California Droughts Could Have Dangerous Ripple Effects
http://www.livescience.com/49287-california-droughts-ripple-effects.htmlEpic droughts like the one gripping California for three years now may become more frequent in the future due to climate change, according to new research.
This will not only strain the drinking-water supplies for California's 38 million people, but will also induce a cascade of other hazards — including fires, floods and poor water quality — as populations continue to grow statewide, scientists say.
Despite heavy rains this month, 78 percent of California is still experiencing either exceptional or extreme drought, according to the National Drought Mitigation Center. Unusually low snowfall across the state is largely to blame, scientists say. About one-third of California's water comes from snowmelt in the Sierra Nevada mountains, which stretch through the eastern part of the state for nearly 400 miles (644 kilometers).
"All this rain is great," Nina Oakley, a scientist with the Desert Research Institute in Nevada, told Live Science at the annual American Geophysical Union meeting earlier this month. "But really, the snow in the Sierras is what we are after for a good year to help bring us out of drought." [Video: California Drought Map Time-Lapse Shows Distressing Trend]
= new reply since forum marked as read
I didn't know the Great Lakes were receding. I haven't been up that way in many years. I guess with our larger population we are much more thirsty than ever. I saw a special on a news program called Vice on HBO a few months back where they showed an entire town somewhere in Texas that just cleared out. There was no water left and the folks there had to abandon their homes. I know that Georgia and Tennessee have fights over water rights too. I think this is going to be the biggest problem that future generations have to deal with. Anyway, Happy New Year to you! 
By God, you'd have to pipe it OVER the Rocky Mountains! Even the lowest passes through them are a MILE of vertical elevation change from the Great Lakes or anywhere else east of Iowa or Nebraska. I suppose we could build a few dozen gigawatt-sized nuclear reactors in a chain across the Midwest and Southwest, all dedicated solely to pumping water 
The same concept mostly applies to desalination plants on the cost: to make enough water to make a difference in the drought would require so many plants, consuming so much energy, that it would bankrupt the state of California trying to do such a thing.
People don't seem to understand the scale of how much water we consume in this country. We have this idea that since we can move millions of barrels of oil a day, we could simply do the same with water. What few seem to consider is that the amount of water we consume absolutely dwarfs the amount of water we consume daily. The water directly consumed by us, the stuff coming out of our taps, is tiny compared to the water we don't see: the water we use for agriculture and industry. A desal. plant can supply a city's drinking water needs, but not come close to supplying the farms and factories that support the economy that city is based upon.
