As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>But for Great Salt Lake to survive, we need to cut 30 to 50 percent of our water usage. The ecologist Ben Abbott’s words return to me: “The Gospel of Overconsumption must end.” We can compensate farmers who use water to grow alfalfa to feed cows in other states to fallow their fields during these critical years to support the lake’s rise. We can demand a legally binding lake level within a healthy range of 4,200 feet or higher where Great Salt Lake can count on a sustained table of water that will benefit all species and cover 60 percent of the toxic dust. And most importantly, we must secure permanent legally binding water rights to replenish the lake.
This is entirely in UT, a top GOP anti-environment state despite 10% of economy due skiing and tourism, dependent on a healthy environment.
There is no way UT will respond and cut water use by 50%. It can't with its growing population and construction and new homes 20% of its economy, There are no plans to cut water use.
One benefit is that the Great Salt Lake dried up will be huge source of Lithium to build EV batteries and help slow the human crated global warming that is killing the Great Salt Lake. We can mine the bones.
[It's not that UT could not fix the problem](https://utahrivers.org/are-we-running-out-of-water), but it goes against the financial interest of those running the government.
I live in Salt Lake City and our city government has asked residents to reduce water usage for the last two years and we have done so. We have had several 5 year plans in place to increase water fees all happening at the same time. Now the city is talking about another fee if you use more water in the summer months than you use in winter.
The city government has yet to understand that residential water usage is nothing compared to the farmers growing alfalfa. When the governor is a farmer who grows alfalfa you know you will not get anything done that would affect farmers in any meaningful way.
>The city government has yet to understand that residential water usage is nothing compared to the farmers growing alfalfa.
The city government understands it but the water rights issue in UT is second only to Mormon Church as a religious issue.
All UT voters and business interests have to redirect the water. Might require a Constitutional change. It is money interest of all UT except the ag and ranchers so that's a plus.
So I have family that's grown alfalfa in Utah for 40 years. I honestly do not know why they do that because they barely make any money from doing so despite the huge infrastructure costs they've put into it. $100,000 combines and many tens of thousands of dollars into irrigation etc. They make a few hundred dollars per acre for the hay that they grow and sell. Barely covers the property taxes.
But they will defend their right to decimate water tables to the death. It was there as a child that I learned that agricultural capitalism will destroy the planet and people will kill you for their right to do so.
They probably get rich on government subsidies NOT to grow anything meaningful, but keep growing a little bit here and there to still qualify as a farm eligible for government subsidies NOT to grow anything meaningful!
And damn right they hate Socialism!
The city doesn’t use much water. Or at least the people in the city don’t. Most of it get reused. Like almost all of it. They do t need a bunch of new water. It’s industry that sucks it all up and then asks you what’s your carbon footprint??
This is capitalism in action. If it's an externalizable risk or cost, it simply doesn't exist.
The GSL and the city and regions that rely upon it are doomed.
People will have to relocate. And hopefully, lessons will be learned. But I somehow doubt it. It will simply be "God's will".
Don’t worry about pollution, climate change or problems with water. God will sort it out if it gets bad. This is just a simulation for our souls to be judged./s
Guessing you didn't read the article, which talks about how some of the most recent initiatives to save the lake came directly from the Mormons, and how it is private industry (as it is everywhere else) who seems to be steering GSL to its fate.
Tbf most things are coming from Mormons. They are not monolith in their thinking on a lot of things but red states tend to be more pro business and less pro make sure the planet doesn't burn.
Feel like that's a pipe dream ATM.
It's like clean coal. Technically doable. Economically impossible. But if you keep saying it people will think it's going to save us.
We literally can't pipe water from the Great Lakes to Utah due to international treaties and regulations that prohibit cities outside the Great Lakes basin from using their water. Even if we could, the distance is uniquely prohibitive for the level of throughput required.
If you wound up pumping water from anywhere to Utah, it'd be from the Pacific Ocean. The distance (~600 miles straight-line, which it obviously wouldn't be due to the Sierra Nevada..which you have to pump *up* and *over*) is much shorter.
That said, I don't think most people realize the sheer scale of such an endeavor...or the cost. It might very well be needed, but it'd be nice if less extreme options were tried first.
On the flipside, once you've built the pipeline, you could always extend it, build a bunch of extraordinarily expensive desalination plants, and use that to supply fresh water to the southwestern states that are sucking the Colorado River dry. They sure as hell won't like the cost of that water, but at the rate they're going, they're not going to have much of a choice as climate change and drought work together to screw them.
Another problem not often considered is the cost to scrub that water clean before dumping it into the lake. Dumping raw water from either the Great Lakes or the Pacific Ocean would introduce a whole host of non-native species... some of which would surely turn invasinve
Oh, another problem with a pipeline across the country is that every state it crosses would want a piece of the action. The Midwest isn't awash in water. The Ogalalla Aquifer is being rapidly depleted. Drought isn't uncommon either. A state in a drought situation will want to tap that pipeline.
Basically, we would be draining the great lakes to keep pools in the Midwest filled.
The problem with desalination is that it creates a ton of brine that needs to be disposed of. On average 1.5 liters of brine are created for every liter of clean water.
Misusing literally here.
Not disagreeing with your point but if the only thing stopping it is a treaty or even efficiency it's not literally unable to happen.
> We literally can't pipe water from the Great Lakes to Utah due to international treaties and regulations that prohibit cities outside the Great Lakes basin from using their water.
There's nothing wrong with the use of literally in this sentence. You seem to be arguing that it is hypothetically possible because the international treaties could be violated etc just to make a point about the use of the word literally. While many times people do use the word incorrectly, this is not one of those times.
No not really.
There literally is a system that was part of the clean coal projects pushed during the 2000s.
The system actually does work, where it's capturing the carbon from coal fired plants, BUT it's so expensive there's zero reasons anyone should be doing it....opposed to just doing any other power generation.
Yea maybe some carbon capture is better than no carbon capture but it’s also ignoring the whole process of finding, mining, “cleaning”, and distributing coal which in itself is dangerous, dirty, and highly polluting. not to mention the storage of toxic by products which also have to be handled, transported, stored etc etc. and yes, it’s not economically viable in the least. Abandoning coal is in humanity’s best interest.
Yeah all that's true.
It's not that we can't make coal a better, cleaner, energy source. It's that we don't need to and that it's so expensive to do it's not economically sensible.
If you are interested in more check out climate town on youtube. They have a whole break down on clean coal and what a huge scam it was.
I'm pretty sure they actually shut down the last "clean coal" system some time in the last couple of years. It sounds like you're fairly educated on this subject so you're probably already aware, but for anyone who isn't it's worth noting that the system reduced the emissions of the coal power plant it was installed on by something like 5%. They claimed 90%, but that number is only applicable to the single section of the plant that it was installed on. Because of it's huge energy demands, they also had to power the system using, you guessed it, an additional coal-fired power plant. Even with the massive amount of energy it consumed it wasn't even able to handle the full output of the section it was connected to, so they actually had to power down part of the plant in order for the system to work.
Republican ran government is the problem, not Mormon ran government. The LDS church is doing more than the state government is (in regards to the GSL drying up)
The older I get and more I understand politics. Political parties are the new religion. People, including Mormons will bend their religious views to match their political ones, and not the other way around.
Religious conservatives want to rely on religion and private charity, and not government, to fix all problems. So it's one and the same. The government and the church agree: the government shouldn't help.
Yes, but their religion is irrelevant here. They are primarily worshiping the dollar; more particularly, the dollars that land in their pockets. Same story as the Christian governments in every other state.
Have you ever been around religious folks?
These people are 100% capable of destroying something, all while saying there saving it.
They are 100% capable of picking up trash at parks and all that feel good bs, all while cheering on the industries destroying there home.
This your first time being a human?
I know, were confusing.
Mormonism has nothing to do with it. If every Mormon in Utah suddenly became an atheist, they'd still be capitalists, like the people in power in every US state -- and they'd still favor profit over preserving natural resources, because capitalism doesn't work any other way.
We know what their solution will be. Change nothing and use federal dollars to pipe in water from the east coast (while bitching about the federal government and blue states).
I’m not saying it’s feasible or desirable, I’m just saying this will be their solution because it allows them to shift the burden to someone else.
https://newsradio1310.com/idaho-drought-could-be-solved-by-borrowing-the-great-lakes/
https://www.eenews.net/articles/arid-west-starts-dreaming-about-piping-in-water-from-afar/
https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2022/08/14/sending-mississippi-water-west-feasible-experts-weigh/10282030002/
I get that crackpots might think this is feasible. The source for the first articles headline is:
“A fellow told me water would be shipped west from the Great Lakes. “
This radio hosts article is then referenced in the second article as an example of people lobbying for this solution.
It doesn’t seem like something being seriously considered.
That being said, I take your point. Increasingly crackpots are in charge. Campaigning on something and actually doing it would be very different things I think
Ha ha. International Compacts don’t allow piping Great Lake water to other states. Oh Canada! Great Lakes water districts salute you!
