PDA

View Full Version : Playing with Dead Sea is disaster in making?



Inclusa
2015-Dec-15, 10:31 AM
Two proposals: One Mediterranean to Dead Sea, and the other is Red Sea canal to Dead Sea.
Both will bring massive sea water into the system.
(Like Aral Sea, Israel's irrigation project has caused drying of Dead Sea.)
Some talk about the destruction of very unique geological features; others talk about increased seismic activities.
Does the Three Gorges project tell anything?

efanton
2015-Dec-15, 06:55 PM
The whole of the Middle East is suffering a water crisis. Turkey is continually putting up dams on the Euphrates and you cant blame them for that they have to feed and provide water for their population but this has consequences for countries down stream.

The Dead Sea is below sea level so a canal from the Red Sea seem like a viable option. This cannot be fairly compared to the Aral Sea, that was a fresh water lake not a sea, and diverting sea water across barren desert cannot be seen as destruction of habitat. I also could not see how anyone would come to the conclusion that this is going to affect sea levels either locally or globally. The land around the Dead Sea is virtually barren so the only real concern would be the potential loss of archaeological sites previously or yet to be found.

Who are we to deny other countries the right and means to provide food and water to their people?

geonuc
2015-Dec-15, 10:37 PM
I also could not see how anyone would come to the conclusion that this is going to affect sea levels either locally or globally.
Has anyone suggested that?

Squink
2015-Dec-15, 11:52 PM
How large is the area below sea level?
Are we likely to see global shifts in wind/pcp patterns as a result of flooding the hole?

efanton
2015-Dec-16, 12:33 AM
How large is the area below sea level?
Are we likely to see global shifts in wind/pcp patterns as a result of flooding the hole?

Did the weather in California change when Lake Mead was created?
Did the weather in Canada change when the Manicouagan Reservoir was created?
We could ask the same question of all man made reservoirs, and its almost certain the answer would be there has been no change in climate or weather.

As the intention is to build a canal the amount of water let through its locks can be managed. Its likely the Israeli's will only use it to keep the Dead Sea at current levels. land area is almost as precious as water to the Israeli's. Unfortunately we have seen the evidence of that with the occupation and take over of Palestinian settlements, by lets stay away from the politics. Why would they increase the size of the dead sea if they can constantly top it up through a canal? But if they did increase it size it would only be by a very small fraction of its existing size. The Dead Sea is big, really big, about 250 sq miles big. In fact it is currently bigger than any man made reservoir ever built, so why would there be a need to make it even bigger? There would also be the problem that by increasing its current size they would also flood Jordanian land so they could not possibly do that without the agreement of the Jordanian's or risk provoking yet another middle east war.

Squink
2015-Dec-16, 07:38 PM
Did the weather in California change when Lake Mead was created?
Did the weather in Canada change when the Manicouagan Reservoir was created?
Mead is to the east of CA. Manicouagan is tiny.
You've forgotten the Aral sea. How'd that work out? (http://www.columbia.edu/~tmt2120/environmental%20impacts.htm)

efanton
2015-Dec-16, 09:14 PM
You've forgotten the Aral sea. How'd that work out?

I did not forget the Aral Sea. I already posted my thoughts on that in a previous post


The Dead Sea is below sea level so a canal from the Red Sea seem like a viable option. This cannot be fairly compared to the Aral Sea, that was a fresh water lake not a sea, and diverting sea water across barren desert cannot be seen as destruction of habitat.

You are trying to compare apples with oranges.
The Aral Sea had an indigenous eco-system that was almost totally destroyed. The Dea sea is of such high salinity that it cannot harbour life beyond a very small amount of very tenacious bacteria and microbial fungi. There is certainly no fish nor plant life in it.
Diverting water from the Aral Sea also meant diverting water from its catchment area, the Canal project for the Dead Sea would be the complete opposite.

So forget about trying to compare the Dead Sea with the Aral Sea you just cant.
Can you give any evidence that there would be an ecological impact by building the canal? Can you foresee or give any evidence of an impact on the Red Sea or the Mediterranean Sea? If you cannot then I see no negative consequence of this project, in fact it seems like a sensible project that will allow completely barren land become productive and able to sustain Fauna and flora.

Squink
2015-Dec-16, 11:48 PM
diverting sea water across barren desert cannot be seen as destruction of habitat.Don't see how you arrive at that conclusion. There's a lot of good salt and mineral mining that goes on down there.
Tell me about what you know about how a massive new evaporative pool (150 X 16 km?) would do to the climate of Jordan.
If you've ever been down there, you know it gets hot. How much water a day would evaporate off the thing (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/evaporation-water-surface-d_690.html). How much cooling would that cause, and where would the water fall back out of the atmosphere?
Don't tell me it'd be harmless, prove it.

efanton
2015-Dec-17, 12:11 AM
Do you think they are going to try irrigating crops with salt water? Obviously not.
So how do they turn salt water that would kill crops into something that would irrigate them? They use evaporation to create fresh water which they then trap to use to irrigate crops. What would be the point of spending millions to get sea water to the Dead Sea only to evaporate it straight back into the air. You obviously have not thought this through.

