Coffee in hand, sometime after 5:30 this morning, I was surfing my news feeds “when what to my wondering eyes should appear?” No, not a miniature sleigh and eight tiny reindeer.
Not a little old “driver” (of global warming) so lively and quick; What I saw was a headline I just had to click.
This time a local franchise of the dinosaur press, to partially pimp another approved narrative, used this headline to pose a question. “Seacoast to get hit by heavy rain from Elsa. Will it impact drought? And surfing?“
A tropical storm is predicted to sideswipe New Hampshire. Will heavy rain impact the drought?
Should Kamala’s laugh make us suspicious? Do Democrats raise taxes? Does light peel back at the edge of darkness? Will rain impact drought?
Seriously?
Headline writing is an art, and I’m no master, but sometimes, they are so stupid (like modern art) you have to look.
What the…?
Without laying my finger aside of my nose, I gave a quick click to read what they proposed. Did Fosters Daily Democrat think yes, rain could alleviate drought? I was hoping they’d say no, but yes. Yes, it can.
“The biggest impact we’re expecting would be locally heavy rainfall,” said meteorologist Hunter Tubbs at NWS in Gray Maine. “This tropical system is exactly what we need in terms of getting our precipitation levels back up. Much of the area is in a moderate drought, and our rainfall deficits are quite high now.”
I’m still flabbergasted that this is a problem for the seacoast. These are the same people mewling about how (for reasons no one can explain) the tiny annual shift in sea-level rise caused by isostatic rebound (vertical land motion) is going to increase exponentially out of nowhere despite no actual evidence to support it. The ridicule has been extensive but not without solutions.
While one group of idiots said NH would need more than a billion dollars to build a sea wall along the coast to contain Poseidon’s rage, I suggested a cheaper alternative. For a fraction of the bloated spending, we (you) could build a desalination plant. This facility would extract 100,000 cubic meters of water per day and make it potable for roughly 300,000 people.
You could build bigger, and you would need to consider inland infrastructure for delivery, but you’d be killing several birds with one big stone. Good paying construction jobs, long-term facility operating and maintenance and upkeep jobs, reducing-called sea-level rise by removing the sea and processing it to address drought-related issues.
At a fraction of the cost of just about every other idea ever conceived to address the non-problem of global warming.
Water water everywhere and look now we can drink. Or water lawns, irrigate farms, and so on.
If we need to lower the seas a bit more, build more plants, and pipe the stuff inland. We could build them everywhere for a pittance compared to the budget-busting money pits into which we’ve been dumping taxpayer cash for decades.
And no more stupid headlines wondering if heavy rain will affect local drought conditions.
Yes, Virginia, the rain really does lesson drought conditions.