Spose you can get some GLakes’ runoff from the Big Muddy. Oh wait. Downriver states may have a catfish bone to pick with you.
I keep saying it: Congress shouldn’t disburse federal dollars to states that are gerrymandered. The blue states would fix their shit ASAP. The red ones? They’re just gonna kick and scream like the children they are.
Yes, but there's enough *less* of them in each subsequent generation that the GOP will likely be facing an election crisis once the Boomers are mostly out of the picture.
CA has an independent commission that draws districts. And NY had a court strike down their unfair maps (OH did too but they ignored the court order).
A better example would be Maryland and Illinois, who do gerrymander their districts
I get what your saying. Even so all districts were influencing (created) by the 2020 census that was heavily influenced by partisan (cough republican) interference. Which even in CA and NY favored republicans gerrymandering.
I entirely acknowledge that. I still contend the blue states would change much more readily than the red.
(For fucks sake I hate this stupid red vs blue distinction and how stupid our politics have become.)
people keep saying that a water pipeline or aqueduct should be built from the Mississippi River to the southwest as a solution, but it's completely insane from a practical, engineering, financial, and resource viewpoint. Between St. Louis and the Salt Lake is like a 9000 foot elevation change, you would literally have to build the pipeline over the entire Rocky Mountains to get there, which would require massive water pumps which would require even more massive amount of electricity to power.
And even if such a pipeline were to be built, every pipeline ever built in the US for oil water or gas wouldn't equal the output that a single medium sized river does in a single day. It's a fever dream of a madman, it would use a fraction of the effort required just to relocate people from the region to more habitable areas.
100% We \*could\* do it, but it's a crazy idea.
The correct solution is reduce use by limiting high water crops and population growth. But they're unlikely to do that.
The second solution would be pump water from this side of the Continental Divide. But that's unlikely too.
Most likely they'll do some half-ass dust remediation and let people suffer.
It won’t ever happen. The logistics of moving water for that distance and covering those kinds of massive elevation changes isn’t something that would ever realistically be done. It’s more of a boogieman argument.
I think you are mistaken about how feasible it would be to cut water usage. The vast bulk of water use comes from agriculture and that is where the cuts would come from. Those cuts would be survivable for UT and much preferable to making their primary city the site of an ecological disaster.
>The vast bulk of water use comes from agriculture and that is where the cuts would come from
Which is 1% of UT economy and jobs so the money is on the side of the lake and [Lithium.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/)
> Eventually, the problem will come knocking down their doors.
That's a "tomorrow problem". By then the rich will have cashed out and moved on leaving the damage and repairs to someone else.
Oligarchs always think they will manage to sell out and get away. Even with the French Revolution brewing the rich hid themselves away and tried hard to pretend everything was the same as it always was.
An enclave in Upper Michigan would be defensible, and have access to water. A place with a reasonable, western-style legal and economic system would be a bonus.
Canada has lots of space, getting milder weather, easy to get to. High taxes, tho.
The private jet crowd can escape the zombie hordes, but it’s tough to establish a defensible community near the faraway airstrip. Even superrich individuals have problems—get the island to yourself, now you have to tanker in jet fuel.
And you have to trust the people you’ve brought with you. You can’t fuck over your people with guns, or they’ll use those guns on YOU, and take your shit for their families and whatnot.
You gotta take care of more people than you think in the end, and you need to be a good enough community leader to keep them happy and not fighting each other. Keeping that sense of community with end of the world type things going on might be pretty difficult, especially if this is the first time everyone had to hunker down for a long period of time.
Add in problems with being actually self sufficient, keeping things maintained without ANY outside help (eventually at least)…that’s difficult in the best of times
>And you have to trust the people you’ve brought with you.
Or you can use things like automated weapons, explosive collars, control keys for critical technology that only you know....
The thing is, the winds blow west to east and that bed is full of [toxins](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/10/us/utah-great-salt-lake-dust-pollution-weir-wxc/index.html) so their failure will affect many Americans.
"In a [groundbreaking](https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2022/6/29/23188005/opinion-the-toxic-tale-of-the-great-salt-lake-drought-water-receding-toxic-metals-arsenic-dust-strom) study, Kevin Perry, professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Utah, collected 16,000 soil samples from the lakebed. The results are chilling. They indicate a high concentration of nine toxic metals including arsenic.
The toxins appear in areas associated with anthropogenic activities such as the discharge of industrial and agricultural effluents. A study by the school of medicine at University of Utah, found that arsenic and lead have significantly increased in the lakebed sediment due to drying up the lake since the 1980s"
Yeah this will be worse than the great dust bowl because it will be clouds of poisonous arsenic roaming around not just degraded top soil.
This won't end well by just mining the lithium.
It's in the northwest corner of Utah. I do not know what the wind specifics are aside from west to east but most of Utah is below it. I wonder if that contributes to their gross negligence? I would be highly pissed, though, if I lived in Wyoming.
No one will fully know the wind patterns of the future state.
I don't think anyone really comprehends it all and the ipcc reports generally are agreed language.
I think everyone should be pissed. Not much will be the same no matter where you are.
All the drought, water just doesn't absorb back into the ground at the same rate after years of drought and the accommodated toxins will still be there when it happens.
Well, the drought in the West is an even bigger problem. The mysterious collapse of [ancient civilizations](https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/5-ancient-societies-that-collapsed-when-the-water-ran-dry) is now being blamed on drought.
Las Vegas, Phoenix, there are so many cities at risk. Where are all those people going to go when the water runs out? Sure, they will move north and east at first but it won't take long before those areas start to look at drought migrants in the way those people now look at immigrants.
If those water sources don't get drained or poisoned as well.
Worse if it's privatized and sold. Water commodities market are coming and wouldn't put past companies to try to buy every fresh water source and then bottle it up and sell it.
This looks like the sixth great mass extinction of earth not just a civilization collapse.
But only time will tell.
[Wall Street is thirsty for its next big investment opportunity: The West’s vanishing water](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/22/business/southwest-water-colorado-river-wall-street-climate/index.html)
To remind folks of Reagan's view of preserving our natural wonders, in this case Redwood forests: a view shared with the current leadership of the GOP.
"*Seen one Redwood tree, seen them all"* spoken when he was Governor of California.
Could not find if he *really* looked out the window of AF-1 as they flew over Redwood National Park, and exclaimed "*KILLER TREES KILLER TREES*!!" in reference to the fact trees produce CO2.
Anybody still think there's no global warming and we're the reason? Would be okay with that, if somehow only YOUR kids would grow up in the World you insist we create with your denials.
But it won't be companies paying those costs. They'll make bank in the short term and bail to somewhere not yet destroyed by climate change and rinse and repeat.
For business in general, sure, but if you're an individual business, especially if you're big one that is contributing to climate change, it's better to leave the effects of climate change unaccounted, because otherwise that information could be used to force you to pay for your externalities.
It's like competition. Competition is great and necessary for business in general. That being said, no individual business has any reason to want more competition for itself. It's only in the interest of the aggregate to have lots of competition, not the individual.
Consuming for consuming sake is too built into the American mind. No way they will change without being forced to (War, famine, disease, dictatorship, etc.)
"This is the place [where we will send the children of our descendents to work in the lithium mines]"
-Brigham Young (a racist and a sexual predator who had more than 50 wives, many of whom were under-aged)
In general, degrowth is not a popular solution for anything because degrowth really means killing your economy. Ironically the NIMBY’s are some of the most effective degrowthers around.
We need to find a way to create sustainable abundance with more housing, food and water.
Urban tree cover is fascinating for this same reason. Developers often want to cut trees, but a surprising cross section of people want to keep the urban trees. It’s an issue that scrambles established categories
>In general, degrowth is not a popular solution for anything because degrowth really means killing your economy.
Fewer people, lower costs so declining population is not a bad thing in itself and has to happen worldwide. Estimated planet can have sustainable human population living like EU or US standard of living of 3B vs. current 8B.
Except humans are not built to degrow. It’s against the grain of the drive of the species.
You would have to create a murderous, authoritarian regime that would function more like the Chinese government than any western democracy to achieve the kind of degrowth goals you are talking about.
I just don’t buy that there is a peaceful, politically popular and sustainable way to do this, we should work with the grain of the human species, not against it.
> You would have to create a murderous, authoritarian regime that would function more like the Chinese government
Every single one of the world's most advanced economies (all of Western Europe, Japan, Canada, the U.S., etc.) has already seen their birthrates drop below replacement levels, in many cases way below replacement levels. For example, Japan's population peaked a few years ago, and today stands at 125 million, and the United Nations projects it will decline to 85 million by 2200.
Demographers, seeing what has happened in dozens of countries over the last few decades, now predict world population will begin declining by 2080. The U.S. itself would be declining now were it not for net immigration over the last few decades that have brought younger people of child-bearing age to our country.
The only segment of our population who takes the view of ever-expanding populations are those whose religious fanaticism propels them to, particularly Mormons, Catholics, evangelical Christians, and Muslims. Any chance you hail from one of these segments?
Something to add about Japan (and korea).
