What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
46 Comments
- PATSCRU, on 11/07/2007, -1/+20did anyone else think that this story was going to be about aperture labs having a portal program to bring water to drought ridden places...?
- inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+18The actual map isn't missing its key. It is just that when Treehugger decided to write a worhtless 10 line "article" on it for the sole reason of spamming Digg for ad sense dollars, they failed to include the key.
Hey treehugger.com...if you would have eliminated the middle man (yourself) and submitted the actual site rather than adding absolutely nothing new, you could have saved a lot of energy. - Dumbledorito, on 11/07/2007, -0/+10Now you're droughting with portals!
The cake, while possibly a lie, is no longer moist. - snyperr2s, on 11/06/2007, -1/+8I thought they ment the Aperture Portal Device, to bad it isn't.
- Iwantawii, on 11/07/2007, -0/+6You're right, USELESS article. Here is the source:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_asses ... - Dokument, on 11/07/2007, -0/+5or Tennessee where they are using firetrucks to bring water. and the watertower is only turned on briefly every day.
- koko775, on 11/06/2007, -0/+5the drought is a lie.
the drought is a lie.
the drought is a lie.
overused, boring, etc. but I did it for my amusement. Please digg me down to comfortable invisibility. Thank you. - dotorg, on 11/08/2007, -0/+5Water is 62lbs per cubic foot, approximately. So it would take on the order of a half million foot pounds of energy to move a single cubic foot of water up to a reasonable starting altitude to feed rivers in the rocky mountains. If you assume its 500 miles and you want to keep the water moving, say, 50mph (ten hours transit), you're talking (very roughly) 30 watts consumed per cubit foot of water ignoring pumping efficiencies.
It'll *never* happen. There is no way to produce even a tiny fraction of the energy needed to do it. You need the power of the sun hitting a million square miles of ocean to move that much water to altitude. - m0laria, on 11/06/2007, -1/+5adsense kills trees.
- sockpuppets, on 11/07/2007, -0/+4Digg effect? I'm only downloading like 2 gallons a minute.
- sockpuppets, on 11/06/2007, -1/+5You're Mexican?
- Wacer, on 11/06/2007, -0/+3Wonderful Idea. Incredibly expensive.
- DonKarnage25, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3http://www.drought.gov/portal/server.pt
Link to actual site. - inactive, on 11/06/2007, -1/+4that map is missing its key.
i live in iowa, and iowa is white, so does that mean glacier or desert? - jmcqk6, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2It could happen if we were a Type I civilization. Being Type 0 really sucks sometimes...
- jmcqk6, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2um... you should have just stuck to the aquifer comment. Yes, it's still shrinking.
If the drought really is serious, we don't need to worry about growing population. It'll kill people pretty efficiently on it's own. - Sarevok9, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2Yeah... Atlanta is in some trouble too.... whats their countdown at now, 50 someodd days?
- protogenxl, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only. There is no stopping in a red zone.
- pinchduck, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2Drought conditions aren't predictions, they are trends. Hindsight being 20/20, I'm thinking that the map is pretty accurate.
- eastcoast, on 11/06/2007, -2/+4This is very important, especially to those of us that live in So. California.
- lucidguru, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3Has anyone yet proposed a salt water pipeline from the ocean to the rocky mountains? You could then build a desalination plant to make freshwater to feed all the rivers and streams... The water would flow down back to the ocean regardless of whether or not there was enough precipitation and restrictions on water consumption would not be needed. The more water people consume the more water you pump up to the mountains and desalinate.
- snyperr2s, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2i thought they had a super secret portal program.
- QuickeningYak, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3I thought that was al-Qaeda.
- snyperr2s, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1I hate that damn cake
- inactive, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1If you really want to know the answer to your question...no.
- BugMeNot2, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1:D
http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Func_liqui ... - zmjone2992, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1really bad in georgia too
- Pixelpaws, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1None of the information on the "new" portal is actually new, though. All of those maps were have been accessible through weather.gov for a long time; this just gives them a unique URL.
- Krovvy, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1I'm from North Carolina, definitely feeling it.
- mahdaeng, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1You are a vast brown area around Los Angeles?
- NeonElixir, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1So I'm stuck with lake effect snow in Cleveland, but we have fresh water. I suppose it's probably a fair tradeoff.
- inactive, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1Here in beautiful Southern Appalachia we appear to be headed for ecological disaster.
- RTPMatt, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1Unfortunately this dosn't show things like the fact that southern California is in the middle of the desert, so any "improvement" in northern California is near meaningless because any extra water will have to be piped down south.
- BlueStreak69, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1Might as well say the area is Mexican. I'm not but almost everyone else is. And don't take things too literally, damn.
- inactive, on 11/07/2007, -1/+2And even worse is that it is about 8 clicks in to get the actual map.
Straight to maps: http://www.drought.gov/portal/server.pt?open=514&o ... - boiker, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1They (the NWS/NOAA) have been doing this for YEARS. Repackaged news. There's really nothing new about this portal.
- Tawni, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1Well this should be just obvious to those in the west. I am in the sonoran desert in the southwest US so obviously it will be a drought and not a rainforest. Reports that state the obvious are just annoying. If I wanted to be where there was water I would live in Michigan. Instead I conserve water because of where I live.
- naterpoke, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1well that's the 1 beneficial thing to come from the bush administration
- Roger, on 11/06/2007, -3/+3Yep, well I might as well be the first....
The cake is a lie. - BlueStreak69, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1See that vast brown area around Los Angeles? That's me :(
- inactive, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1Buried for no linking to the actual portal
- f4nt0m4s, on 11/06/2007, -2/+1the weatherman can't get the 5-day forecast right but they can predict this drought stuff? damn them!!
- Frnnkdlxx, on 11/06/2007, -3/+2Why do I feel like I'm reading Fox News with this sensationalism?
- adrastus1, on 11/06/2007, -1/+0I like it
- WTFukowi, on 11/06/2007, -2/+0Looks fishy to me. From what I saw, the problems with the aquifers is not addressed. From what I've read, all of the major aquifers are shrinking in size, sometimes faster than expected. It took millions of years for these to form inside of porous rock, but farmers across the midwest and plains have been pumping it out faster than it can be replenished. I know, lets add another 100 million americans over the next thirty years! Good thinking. After all, it is only water. By the way, if you believe the Census Bureau's estimate of 12 million illegals, you need to go back to first grade.
- ScottDaMan, on 11/06/2007, -3/+1Salt water fish want their water too.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is