightful)
A large contribution to drying of Aral Sea is that water which "should" get to it is used in an incredibly wasteful manner - the irrigation systems are in horrible condition, for example. Plus you know, drying of Aral exposed all the toxic stuff we usually dump into water (and which is relativelly stable and harmless in the bottom mud or dissolved in large quantity of water) to the work of wind; dust storms there are toxic.
Oh well, just an "unintended consequence" of progress, like with global warming. Here, similarly to irrigation systems mentioned, we could be much more effective too; and think about it...look around you - how much stuff in the room you're in comes at least partially from oil (in my room, virtually everything...); oil is an insanely valuable resource. And what we do with most of it? Burn it!
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Only for some interpretations of credible, all of which are politically based. There are questions about the size of the anthropogenic component, and significant questions about future consequences, but there are no serious scientific disputes about the existence of AGW.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Please don't lump an obvious consequence of man's actions with one which is still in dispute. Anthropogenic global warming has not been established as a credible theory.
"Global warming" is an unfortunately popularized term, which is prone to misinterpretation so as to breed mistrust in general public. The only remaining "dispute" about anthropogenic climate change is in the heads of the deniers, nodding to each other on internet forums and in media.
And hey, the shrinkage of Aral Sea was probably still "in dispute" (especially with the region's cotton elites) by the time it was too late to avert the disaster.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
When they are indistinguishable, why is that devious? A "real scientist" would say something like "the preponderance of the evidence points to it, so we should act like it's the Truth until proven otherwise." The
Re: (Score:2)
name one impact of AGW that will lead to the extinction of the human species
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"working against it seems like working towards the extinction of the human race"
I understand the meaning of the word "seems", nevertheless the implication of that sentence fragment stands.
Re: (Score:1)
It is a devious tactic to attempt to discredit people
What, a term change made in response to uneducated confusion?
who understand statistics well enough to ask valid and as yet unanswered questions
Could you cite some examples? I'd appreciate if you spend a couple of minutes googling for an explanation why the people who you think "understand statistics" (is this the only necessary qualification, BTW?) actually don't know what are they talking about, as well as for answers to their ill-informed questions. Some people still point at surfacestations.org or similar worn tripe as The Holy Truth That Exposes Evil Conspiracy of Climate Scientists.
Re: (Score:1)
Once again you are attempting to challenge my credibility by lumping me in with a bunch of idiot zealots. You are a zealot, though somewhat less misguided than those you attempt to associate me with. Zealots are the last people we should be listening to.
Don't be so gullible to believe that you are right because so many idiots disagree with you, that is like concluding the Soviet Union was good because it opposed Nazi Germany.
Re: (Score:1)
It's remarkable how asking for credible sources not only gets me labelled a "zealot", but also earns a Troll moderation. Way to go, "nerds".
Re:Makes me worried for other environmental proble (Score:4, Informative)
Oh well, just an "unintended consequence" of progress, like with global warming. !
Please don't lump an obvious consequence of man's actions with one which is still in dispute. Anthropogenic global warming has not been established as a credible theory.
Neither has anthropogenic drying up of Aral sea been proven. It could be just natural change that has nothing to do with human re-routing the water a bit on its way to the Aral... The water level there has changed previously, and it will change again, changes are part of the natural cycles of our planet. Just because it used to be in a communist country doesn't automatically mean any apparent "destruction" (which really is just change, not "destruction") was caused by the commies.
</sarcasm>
Re:Makes me worried for other environmental proble (Score:2)
The people who pointed out that the Aral Sea was headed for a disaster were dismissed as fear-mongers and chicken littles at the time. Given that the environmental movement was proven to be correct then, why dismiss it now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a bit akin to saying.
"I have proof God doesn't exist. See, his priests are assholes! That proves it!"
While you might be right about Al Gore, it doesn't make the initial claim any less probable.
Re: (Score:2)
So, you state that you have no evidence at all that he's incorrect at all, but that because his personal life is deemed by you to be hypocritical, he must be wrong? And anyway, he's a leader of the movement because people like you declare he is so that you can attack him personally. A spokesman (self appointed and visible because he's a public figure who is well funded, not some elected spokesman) who everyone who hates the environment clings to, dec
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. You attack the messenger, but never the message.
Re: (Score:2)
While I remain skeptical (but not outright dismissive) of many of the claims of the environmental movement, particularly the global warming and carbon footprint stuff, it's stuff like this that really makes me worried.
What is it that makes you skeptical of global warming, but not skeptical of this? Is it merely the fact that this disaster has already happened and is completely undeniable, but that the global warming disaster is merely predicted to occur based on well established theory?
If you wait until th
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it's the whole hysterical global warming contingent, that likes to blame everything on global warming. Too many hurricanes? Global warming. Too few hurricanes? Global warming. Heat wave? Global warming. Cold snap? Global warming.