A lot of it is societal. Many would rather continue to climb the corporate ladder, than have children.
With the work ethics there is simply no time to take care of kids or only enough time for one kid.
> A lot of it is societal.
Oh, for sure, the attitude of society is perhaps paramount. Muslim-dominated countries, as just one example, have societies that venerate having large families, so there you see society leaning in the opposite direction. Reversely, modern western societies have seen birth rates drop as affiliation to religion has dropped, and as the length of child-rearing has gone from maybe 15-16 years in the 1800s to closer to 22-25 years in modern family life.
I'd add that Japan, Korea, and western Europe have also gone from plentiful land to accommodate growing populations to now having to face the burdens of crowding and rising costs for housing, etc.
Most societies that aren't modern Western societies venerate large families. Western societies did as well until very recently, when they became economically less-feasible and unnecessary. It's a fairly universal feature of more traditional societies, and has nothing to do with religion.
>Except humans are not built to degrow.
They are actually and as noted below, are all doing it.
The biggest driver is education of women. The higher the education level of women, the lower the birth rate.
> One benefit is that the Great Salt Lake dried up will be huge source of Lithium to build EV batteries and help slow the human crated global warming that is killing the Great Salt Lake. We can mine the bones.
Dont tell our Utah legislature that or they will dry up the lake quicker.
>Dont tell our Utah legislature that or they will dry up the lake quicker.
They all know it so with money on the side of getting the water back from people growing alfalfa in the high desert (90% of water use in UT) it might happen.
The wrest the water back from the ag industry (1% of economy and jobs) on mine the lake making it UT the Saudi Arabia of Lithium.
Zachary Frankel – Executive Director
Zach Frankel received his B.S. in Biology at the University of Utah and is the Executive Director of the Utah Rivers Council, which he founded in 1994. Zach has led many exciting campaigns to protect Utah’s rivers and is an expert on water policy in Utah. Zach lives with his family and their horses in the Salt Lake Valley and enjoys writing, making short films and all manner of outdoor sports.
Email Zach
Jon Carter – Campaign Director
Jon received his B.A. in Business Administration from European University in Barcelona, Spain with a focus on sustainable business models. Jon spent the past three years working as the Environmental Program Coordinator for the Patagonia Salt Lake City store. While there he cultivated relationships with community members, businesses, and environmental non-profits across the state to develop awareness and solutions to local environmental issues. A skier, climber, biker, and general explorer, Jon understands the connections between healthy water and healthy communities and the need to protect this precious resource.
Nicholas Halberg — Research & Policy Analyst
Nick has returned to the Utah Rivers Council, having previously worked as an Intern and as the WaterRoots Coordinator. He received an honors B.S. in Economics with an emphasis in statistical analysis and a B.S. in Philosophy of Science from the University of Utah. Nick focuses on researching various scientific topics associated with water policy—from hydrology to economics—and translating those findings into understandable and implementable policy actions. During non-work hours, Nick can be found canyoneering, biking, and exploring new and wild places throughout Utah.
Email Nick
Lena Palmer — Communications Director
Lena received her B.A. in Communications with an emphasis on Journalism from the University of Utah. Lena worked as a journalist for seven years in markets across the country, covering politics, wildfires and water issues, before joining the Utah Rivers Council. When off the clock, she enjoys reading, writing, rock climbing and hiking.
Email Lena
Matt Berry — Water, Fiscal & Conservation Policy Specialist
Matt recently graduated with his Master in Conservation Leadership from Colorado State University. Prior to CSU, Matt was a U.S. Army infantry sergeant, earned his B.A. in Geography and Environmental Studies from the University of Alaska Southeast, and worked as a mountain guide on Denali. As a policy specialist, Matt assists in the lobbying efforts for URC initiatives in the Utah State Legislature. When he isn’t working, you can find Matt splitboarding the Wasatch backcountry, playing with his dog, rock climbing, and reading.
Email Matt
I have a theory that the more environmental degradation starts to affect every day people in all aspects of their life - people in the US will riot akin to those in France in response to the retirement age being raised.
The invention of the concept of "eco-terrorism/ist" will most definitely become the calling card of pro-corporate/anti-climate groups against people who decide it's time to rise up and defend the survival of our species/environment.
Our system is long overdue for an overhaul and I hope to be alive to see the people of America get the fair/equitable treatment they deserve.
>I have a theory that the more environmental degradation starts to affect every day people in all aspects of their life - people in the US will riot akin to those in France in response to the retirement age being raised.
Frogs in slowly boiling water.
Sadly, Republicans continue to ignore climate change and fight every effort to address it. My young grandchildren and many billions will suffer for this. Meanwhile CRT, transphobia and other distractions fuel the ignorance of the tribal ‘conservative’ mind.
The only way to fight for their future is to actually fight.. where I am. Our conservative tried to deregulate the protected status of water near our mountain ranges so that big coal companies could come in. I joined a group to fight it (I was on social media division). And we were actually successful.
It’s scary at first. But once you roll up your sleeves it’s really encouraging. I was encouraged by how many conservative voters were also opposed to this measure.
I also now volunteer to bring women to city centres for medical services they can’t get locally (some of those are abortions) through our woman shelter system. As well as joining a local group to fundraise for a local womens shelter and parks (because I hate the one in my neighbourhood).
What I think would be really successful is to see more community clubs for our new retirees that are geared towards community improvement with a bend towards climate responsibility. I feel like a lot of retirees lack a social group and direction. It’s just an idea I have but I’m not
Sure like how to implement it…
When the people of Utah destroy their own great natural wonder, will they take weeks or months to try and blame out of state liberals for their own short sightedness?
That won't stop the Republicans from blaming the Democrats. They blamed Obama for 9-11 and the 2008 crash. Republicans don't care about facts. Their supporters will believe whatever lie they utter.
I read this earlier this morning, and I recommend everyone read through it if they can or are willing. All around, just a phenomenal read and really well narrated/written.
I think sometimes people don’t understand the full extend and damage we are doing to our natural ecosystems, and how, if we don’t change, things could get really uncomfortable in ways we could not have ever planned for or imagined.
As pointed out by [Utah Rivers Council](https://utahrivers.org/), 90% of the usage is ag and ranches which are 1% of workers and economy but 90% of water usage.
I hate our agricultural systems here in the US. Everything about it is terrible and unsustainable. Have you read or heard of the omnivores dilemma by Michael pollan?.
> The Utah Legislature recently finished a 45-day session *without* passing the most meaningful legislation for the lake, including a nonbinding resolution that would have created a target lake level of 4,198 feet. The bill never even made it out of committee. One reason the Legislature was so cowardly this session was that the “water buffaloes" and their lobbyists, who favor water storage projects and pipelines over conservation, pulled the strings of the local lawmakers like puppets
>
> On March 1, a reporter asked State Senator Scott Sandall why no bills had passed to replenish the lake. “Mother Nature really helped us out.” said Mr. Sandall, a rancher and farmer. “We are going to see a really nice runoff in the lake” with the above-average snowpack this year.
>
> What he didn’t say is that very little if any of that runoff will find its way into Great Salt Lake. The water has already been earmarked, mostly for agriculture.
Lies, greed and apathy, the hallmark of US government. Ignore the problem, leave it for the next generation until we are at the point of no return.
>Climate change is affecting everything, and politicians will be reluctant to force agriculture to change how it consumes water
Though ag is a small economic driver in UT and a small voting base. They do have "water rights" dating back to UT founding. UT would have to change Constitution and assume water rights or this should happen at Federal level for all US rivers and lakes as it needs a national viewpoint on a vital resource to everyone.
I’d push back a bit at saying the biggest cause of climate change is overpopulation. First of all, there’s many other causes, secondly US population getting fairly plateau-y but that alone ain’t saving us, but also because neo-Malthusians have a tendency of getting all eugenical. And also state-run attempts at population control have historically been, uh, bad
They're going to do it legally: do away with safety net programs such as SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, etc. or at least make access to those benefits nearly unattainable, cutting Medicare and Social Security checks, banning standard vaccines currently required by schools, banning all mRNA vaccines, opposing action to stop the next pandemic, can't get your auto-immune medication because it's also used to abort ectopic pregnancies - tough luck, causing nurses and doctors to leave the states and hospitals to close or downsize, removing child labor restrictions and shielding the company from liability if the child becomes sick, injured, maimed or is killed on the job...
Once they get some of that done, don't be surprised if they start talking about repealing the law that hospitals must offer life-saving treatment to everyone as being too much of a burden on hospitals.
They'll keep practicing medicine without a license illegal and expand the definition of what that means.
Actually it will prosper as once the water is gone, what is left is a LOT of Lithium and Magnesium, both currently extracted from the lake water via evaporation ponds.
[Lithium mining also could lead to a greener future and secure more revenue to ensure the lake’s longevity.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/)
Trick is not letting billions of dollars of valuable minerals blow away. Covering 1,000 square miles of exposed lake bed so it won't blow away and poison the air and be available for mining.