Its not for me to prove a thing. You seem to have positioned yourself that this is a terrible idea and will cause all sorts of catastrophes. It is for you to support you stance with EVIDENCE not wild hypothesis or conspiracy theory.

To me this project seems a perfectly plausible plan that has much benefit. I remain open minded about the project, but if someone could demonstrate logically and with evidence why it would be a bad thing to do, then I might reconsider my stance.

John Mendenhall
2015-Dec-17, 12:59 AM
IIRC, this project is dicussed in Willy Ley's book Engineer's Dreams. It's a 1400 foot drop tp the Dead Sea frpm the Med. It's worth doing just for the hydroelectric power. The half-dozen or so countries that are directly involved would have to hammer oiut a working durable relationship, however. Thay may br a bigger problem than the environeering and environmental problems (keep in mind please, gentle folk, that political discussions on the board are narrowly limited to the idea being discussed.)

BigDon
2015-Dec-17, 05:39 PM
Okay John, who then are the countries that have to form an alliance for this to work?

Cause if this has to pass through both Shia and Sunni held countries it just isn't going to happen, except on paper.

danscope
2015-Dec-17, 10:05 PM
If you look at a satellite loop of a major river or body of water, you can see "easily" the evaporative process of rain clouds forming directly from that body of water. Some of it comes down where it previously had no chance of rain . Listen folks, this IS terraforming. The real thing.
" And the desserts shall blossom again and bring life to a new world ." Not a bad ambition, I should think.
And Big Don is right .

Reality Check
2015-Dec-17, 11:32 PM
Two proposals: One Mediterranean to Dead Sea, and the other is Red Sea canal to Dead Sea.
Both will bring massive sea water into the system.
(Like Aral Sea, Israel's irrigation project has caused drying of Dead Sea.)
Some talk about the destruction of very unique geological features; others talk about increased seismic activities.
Does the Three Gorges project tell anything?
That no one would be foolish enough to confuse a dam (Three Gorges Dam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam)) with canals or pipelines, Inclusa?
The post is incomplete - it is Israel, Jordan and Syria who have diverted water from the Dead Sea watershed, primarily for irrigation.
The Mediterranean–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) and Red Sea–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) are projects to restore the level of the Dead Sea - so "massive sea water" is irrelevant.

Who is that seeming mythical "some", Inclusa?
The Red Sea–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) is the project being evaluated currently. The geological, environmental and archeological impacts have been considered and planned to be minimal, e.g. using pipelines rather then canals where appropriate.

Inclusa
2015-Dec-18, 06:29 AM
That no one would be foolish enough to confuse a dam (Three Gorges Dam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam)) with canals or pipelines, Inclusa?
The post is incomplete - it is Israel, Jordan and Syria who have diverted water from the Dead Sea watershed, primarily for irrigation.
The Mediterranean–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) and Red Sea–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) are projects to restore the level of the Dead Sea - so "massive sea water" is irrelevant.

Who is that seeming mythical "some", Inclusa?
The Red Sea–Dead Sea Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea%E2%80%93Dead_Sea_Canal) is the project being evaluated currently. The geological, environmental and archeological impacts have been considered and planned to be minimal, e.g. using pipelines rather then canals where appropriate.

Thanks a lot!
I heard the project is being approved, but I'm YET to find sources about that it is being built.

John Mendenhall
2015-Dec-18, 08:42 AM
Okay John, who then are the countries that have to form an alliance for this to work?

Cause if this has to pass through both Shia and Sunni held countries it just isn't going to happen, except on paper.

Yea!! BigD is back. Good to see your post.

WRT the subject, you are right. (Sigh)

slang
2015-Dec-22, 06:35 PM
(keep in mind please, gentle folk, that political discussions on the board are narrowly limited to the idea being discussed.)

No, they're not limited, they are not allowed. With only a few exceptions noted in the rules, and this topic is not one of those exceptions. Already we're skating on very thin ice here (no wonder, with salt water..).

wd40
2016-Jan-04, 08:20 PM
Dead Sea sinkholes (http://www.livescience.com/50379-dead-sea-sinkholes.html) are an increasing problem, damaging roads and the Dead Sea hotels where the world's eczematous and psoriatic go for relief. Israel is required by the peace treaty to send 50 million cubic metres of Sea of Galilee water annually to Jordan, much of which would otherwise reach the Dead Sea. Desalination now supplies 70% of Israel's own water needs. A future revivification of the Dead Sea is mentioned in an ancient text, not by a canal from the Mediterranean or Red Sea, but from a river emanating 15 miles away in Jerusalem.