SkyscraperCity banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
With the Midwest emptying out, as other parts of the country continue to grow, when it becomes necessary should water from the Great Lakes be pumped to where it's needed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,278 Posts
^^

First off, the Midwest is not emptying out. It's also growing in population faster than the Northeast.





The Midwest grew by 5 million between 1990 and 2000 or at a rate of 10%
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764220.html

Over 66 million people live in the Midwest according to a 2006 census estimate.





Second, why should we pump water to places where nature makes it almost impossible to support large populations :dunno: I say too bad... let them pay outrageous monthly utilities for choosing to live in the desert.:banana:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I have never considered Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, or North Dakota the Midwest. I also am surprised to hear that the Midwest is growing. I guess I'm just thinking about Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, etc., and not thinking region wide.

But, I just feel that there is more than enough water in the Great Lakes to share with other parts of the country. Of course it may not be economically feasible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,278 Posts
^^

Officially the states above are all considered Midwest by the US Census...

Also, there is a growing trend of population reversal where many Midwest transplants are now finding their way back home, so the population for the region will probably grow more rapidly in the coming years when compared to the past 2 or 3 decades (not to mention metro areas such as Chicago, Minneapolis, and Indy are still growing robustly). But even metropolitan St Louis is growing. Though Detroit and Cleveland are stagnant...

As for sharing the Great Lakes with the "thirsty" southwest.... they better cough up some cash. :D

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17354828
 

·
born again cyclist
Joined
·
3,671 Posts
Of course it may not be economically feasible.
no, it would not even be close to economically feasible. to pump water from the great lakes all the way to the arid southwest would be exorbitantly expensive. it would be many times cheaper to invest in water conservation measures and de-sal plants.

and on top of the costs, the water of the great lakes is now protected by law from leaving the watershed, with a few exceptions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
Well, I was thinking more the South/Southeast, than the Southwest. Use the Mississippi River to carry the water further south. Build some reservoirs along the way. Probably just a pipe dream anyway, especially with what Steely Dan said about the water not leaving the watershed. But when you look at Chicagogeorge's link, you see the South is by far the most populated part of the country, and has added more people than any other part of the country by far since 1990, it seems like something will have to be done.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Wasn't there a huge Great Lakes water thread on here not even a few months ago? Can someone resurrect it and merge this with that one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,687 Posts
The South isn't the most populated part of the country, it just happens to cover a very large portion of the country. The Midwest and Northeast combined are about the same size as the South, yet they have 121 million people compared to 112 million in the South. Also keep in mind the "South" includes Maryland, Delaware, and Washington D.C. which many people now view as being a part of the Northeast.

The five Great Lakes states (Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin) combined are smaller than the state of Texas but have over 46 million people. That's almost double the population of Texas.

I think the people in the Great Lakes region need the water a lot more than the Texans and Georgians.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Well Hudinka, it is the most populated region, area not withstanding. And it has also added more people than any other region in the last 20 years or so. Here's the link if you missed it before.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764220.html
I am also having a hard time understanding your point about the Midwest and Northeast combined being roughly the same area and population as the South.

And what does the fact that Texas has a lot of rural land out West have to do with anything. About 21 million of Texas' 24 million people live in an area the size of Minnesota. See, I can play too.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,687 Posts
Uh you asked the question...

With the Midwest emptying out, as other parts of the country continue to grow, when it becomes necessary should water from the Great Lakes be pumped to where it's needed?
My point was to show that the Midwest isn't "emptying out". The Great Lakes states (which are still growing at a steady pace) have one of the highest concentrations of people in the U.S. The regions that lie alongside the Great Lakes combined have over 135 million people (including Canada). Even if most of them don't live in the Great Lakes watershed, that's still a lot of people to write off as "emptying out"...

If you want access to Great Lakes water then move to the watershed. It's that simple. You don't need to get an attitude when people in the Midwest answer your question...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,164 Posts
With the Midwest emptying out, as other parts of the country continue to grow, when it becomes necessary should water from the Great Lakes be pumped to where it's needed?
I'm not sure how you mean the Midwest is "emptying out" when its population continues to grow. What's really happening in the Midwest is a mass exodus from the the country (and in some areas, the city) to the suburbs.

Great Lakes water is vulnerable enough as it is, and many of the Great Lakes have seen water level drops over the past several years, so good luck trying to tap our already dwindling resource.
 

·
Mostly Sane
Joined
·
2,326 Posts
...The five Great Lakes states (Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin) combined are smaller than the state of Texas but have over 46 million people...
Uhhh...Minnesota has 4 times the shoreline of Indiana, and 3 times the shoreline of Illinois, and almost as much as Ohio, yet it's not a Great Lakes State??? Heck, New York has almost twice the shoreline of Ohio.

If, by "Great Lakes States," you mean states that border a Great Lake, then there are eight of them and one province. Indeed I think Pennsylvania has more shoreline than Indiana.

But, I do understand and stand by your point. There are far more people in those 5 particular Midwestern states you name than in Texas, even though it's a smaller area than Texas.
 

·
MillerTime
Joined
·
229 Posts
First off i have to agree with Avian, how are their only 5 great lakes states?

Second, im a firm believer that the great lakes water should stay in the great lakes. I definitly dont like the idea of the Federal Government stepping in and telling us what to do with our resources either. If you live in a region that doesnt have enough water then you just have to deal with it. Youre going to have to use less of it and pay more for it. If you dont like that, then move to a region where there is water available. Life isnt fair and it never will be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,460 Posts
But, I just feel that there is more than enough water in the Great Lakes to share with other parts of the country. .
No there isn't. How about those states in the West quit building golf courses and growing crops.

The Great Lakes are vital shipping lanes and any significant drop in water levels would impede the movement of commerce. Not too mention that the Great Lakes are very delicate ecosystems and need to be protected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,460 Posts
Also, if the South is having water issues, then it should limit population growth. They created the problem by doing nothing to curb sprawl and water intensive development, they should be responsible for fixing the problems it caused. How about CONSERVING water, instead of grabbing at another region's source?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,687 Posts
Uh... The "Great Lakes states" is a region that includes the five states I listed. Minnesota is part of the Northern Plains region and New York and Pennsylvania are part of the Mid-Atlantic region. I know that more states lie along the lakes, but I was referring to the Great Lakes region, which is the most populated portion of the Midwest.
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top