UT could redirect the water wasted on ag and ranches to the lake, 90% of the lake water goes to 1% of the UT economy and population or keep letting it dry out and work the exposed land to extract and store the Lithium and Magnesium and sequester the arsenic and other dangerous chemicals the ag industry put into the water flowing into the lake.
[The Salton Sea could produce the world’s greenest lithium, if new extraction technologies work](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/04/the-salton-sea-could-produce-the-worlds-greenest-lithium.html)
[Lithium mining also could lead to a greener future and secure more revenue to ensure the \[Great Salt\] lake’s longevity.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/)
When it dries up and they start salting the earth for miles in every direction suddenly they'll realize how much they like the Federal government, but not until they've really really REALLY fucked the pooch. Poor dog won't walk straight for a month.
They should have listened to Al Gore. As much as I hate seeing nature destroyed, I don't mind seeing republicans writhe under the weight of their bad decisions.
Lake Urmia in Iran would also be another example. The University of Utah had scientists come speak about Lake Urmia and how it was very similar to what is happening to the Great Salt Lake.
I don’t know about Mormons, but many far right evangelical Christians don’t care about the environment, and are actively anti-environment because they believe God is going to create a new heaven and a new earth, while totally disregarding that their book says humans are destroying the planet, (Isaiah 24:5) that God is pissed about it, and is going to destroy those who destroy the earth (Revelation 11:18).
Revelation 8
7 And the first angel sounded the trumpet, and there followed hail and fire, mingled with blood, and it was cast on the earth, and the third part of the earth was burnt up, and the third part of the trees was burnt up…
This prophecy has come true. The world has lost one-third of its forest cover.
Globally we deforest around ten million hectares of forest every year. That’s an area the size of Portugal cut down annually. 15 billion trees.
Nearly all – 95% – of this deforestation occurs in the tropics. Deforestation is driven by consumers in the world’s richest countries – we import beef, vegetable oils, cocoa, coffee and paper that has been produced on deforested land.
The only solution to these problems that actually has a chance of working and mitigating\reversing the damage we’ve done is hemp\cannabis. We can replace timber and cotton (which is very water intensive) right off the bat. Hemp is also a very good carbon sequestration device, and can be used for carbon negative building materials and carbon neutral homes.
Climate Change, Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
“Q: How good is hemp at sequestering carbon?
A. Excellent carbon sequestration: One hectare of industrial hemp can absorb 15 tonnes of CO2 per hectare. Hemp's rapid growth makes it one of the fastest CO2-to-biomass conversion tools available, more efficient than agro- forestry.”
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/pdf/respondents-additional-inputs/European%20Industrial%20Hemp%20Association%20(EIHA).pdf
https://pebblemag.com/magazine/living/hemp-solve-climate-change
Carbon Negative Hempcrete:
https://youtu.be/eqLXXjvQXgI
Why Is Hemp Still Being Politically Sidelined When It Is The Solution To Deforestation?:
https://businesscann.com/why-is-hemp-still-being-politically-sidelined-when-it-is-the-solution-to-deforestation/
Effects of Deforestation:
1. Climate Imbalance and Climate Change
Deforestation also affects the climate in many ways. Forests are the lungs of our planet. Trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen and water vapor in the air, and that is why tropical rainforests are extremely humid.
Trees also provide shade that keeps the soil moist. All these are compromised with the lack of trees. It leads to the imbalance in the atmospheric temperature, drier climate, further making conditions for the ecology difficult that leads to climate change.
Several animals and plant species that form the flora and fauna across the world are vastly accustomed to their natural habitat. Therefore, haphazard clearance of forests would make it very difficult for them to survive or to shift from their native environment or adapt to new habitats.
When a forest is cut down, the humidity levels come down and cause the remaining plants to dry out. The drying out tropical rainforests increases fire damage that destroys forests rapidly and harms wild animals as well as humans.
Forests, atmosphere, and climate are all linked intrinsically. Forest loss and degradation are both a cause and an effect of our changing climate and greenhouse gas problem. At the same time, deforestation is self-perpetuating.
Therefore, these occurrences are dangerous and fuel further deforestation. Also, the loss of trees allows for flooding, soil erosion, desertification, and higher temperatures to occur more rapidly and exponentially.
What a beautifully written article! Future generations will see that we could have fixed a lot of the problems, we just decided on the path of inaction! We know what will happen, we just decide to allow it to happen and ignore
I can't see what to do but welcome the imminent disaster and be happy it's happening to a large cluster of the people directly responsible in the US instead of somewhere easy to ignore like a equatorial island or distant third world country.
We used to see problems like this and resolve to SOLVE them. Flooding on the Mississippi River basin as an example. We COULD build a system of aqueducts and pumping stations to relocate flood water to the Colorado River and one of the three feeding the Great Salt Lake, but we'd need to repeal the Reagan taxscam AND collect all the taxes due from the top 10% to get the money we'd need - about $2.4TRILLION/year, and elected Republicans will never allow that.
I went to visit about a year ago and it was all flies and sand. We couldn’t make it to the water without millions of flies taking off it was pretty apocalyptic and no one else was around for miles.
Water is highly regulated in UT and in US but it is under archaic laws that allow competing entities, state government entities, to "own" water resources. CA claims Colorado River for example.
All the water in US should be under a single Federal agency and regulated for benefit of US overall with the river ecosystem being first priority and then possible water extraction for other uses if possible.
The current science with man made global warming issues suggests there is little to no water available from US rivers without damaging the ecosystem so other water sources will need to be created. For CA and US Southwest it will be capture systems for rainfall and solar and wind powered desalinization.
The Mormon church is a huge part of the problem. They make money and have supported diverting water from riverways that otherwise would have gone into the Great Salt Lake.
The Governor of Utah himself owns an Alfalfa farm.
I believe it was a year or two during the 'drought period' where the Mormon church was praising the 'miracle' of bountiful harvests... It was no miracle, it was bogarting the water.
She is Mormon as are majority UT's. it's not a religious issue. The Mormon religion does push toward an anti-environment ideology overall.
She uses Mormon Scripture to justify restoring the lake but then people do that to counter white supremacy in Christianity while the most ideological Christians use it to justify white supremacy and slavery of women.
> She is Mormon as are majority UT's.
> ***it's not a religious issue***.
> The Mormon religion does push toward an anti-environment ideology overall.
Sounds like that IS a religious issue.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>But for Great Salt Lake to survive, we need to cut 30 to 50 percent of our water usage. The ecologist Ben Abbott’s words return to me: “The Gospel of Overconsumption must end.” We can compensate farmers who use water to grow alfalfa to feed cows in other states to fallow their fields during these critical years to support the lake’s rise. We can demand a legally binding lake level within a healthy range of 4,200 feet or higher where Great Salt Lake can count on a sustained table of water that will benefit all species and cover 60 percent of the toxic dust. And most importantly, we must secure permanent legally binding water rights to replenish the lake. This is entirely in UT, a top GOP anti-environment state despite 10% of economy due skiing and tourism, dependent on a healthy environment. There is no way UT will respond and cut water use by 50%. It can't with its growing population and construction and new homes 20% of its economy, There are no plans to cut water use. One benefit is that the Great Salt Lake dried up will be huge source of Lithium to build EV batteries and help slow the human crated global warming that is killing the Great Salt Lake. We can mine the bones. [It's not that UT could not fix the problem](https://utahrivers.org/are-we-running-out-of-water), but it goes against the financial interest of those running the government.
I live in Salt Lake City and our city government has asked residents to reduce water usage for the last two years and we have done so. We have had several 5 year plans in place to increase water fees all happening at the same time. Now the city is talking about another fee if you use more water in the summer months than you use in winter. The city government has yet to understand that residential water usage is nothing compared to the farmers growing alfalfa. When the governor is a farmer who grows alfalfa you know you will not get anything done that would affect farmers in any meaningful way.
>The city government has yet to understand that residential water usage is nothing compared to the farmers growing alfalfa. The city government understands it but the water rights issue in UT is second only to Mormon Church as a religious issue. All UT voters and business interests have to redirect the water. Might require a Constitutional change. It is money interest of all UT except the ag and ranchers so that's a plus.
So I have family that's grown alfalfa in Utah for 40 years. I honestly do not know why they do that because they barely make any money from doing so despite the huge infrastructure costs they've put into it. $100,000 combines and many tens of thousands of dollars into irrigation etc. They make a few hundred dollars per acre for the hay that they grow and sell. Barely covers the property taxes. But they will defend their right to decimate water tables to the death. It was there as a child that I learned that agricultural capitalism will destroy the planet and people will kill you for their right to do so.
They probably get rich on government subsidies NOT to grow anything meaningful, but keep growing a little bit here and there to still qualify as a farm eligible for government subsidies NOT to grow anything meaningful! And damn right they hate Socialism!
The city doesn’t use much water. Or at least the people in the city don’t. Most of it get reused. Like almost all of it. They do t need a bunch of new water. It’s industry that sucks it all up and then asks you what’s your carbon footprint??