Plus, many actual environmentalists I've met tend to be trying to use it as a cover for some sort of Marxism, and generally appear to me, at least, favor words over action. That and what generally appears to be hypocrisy (Al Gore taking a private jet to a conference to warn
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it's the whole hysterical global warming contingent, that likes to blame everything on global warming. Too many hurricanes? Global warming. Too few hurricanes? Global warming. Heat wave? Global warming. Cold snap? Global warming.
That's the media trying to sell some eyeballs. Over simplification, simple answers, and fear sells. It isn't science.
Plus, many actual environmentalists I've met tend to be trying to use it as a cover for some sort of Marxism, and generally appear to me, at least, favor wo
Recover is a subjective word (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, yeah. One of these days the San Andreas Fault is going to slip big time, and everything east of it will slide under the Atlantic Ocean.
Re: (Score:2)
What, the .1% of the US land mass that is west of the fault? How is that even comparable?
Israel's Natural Resource (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
You tell me. My wife splurged something like $100 on a jar of Dead Sea "healing" cosmetics. Now I wish that damned sea really died.
Flood it all - improve rainfall (Score:2)
stop messing with it (Score:2)
Just stop messing with it for a couple of centuries and it will recover.
So What, Seas Dry Up (Score:2, Informative)
Throughout the history of the world seas have dried up. Watch any nature documentary, particularly the ones touching on geology and you can't seem to go 5 minutes without someone saying something about some place being a dried up seabed.
Re: (Score:3)
That is fine if you do not care about the human population that depends on these seas and lakes. The reality is that when natural resources run out or fail like this the civilizations that grew up around them usually collapse. I don't know about you, but I like civilization and do not want to see it collapse.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
"That is fine if you do not care about the human population..."
Finally a ray of light....I don't care. If ignorant people want to destroy their countries let them. Just as people need heros to hold up we need those who failure misserably to serve as a warning to others.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately the world is so interconnected that the failures do not just destroy themselves, they put me at risk to. It is a lot like driving. If I drive badly I am as much of a threat to you as I am to myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Finally a ray of light....I don't care. If ignorant people want to destroy their countries let them. Just as people need heros to hold up we need those who failure misserably to serve as a warning to others.
Except that Uzbek and Kazakh fishermen who relied on the sea to feed them for centuries weren't the ones who put in place policies that led to its destruction, nor had they any say in them.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an interesting point. The -istan countries were bent over and raped by Mother Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not as simple as that (in this case, anyway). The major reason for Aral drying up was because water from rivers feeding it was diverted for irrigation of those very same countries (and also Turkmenistan) - leading to a large increase in agricultural base. So it's win for some and lose for others within the same country. I'm not even aware of any benefits Russia (as part of USSR) has derived from this project.
Speaking more broadly, it's a touchy topic, but there are two things to keep in mind. For most
youtube video (Score:5, Informative)
This video [youtube.com] shows the Aral sea disappearing. This blog [fotokontakt.ru] has photos from the site as it was in 2008.
NaCl, we don't need no stinkin' NaCl (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The dead sea lies nearly a half a kilometre below sea level, use this drop to generate electricity, use the electricity to extract the salt from the sea water - why is this so difficult for you to understand?
Or do you have a hidden agenda like shares in the dead sea potash/tourist industry, or perhaps you are an ultra conservative and totally disagree with any change at all?
"Remember, the Dead Sea is normally only fed from 'fresh water' sources."
Lol the Jordan river 'fresh water' the Jordan river is a fetid
Re: (Score:1)
Build us a reservoir, a dam and t'other side of dam, a clutch of pelton wheels.
With the weight of the world's oceans pressing on those pelton wheels, I fail to see why there would be insufficient energy to pump said 'salty brine' back from whence it came, minus the desert greening ingredient.
Re: (Score:1)
Let us make the Jordan smell sweeter
Lake Superior in trouble, too (Score:2)
Two years ago, Lake Superior was at its lowest level since 1929 (IIRC). It came back some the following year, but this year I am told it is even below those 1929 levels.
I really hope people are on top of this! I know there are huge amounts of water being drained from Superior for human use.
Re: Dead Sea (Score:1)
I’m sorry. I don’t get really excited about microbes and brine shrimp. If you do NOTHING, they will become crunchy.
Dike off a square mile or two as a preserve.
In general solutions that pay for themselves work faster. Bringing water in from either the Red Sea or the Mediterranean can generate power twice — once by the elevation difference, and once by the dilution process. Sure, you’ll end up with a salinity gradient — less salty where the resalinization plant comes in.
Done righ
Re:Yeah... not really interested (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah... not really interested (Score:4, Funny)
Your lack of perspective is hardly the article's failure.
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Nothing to see here, move along (Score:2, Funny)
In fairness, you did't even need to comment on this article. Please do us all a favor and return to your NASCAR broadcasts.
Re: (Score:1)
You know, if you're a Cornhuskers fan.