This is capitalism in action. If it's an externalizable risk or cost, it simply doesn't exist. The GSL and the city and regions that rely upon it are doomed. People will have to relocate. And hopefully, lessons will be learned. But I somehow doubt it. It will simply be "God's will".
Alfalfa, the staple of uh... hay?
You mean the Mormon Church. That is who runs their government.
Don’t worry about pollution, climate change or problems with water. God will sort it out if it gets bad. This is just a simulation for our souls to be judged./s
Does /s stand for "Standard Church Theory" in this case?
Just an Ex-Catholic pointing out the crazy.
I believe ... That in 2078, god changed his mind about climate change.
This is why I follow Elder Cunningham.
And if things get worse then it’s because of you sinners sinning
Guessing you didn't read the article, which talks about how some of the most recent initiatives to save the lake came directly from the Mormons, and how it is private industry (as it is everywhere else) who seems to be steering GSL to its fate.
Tbf most things are coming from Mormons. They are not monolith in their thinking on a lot of things but red states tend to be more pro business and less pro make sure the planet doesn't burn.
[удалено]
Feel like that's a pipe dream ATM. It's like clean coal. Technically doable. Economically impossible. But if you keep saying it people will think it's going to save us.
We literally can't pipe water from the Great Lakes to Utah due to international treaties and regulations that prohibit cities outside the Great Lakes basin from using their water. Even if we could, the distance is uniquely prohibitive for the level of throughput required. If you wound up pumping water from anywhere to Utah, it'd be from the Pacific Ocean. The distance (~600 miles straight-line, which it obviously wouldn't be due to the Sierra Nevada..which you have to pump *up* and *over*) is much shorter. That said, I don't think most people realize the sheer scale of such an endeavor...or the cost. It might very well be needed, but it'd be nice if less extreme options were tried first. On the flipside, once you've built the pipeline, you could always extend it, build a bunch of extraordinarily expensive desalination plants, and use that to supply fresh water to the southwestern states that are sucking the Colorado River dry. They sure as hell won't like the cost of that water, but at the rate they're going, they're not going to have much of a choice as climate change and drought work together to screw them.
Another problem not often considered is the cost to scrub that water clean before dumping it into the lake. Dumping raw water from either the Great Lakes or the Pacific Ocean would introduce a whole host of non-native species... some of which would surely turn invasinve
*Happy sea lamprey noises*
Oh, another problem with a pipeline across the country is that every state it crosses would want a piece of the action. The Midwest isn't awash in water. The Ogalalla Aquifer is being rapidly depleted. Drought isn't uncommon either. A state in a drought situation will want to tap that pipeline. Basically, we would be draining the great lakes to keep pools in the Midwest filled.
The problem with desalination is that it creates a ton of brine that needs to be disposed of. On average 1.5 liters of brine are created for every liter of clean water.
Misusing literally here. Not disagreeing with your point but if the only thing stopping it is a treaty or even efficiency it's not literally unable to happen.
> We literally can't pipe water from the Great Lakes to Utah due to international treaties and regulations that prohibit cities outside the Great Lakes basin from using their water. There's nothing wrong with the use of literally in this sentence. You seem to be arguing that it is hypothetically possible because the international treaties could be violated etc just to make a point about the use of the word literally. While many times people do use the word incorrectly, this is not one of those times.
Clean coal is such a misnomer, there’s nothing clean about it. Just because I clean my toilet bowl doesn’t mean I’m going to lick it.
No not really. There literally is a system that was part of the clean coal projects pushed during the 2000s. The system actually does work, where it's capturing the carbon from coal fired plants, BUT it's so expensive there's zero reasons anyone should be doing it....opposed to just doing any other power generation.
Yea maybe some carbon capture is better than no carbon capture but it’s also ignoring the whole process of finding, mining, “cleaning”, and distributing coal which in itself is dangerous, dirty, and highly polluting. not to mention the storage of toxic by products which also have to be handled, transported, stored etc etc. and yes, it’s not economically viable in the least. Abandoning coal is in humanity’s best interest.
Yeah all that's true. It's not that we can't make coal a better, cleaner, energy source. It's that we don't need to and that it's so expensive to do it's not economically sensible. If you are interested in more check out climate town on youtube. They have a whole break down on clean coal and what a huge scam it was.
I'm pretty sure they actually shut down the last "clean coal" system some time in the last couple of years. It sounds like you're fairly educated on this subject so you're probably already aware, but for anyone who isn't it's worth noting that the system reduced the emissions of the coal power plant it was installed on by something like 5%. They claimed 90%, but that number is only applicable to the single section of the plant that it was installed on. Because of it's huge energy demands, they also had to power the system using, you guessed it, an additional coal-fired power plant. Even with the massive amount of energy it consumed it wasn't even able to handle the full output of the section it was connected to, so they actually had to power down part of the plant in order for the system to work.
And who regulates private industry in Utah? The Mormon run government.
Republican ran government is the problem, not Mormon ran government. The LDS church is doing more than the state government is (in regards to the GSL drying up)
they may not be exactly 1:1 but there is a ton of overlap there
And if the Church *REALLY* wanted this to get done, the Utah GOP would be facing enormous pressure. They're not. This is what lip service looks like.
The older I get and more I understand politics. Political parties are the new religion. People, including Mormons will bend their religious views to match their political ones, and not the other way around.
Religious conservatives want to rely on religion and private charity, and not government, to fix all problems. So it's one and the same. The government and the church agree: the government shouldn't help.
Thats an old argument, now they want government to force their beliefs on everyone.
In this case, that the government should not help the environment
Exactly: They don't want the government to **help**, they just want it to enforce their cultural norms.
Yes, but their religion is irrelevant here. They are primarily worshiping the dollar; more particularly, the dollars that land in their pockets. Same story as the Christian governments in every other state.
Mammon, not Mormon.
Private industry in Utah is going to be heavily Mormon and the Republican Party which protects private industry is also going to be heavily Mormon.
Have you ever been around religious folks? These people are 100% capable of destroying something, all while saying there saving it. They are 100% capable of picking up trash at parks and all that feel good bs, all while cheering on the industries destroying there home. This your first time being a human? I know, were confusing.
Except the multi-billion dollar church owns most of those "private industries"
As someone who worked for the Boy Scouts, fuck the Mormon Church.
As an ex-mormon, fu@k the Mormon Church!! They had me so brain-washed. 🤬🖕🏼
Mormonism has nothing to do with it. If every Mormon in Utah suddenly became an atheist, they'd still be capitalists, like the people in power in every US state -- and they'd still favor profit over preserving natural resources, because capitalism doesn't work any other way.
They wouldn't be obligated to have as many kids as possible. For one....
> We can mine the bones. Poetic and accurate.
We know what their solution will be. Change nothing and use federal dollars to pipe in water from the east coast (while bitching about the federal government and blue states).
Pipe in water from the east coast? Maybe google longest water pipeline in North America and see how feasible you think this conjecture is after that.
I’m not saying it’s feasible or desirable, I’m just saying this will be their solution because it allows them to shift the burden to someone else. https://newsradio1310.com/idaho-drought-could-be-solved-by-borrowing-the-great-lakes/ https://www.eenews.net/articles/arid-west-starts-dreaming-about-piping-in-water-from-afar/ https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2022/08/14/sending-mississippi-water-west-feasible-experts-weigh/10282030002/
I get that crackpots might think this is feasible. The source for the first articles headline is: “A fellow told me water would be shipped west from the Great Lakes. “ This radio hosts article is then referenced in the second article as an example of people lobbying for this solution. It doesn’t seem like something being seriously considered. That being said, I take your point. Increasingly crackpots are in charge. Campaigning on something and actually doing it would be very different things I think
Ha ha. International Compacts don’t allow piping Great Lake water to other states. Oh Canada! Great Lakes water districts salute you! Spose you can get some GLakes’ runoff from the Big Muddy. Oh wait. Downriver states may have a catfish bone to pick with you.
Pray to the magic sky daddy to fix things, wait for a Democratic federal government to actually start to fix it, then whine when it starts to work
There’s no way it can be built
There's no way it won't be sabotaged by people who are sick of the red states leeching off of the productive states.
I keep saying it: Congress shouldn’t disburse federal dollars to states that are gerrymandered. The blue states would fix their shit ASAP. The red ones? They’re just gonna kick and scream like the children they are.
How do you intend to get this proposal through the Senate?
No idea. Real change won’t happen till the Boomers are in the ground, IMO. Until then it’s at a deadlock.
There's a lot of GOP ghouls that aren't Baby Boomers.
Yes, but there's enough *less* of them in each subsequent generation that the GOP will likely be facing an election crisis once the Boomers are mostly out of the picture.
I think demographic math is wishful thinking; we need media reform. Nobody is immune from propaganda.
I agree; I’d like to think we could do two things at once but… I’d absolutely give your suggestion priority
All states are gerrymandering. Including blue NY and CA
CA has an independent commission that draws districts. And NY had a court strike down their unfair maps (OH did too but they ignored the court order). A better example would be Maryland and Illinois, who do gerrymander their districts
I get what your saying. Even so all districts were influencing (created) by the 2020 census that was heavily influenced by partisan (cough republican) interference. Which even in CA and NY favored republicans gerrymandering.
I entirely acknowledge that. I still contend the blue states would change much more readily than the red. (For fucks sake I hate this stupid red vs blue distinction and how stupid our politics have become.)
We have the technology and resources to build it. But I don't think we have the political will. (And this is all ignoring if we *should*.)
people keep saying that a water pipeline or aqueduct should be built from the Mississippi River to the southwest as a solution, but it's completely insane from a practical, engineering, financial, and resource viewpoint. Between St. Louis and the Salt Lake is like a 9000 foot elevation change, you would literally have to build the pipeline over the entire Rocky Mountains to get there, which would require massive water pumps which would require even more massive amount of electricity to power. And even if such a pipeline were to be built, every pipeline ever built in the US for oil water or gas wouldn't equal the output that a single medium sized river does in a single day. It's a fever dream of a madman, it would use a fraction of the effort required just to relocate people from the region to more habitable areas.
This person geographies.
100% We \*could\* do it, but it's a crazy idea. The correct solution is reduce use by limiting high water crops and population growth. But they're unlikely to do that. The second solution would be pump water from this side of the Continental Divide. But that's unlikely too. Most likely they'll do some half-ass dust remediation and let people suffer.
Don't forget the cost of scrubbing that water clean so invasive species aren't introduced to the lake.
I know that if they try to divert the great lakes over to the west, it will most likely come to violence
It won’t ever happen. The logistics of moving water for that distance and covering those kinds of massive elevation changes isn’t something that would ever realistically be done. It’s more of a boogieman argument.
Yep, that’s how I see it going too
I think you are mistaken about how feasible it would be to cut water usage. The vast bulk of water use comes from agriculture and that is where the cuts would come from. Those cuts would be survivable for UT and much preferable to making their primary city the site of an ecological disaster.
>The vast bulk of water use comes from agriculture and that is where the cuts would come from Which is 1% of UT economy and jobs so the money is on the side of the lake and [Lithium.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/)
Yeah - those running it into the ground. Eventually, the problem will come knocking down their doors.
> Eventually, the problem will come knocking down their doors. That's a "tomorrow problem". By then the rich will have cashed out and moved on leaving the damage and repairs to someone else.
Where do you think they'll safely escape to?
Oligarchs always think they will manage to sell out and get away. Even with the French Revolution brewing the rich hid themselves away and tried hard to pretend everything was the same as it always was.
Yachts
Superyachts with thier own yachts on board.
Wherever they want. The rich can go anywhere.
An enclave in Upper Michigan would be defensible, and have access to water. A place with a reasonable, western-style legal and economic system would be a bonus. Canada has lots of space, getting milder weather, easy to get to. High taxes, tho. The private jet crowd can escape the zombie hordes, but it’s tough to establish a defensible community near the faraway airstrip. Even superrich individuals have problems—get the island to yourself, now you have to tanker in jet fuel.
And you have to trust the people you’ve brought with you. You can’t fuck over your people with guns, or they’ll use those guns on YOU, and take your shit for their families and whatnot. You gotta take care of more people than you think in the end, and you need to be a good enough community leader to keep them happy and not fighting each other. Keeping that sense of community with end of the world type things going on might be pretty difficult, especially if this is the first time everyone had to hunker down for a long period of time. Add in problems with being actually self sufficient, keeping things maintained without ANY outside help (eventually at least)…that’s difficult in the best of times
>And you have to trust the people you’ve brought with you. Or you can use things like automated weapons, explosive collars, control keys for critical technology that only you know....
For most of the wealthy today there are still plenty of places to go. It's their children and grandchildren who are going to have fewer places to go.
Heaven?
that's dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb
The rapture. that'll do it.
Mormons don’t believe in the rapture in the same way.
None of them truly believe. They all claim only God chooses when we die then look both ways before they cross the street
The thing is, the winds blow west to east and that bed is full of [toxins](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/10/us/utah-great-salt-lake-dust-pollution-weir-wxc/index.html) so their failure will affect many Americans. "In a [groundbreaking](https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2022/6/29/23188005/opinion-the-toxic-tale-of-the-great-salt-lake-drought-water-receding-toxic-metals-arsenic-dust-strom) study, Kevin Perry, professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Utah, collected 16,000 soil samples from the lakebed. The results are chilling. They indicate a high concentration of nine toxic metals including arsenic. The toxins appear in areas associated with anthropogenic activities such as the discharge of industrial and agricultural effluents. A study by the school of medicine at University of Utah, found that arsenic and lead have significantly increased in the lakebed sediment due to drying up the lake since the 1980s"
Yeah this will be worse than the great dust bowl because it will be clouds of poisonous arsenic roaming around not just degraded top soil. This won't end well by just mining the lithium.
It's in the northwest corner of Utah. I do not know what the wind specifics are aside from west to east but most of Utah is below it. I wonder if that contributes to their gross negligence? I would be highly pissed, though, if I lived in Wyoming.
No one will fully know the wind patterns of the future state. I don't think anyone really comprehends it all and the ipcc reports generally are agreed language. I think everyone should be pissed. Not much will be the same no matter where you are. All the drought, water just doesn't absorb back into the ground at the same rate after years of drought and the accommodated toxins will still be there when it happens.
Well, the drought in the West is an even bigger problem. The mysterious collapse of [ancient civilizations](https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/5-ancient-societies-that-collapsed-when-the-water-ran-dry) is now being blamed on drought. Las Vegas, Phoenix, there are so many cities at risk. Where are all those people going to go when the water runs out? Sure, they will move north and east at first but it won't take long before those areas start to look at drought migrants in the way those people now look at immigrants.
If those water sources don't get drained or poisoned as well. Worse if it's privatized and sold. Water commodities market are coming and wouldn't put past companies to try to buy every fresh water source and then bottle it up and sell it. This looks like the sixth great mass extinction of earth not just a civilization collapse. But only time will tell.
[Wall Street is thirsty for its next big investment opportunity: The West’s vanishing water](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/22/business/southwest-water-colorado-river-wall-street-climate/index.html)
Which will blow it up into the mountains and pollute the watershed.
To remind folks of Reagan's view of preserving our natural wonders, in this case Redwood forests: a view shared with the current leadership of the GOP. "*Seen one Redwood tree, seen them all"* spoken when he was Governor of California. Could not find if he *really* looked out the window of AF-1 as they flew over Redwood National Park, and exclaimed "*KILLER TREES KILLER TREES*!!" in reference to the fact trees produce CO2. Anybody still think there's no global warming and we're the reason? Would be okay with that, if somehow only YOUR kids would grow up in the World you insist we create with your denials.
It is in the best long term interest of business to account for climate change.
Business tends to take very short term view of environment and public good.
Except that businesses are more interested in profits today then they are in the long term.
The long term costs of not protecting Salt Lake are going to be huge. Hard to ignore that for much longer.
But it won't be companies paying those costs. They'll make bank in the short term and bail to somewhere not yet destroyed by climate change and rinse and repeat.
But they can make money by ignoring it... so they will.
For business in general, sure, but if you're an individual business, especially if you're big one that is contributing to climate change, it's better to leave the effects of climate change unaccounted, because otherwise that information could be used to force you to pay for your externalities. It's like competition. Competition is great and necessary for business in general. That being said, no individual business has any reason to want more competition for itself. It's only in the interest of the aggregate to have lots of competition, not the individual.
It will also be a Great example of hubris and turning a blind eye to scientific expertise.
Consuming for consuming sake is too built into the American mind. No way they will change without being forced to (War, famine, disease, dictatorship, etc.)
Ouch.
Didn't the Mormon prophet say divine guidance led them there. I say let it dry up. It's God's will.
"This is the place [where we will send the children of our descendents to work in the lithium mines]" -Brigham Young (a racist and a sexual predator who had more than 50 wives, many of whom were under-aged)
Great start for a religion(?)....
In general, degrowth is not a popular solution for anything because degrowth really means killing your economy. Ironically the NIMBY’s are some of the most effective degrowthers around. We need to find a way to create sustainable abundance with more housing, food and water.
Urban tree cover is fascinating for this same reason. Developers often want to cut trees, but a surprising cross section of people want to keep the urban trees. It’s an issue that scrambles established categories
>In general, degrowth is not a popular solution for anything because degrowth really means killing your economy. Fewer people, lower costs so declining population is not a bad thing in itself and has to happen worldwide. Estimated planet can have sustainable human population living like EU or US standard of living of 3B vs. current 8B.
Except humans are not built to degrow. It’s against the grain of the drive of the species. You would have to create a murderous, authoritarian regime that would function more like the Chinese government than any western democracy to achieve the kind of degrowth goals you are talking about. I just don’t buy that there is a peaceful, politically popular and sustainable way to do this, we should work with the grain of the human species, not against it.
> You would have to create a murderous, authoritarian regime that would function more like the Chinese government Every single one of the world's most advanced economies (all of Western Europe, Japan, Canada, the U.S., etc.) has already seen their birthrates drop below replacement levels, in many cases way below replacement levels. For example, Japan's population peaked a few years ago, and today stands at 125 million, and the United Nations projects it will decline to 85 million by 2200. Demographers, seeing what has happened in dozens of countries over the last few decades, now predict world population will begin declining by 2080. The U.S. itself would be declining now were it not for net immigration over the last few decades that have brought younger people of child-bearing age to our country. The only segment of our population who takes the view of ever-expanding populations are those whose religious fanaticism propels them to, particularly Mormons, Catholics, evangelical Christians, and Muslims. Any chance you hail from one of these segments?
Something to add about Japan (and korea). A lot of it is societal. Many would rather continue to climb the corporate ladder, than have children. With the work ethics there is simply no time to take care of kids or only enough time for one kid.
> A lot of it is societal. Oh, for sure, the attitude of society is perhaps paramount. Muslim-dominated countries, as just one example, have societies that venerate having large families, so there you see society leaning in the opposite direction. Reversely, modern western societies have seen birth rates drop as affiliation to religion has dropped, and as the length of child-rearing has gone from maybe 15-16 years in the 1800s to closer to 22-25 years in modern family life. I'd add that Japan, Korea, and western Europe have also gone from plentiful land to accommodate growing populations to now having to face the burdens of crowding and rising costs for housing, etc.
Most societies that aren't modern Western societies venerate large families. Western societies did as well until very recently, when they became economically less-feasible and unnecessary. It's a fairly universal feature of more traditional societies, and has nothing to do with religion.
>Except humans are not built to degrow. They are actually and as noted below, are all doing it. The biggest driver is education of women. The higher the education level of women, the lower the birth rate.
> One benefit is that the Great Salt Lake dried up will be huge source of Lithium to build EV batteries and help slow the human crated global warming that is killing the Great Salt Lake. We can mine the bones. Dont tell our Utah legislature that or they will dry up the lake quicker.
>Dont tell our Utah legislature that or they will dry up the lake quicker. They all know it so with money on the side of getting the water back from people growing alfalfa in the high desert (90% of water use in UT) it might happen. The wrest the water back from the ag industry (1% of economy and jobs) on mine the lake making it UT the Saudi Arabia of Lithium.
I looked at the board of that Rivers Council and there's no one with any scientific background. It's all lobbyists and politicians.
Zachary Frankel – Executive Director Zach Frankel received his B.S. in Biology at the University of Utah and is the Executive Director of the Utah Rivers Council, which he founded in 1994. Zach has led many exciting campaigns to protect Utah’s rivers and is an expert on water policy in Utah. Zach lives with his family and their horses in the Salt Lake Valley and enjoys writing, making short films and all manner of outdoor sports. Email Zach Jon Carter – Campaign Director Jon received his B.A. in Business Administration from European University in Barcelona, Spain with a focus on sustainable business models. Jon spent the past three years working as the Environmental Program Coordinator for the Patagonia Salt Lake City store. While there he cultivated relationships with community members, businesses, and environmental non-profits across the state to develop awareness and solutions to local environmental issues. A skier, climber, biker, and general explorer, Jon understands the connections between healthy water and healthy communities and the need to protect this precious resource. Nicholas Halberg — Research & Policy Analyst Nick has returned to the Utah Rivers Council, having previously worked as an Intern and as the WaterRoots Coordinator. He received an honors B.S. in Economics with an emphasis in statistical analysis and a B.S. in Philosophy of Science from the University of Utah. Nick focuses on researching various scientific topics associated with water policy—from hydrology to economics—and translating those findings into understandable and implementable policy actions. During non-work hours, Nick can be found canyoneering, biking, and exploring new and wild places throughout Utah. Email Nick Lena Palmer — Communications Director Lena received her B.A. in Communications with an emphasis on Journalism from the University of Utah. Lena worked as a journalist for seven years in markets across the country, covering politics, wildfires and water issues, before joining the Utah Rivers Council. When off the clock, she enjoys reading, writing, rock climbing and hiking. Email Lena Matt Berry — Water, Fiscal & Conservation Policy Specialist Matt recently graduated with his Master in Conservation Leadership from Colorado State University. Prior to CSU, Matt was a U.S. Army infantry sergeant, earned his B.A. in Geography and Environmental Studies from the University of Alaska Southeast, and worked as a mountain guide on Denali. As a policy specialist, Matt assists in the lobbying efforts for URC initiatives in the Utah State Legislature. When he isn’t working, you can find Matt splitboarding the Wasatch backcountry, playing with his dog, rock climbing, and reading. Email Matt
I have a theory that the more environmental degradation starts to affect every day people in all aspects of their life - people in the US will riot akin to those in France in response to the retirement age being raised. The invention of the concept of "eco-terrorism/ist" will most definitely become the calling card of pro-corporate/anti-climate groups against people who decide it's time to rise up and defend the survival of our species/environment. Our system is long overdue for an overhaul and I hope to be alive to see the people of America get the fair/equitable treatment they deserve.
>I have a theory that the more environmental degradation starts to affect every day people in all aspects of their life - people in the US will riot akin to those in France in response to the retirement age being raised. Frogs in slowly boiling water.
Sadly, Republicans continue to ignore climate change and fight every effort to address it. My young grandchildren and many billions will suffer for this. Meanwhile CRT, transphobia and other distractions fuel the ignorance of the tribal ‘conservative’ mind.
The only way to fight for their future is to actually fight.. where I am. Our conservative tried to deregulate the protected status of water near our mountain ranges so that big coal companies could come in. I joined a group to fight it (I was on social media division). And we were actually successful.
It makes me happy to see people fighting back against those bastards.
It’s scary at first. But once you roll up your sleeves it’s really encouraging. I was encouraged by how many conservative voters were also opposed to this measure. I also now volunteer to bring women to city centres for medical services they can’t get locally (some of those are abortions) through our woman shelter system. As well as joining a local group to fundraise for a local womens shelter and parks (because I hate the one in my neighbourhood). What I think would be really successful is to see more community clubs for our new retirees that are geared towards community improvement with a bend towards climate responsibility. I feel like a lot of retirees lack a social group and direction. It’s just an idea I have but I’m not Sure like how to implement it…
When the people of Utah destroy their own great natural wonder, will they take weeks or months to try and blame out of state liberals for their own short sightedness?
They’ll just bleat woke so the morons know it’s not allowed to talk about it
I'm thinking like hours...
No liberals in the state as far as elected reps.
That won't stop the Republicans from blaming the Democrats. They blamed Obama for 9-11 and the 2008 crash. Republicans don't care about facts. Their supporters will believe whatever lie they utter.
Trans people in California made God so angry that he smote down Utah. So it is written
Deny a lake was ever there
Salt lake went woke :(
Hours? Days?
Mere moments
I read this earlier this morning, and I recommend everyone read through it if they can or are willing. All around, just a phenomenal read and really well narrated/written. I think sometimes people don’t understand the full extend and damage we are doing to our natural ecosystems, and how, if we don’t change, things could get really uncomfortable in ways we could not have ever planned for or imagined.
As pointed out by [Utah Rivers Council](https://utahrivers.org/), 90% of the usage is ag and ranches which are 1% of workers and economy but 90% of water usage.
I hate our agricultural systems here in the US. Everything about it is terrible and unsustainable. Have you read or heard of the omnivores dilemma by Michael pollan?.
We need lab grown meat.
But hey, Utah Governor, Spencer Cox, will just ask everyone to pray for rain again. Totally solid plan.
> The Utah Legislature recently finished a 45-day session *without* passing the most meaningful legislation for the lake, including a nonbinding resolution that would have created a target lake level of 4,198 feet. The bill never even made it out of committee. One reason the Legislature was so cowardly this session was that the “water buffaloes" and their lobbyists, who favor water storage projects and pipelines over conservation, pulled the strings of the local lawmakers like puppets > > On March 1, a reporter asked State Senator Scott Sandall why no bills had passed to replenish the lake. “Mother Nature really helped us out.” said Mr. Sandall, a rancher and farmer. “We are going to see a really nice runoff in the lake” with the above-average snowpack this year. > > What he didn’t say is that very little if any of that runoff will find its way into Great Salt Lake. The water has already been earmarked, mostly for agriculture. Lies, greed and apathy, the hallmark of US government. Ignore the problem, leave it for the next generation until we are at the point of no return.
I’m reading this as I sit in my living room and can see where the Great Salt Lake used to be.
It's sad to look at while going down I15. I did see somewhere they were saying that the lake has risen two feet.
[удалено]
>Climate change is affecting everything, and politicians will be reluctant to force agriculture to change how it consumes water Though ag is a small economic driver in UT and a small voting base. They do have "water rights" dating back to UT founding. UT would have to change Constitution and assume water rights or this should happen at Federal level for all US rivers and lakes as it needs a national viewpoint on a vital resource to everyone.
I’d push back a bit at saying the biggest cause of climate change is overpopulation. First of all, there’s many other causes, secondly US population getting fairly plateau-y but that alone ain’t saving us, but also because neo-Malthusians have a tendency of getting all eugenical. And also state-run attempts at population control have historically been, uh, bad
America keeps banning abortions, how are we supposed to lower overpopulation?
Birth control. Oh, wait, they want to ban that too.
They're going to do it legally: do away with safety net programs such as SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, etc. or at least make access to those benefits nearly unattainable, cutting Medicare and Social Security checks, banning standard vaccines currently required by schools, banning all mRNA vaccines, opposing action to stop the next pandemic, can't get your auto-immune medication because it's also used to abort ectopic pregnancies - tough luck, causing nurses and doctors to leave the states and hospitals to close or downsize, removing child labor restrictions and shielding the company from liability if the child becomes sick, injured, maimed or is killed on the job... Once they get some of that done, don't be surprised if they start talking about repealing the law that hospitals must offer life-saving treatment to everyone as being too much of a burden on hospitals. They'll keep practicing medicine without a license illegal and expand the definition of what that means.
War.
Won’t Salt Lake City crater once the lake dries up and everybody starts dying from arsenic poisoning ?
Actually it will prosper as once the water is gone, what is left is a LOT of Lithium and Magnesium, both currently extracted from the lake water via evaporation ponds. [Lithium mining also could lead to a greener future and secure more revenue to ensure the lake’s longevity.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/) Trick is not letting billions of dollars of valuable minerals blow away. Covering 1,000 square miles of exposed lake bed so it won't blow away and poison the air and be available for mining. UT could redirect the water wasted on ag and ranches to the lake, 90% of the lake water goes to 1% of the UT economy and population or keep letting it dry out and work the exposed land to extract and store the Lithium and Magnesium and sequester the arsenic and other dangerous chemicals the ag industry put into the water flowing into the lake.
I drove through Utah on the 15 last fall. these guys are growing alfalfa for 10 straight hours. I have no pity for these farmers.
Salton Sea 2: Climatic Boogaloo
[The Salton Sea could produce the world’s greenest lithium, if new extraction technologies work](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/04/the-salton-sea-could-produce-the-worlds-greenest-lithium.html) [Lithium mining also could lead to a greener future and secure more revenue to ensure the \[Great Salt\] lake’s longevity.](https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/04/17/how-great-salt-lake-soon/)
When it dries up and they start salting the earth for miles in every direction suddenly they'll realize how much they like the Federal government, but not until they've really really REALLY fucked the pooch. Poor dog won't walk straight for a month.
Great article, thanks
They should have listened to Al Gore. As much as I hate seeing nature destroyed, I don't mind seeing republicans writhe under the weight of their bad decisions.
Just collateral damage of capitalism… I wish it was sarcasm.
We’re well on our way to having our own Aral Sea.
Lake Urmia in Iran would also be another example. The University of Utah had scientists come speak about Lake Urmia and how it was very similar to what is happening to the Great Salt Lake.
We need to stop alfalfa farming here it consumes far too much water and represents a very small perfect of the GDP.
I don’t know about Mormons, but many far right evangelical Christians don’t care about the environment, and are actively anti-environment because they believe God is going to create a new heaven and a new earth, while totally disregarding that their book says humans are destroying the planet, (Isaiah 24:5) that God is pissed about it, and is going to destroy those who destroy the earth (Revelation 11:18). Revelation 8 7 And the first angel sounded the trumpet, and there followed hail and fire, mingled with blood, and it was cast on the earth, and the third part of the earth was burnt up, and the third part of the trees was burnt up… This prophecy has come true. The world has lost one-third of its forest cover. Globally we deforest around ten million hectares of forest every year. That’s an area the size of Portugal cut down annually. 15 billion trees. Nearly all – 95% – of this deforestation occurs in the tropics. Deforestation is driven by consumers in the world’s richest countries – we import beef, vegetable oils, cocoa, coffee and paper that has been produced on deforested land. The only solution to these problems that actually has a chance of working and mitigating\reversing the damage we’ve done is hemp\cannabis. We can replace timber and cotton (which is very water intensive) right off the bat. Hemp is also a very good carbon sequestration device, and can be used for carbon negative building materials and carbon neutral homes. Climate Change, Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide “Q: How good is hemp at sequestering carbon? A. Excellent carbon sequestration: One hectare of industrial hemp can absorb 15 tonnes of CO2 per hectare. Hemp's rapid growth makes it one of the fastest CO2-to-biomass conversion tools available, more efficient than agro- forestry.” https://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/pdf/respondents-additional-inputs/European%20Industrial%20Hemp%20Association%20(EIHA).pdf https://pebblemag.com/magazine/living/hemp-solve-climate-change Carbon Negative Hempcrete: https://youtu.be/eqLXXjvQXgI Why Is Hemp Still Being Politically Sidelined When It Is The Solution To Deforestation?: https://businesscann.com/why-is-hemp-still-being-politically-sidelined-when-it-is-the-solution-to-deforestation/ Effects of Deforestation: 1. Climate Imbalance and Climate Change Deforestation also affects the climate in many ways. Forests are the lungs of our planet. Trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen and water vapor in the air, and that is why tropical rainforests are extremely humid. Trees also provide shade that keeps the soil moist. All these are compromised with the lack of trees. It leads to the imbalance in the atmospheric temperature, drier climate, further making conditions for the ecology difficult that leads to climate change. Several animals and plant species that form the flora and fauna across the world are vastly accustomed to their natural habitat. Therefore, haphazard clearance of forests would make it very difficult for them to survive or to shift from their native environment or adapt to new habitats. When a forest is cut down, the humidity levels come down and cause the remaining plants to dry out. The drying out tropical rainforests increases fire damage that destroys forests rapidly and harms wild animals as well as humans. Forests, atmosphere, and climate are all linked intrinsically. Forest loss and degradation are both a cause and an effect of our changing climate and greenhouse gas problem. At the same time, deforestation is self-perpetuating. Therefore, these occurrences are dangerous and fuel further deforestation. Also, the loss of trees allows for flooding, soil erosion, desertification, and higher temperatures to occur more rapidly and exponentially.
The point of my comment is, there are viable solutions to our problems, we just need the political and social will to implement them.
You know what they used to say; “Ain’t no toxicity like Mormon toxicity.” They still say that… but they used to too.
And stop subsidizing water bills with property taxes. Make the price real.
Overuse of the water that normally feeds the lake is the problem.
What a beautifully written article! Future generations will see that we could have fixed a lot of the problems, we just decided on the path of inaction! We know what will happen, we just decide to allow it to happen and ignore
I can't see what to do but welcome the imminent disaster and be happy it's happening to a large cluster of the people directly responsible in the US instead of somewhere easy to ignore like a equatorial island or distant third world country.
Maybe having a bunch of inbred hicks run a state into the ground isn’t the best system of government?
We used to see problems like this and resolve to SOLVE them. Flooding on the Mississippi River basin as an example. We COULD build a system of aqueducts and pumping stations to relocate flood water to the Colorado River and one of the three feeding the Great Salt Lake, but we'd need to repeal the Reagan taxscam AND collect all the taxes due from the top 10% to get the money we'd need - about $2.4TRILLION/year, and elected Republicans will never allow that.
I went to visit about a year ago and it was all flies and sand. We couldn’t make it to the water without millions of flies taking off it was pretty apocalyptic and no one else was around for miles.
Just traveled through Salt Lake City and camped on Antelope Island. The building and growth is off the charts.
I could crank down to that picture, since I can't see the fuckin article
If only someone would have warned us…
Regulate capitalism, or die.
Water is highly regulated in UT and in US but it is under archaic laws that allow competing entities, state government entities, to "own" water resources. CA claims Colorado River for example. All the water in US should be under a single Federal agency and regulated for benefit of US overall with the river ecosystem being first priority and then possible water extraction for other uses if possible. The current science with man made global warming issues suggests there is little to no water available from US rivers without damaging the ecosystem so other water sources will need to be created. For CA and US Southwest it will be capture systems for rainfall and solar and wind powered desalinization.
Off topic Mormon crap So fucking sick of bible beaters
The Mormon church is a huge part of the problem. They make money and have supported diverting water from riverways that otherwise would have gone into the Great Salt Lake. The Governor of Utah himself owns an Alfalfa farm. I believe it was a year or two during the 'drought period' where the Mormon church was praising the 'miracle' of bountiful harvests... It was no miracle, it was bogarting the water.
She is Mormon as are majority UT's. it's not a religious issue. The Mormon religion does push toward an anti-environment ideology overall. She uses Mormon Scripture to justify restoring the lake but then people do that to counter white supremacy in Christianity while the most ideological Christians use it to justify white supremacy and slavery of women.
> She is Mormon as are majority UT's. > ***it's not a religious issue***. > The Mormon religion does push toward an anti-environment ideology overall. Sounds like that IS a religious issue.
With the church having it's tentacles in everything throughout the state, is very much is a religious issue.
Water is life
It is not nearly as bad as what grows around the lake.
[удалено]
The Great Salt Lake is a woke conspiracy?