Any water is good water. I'm not so sure about Chicago water tho. Our environmental people would have to sign off on it first.
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Sanders" <wsanders .at. efgroup DO.T net>
To: "ProFox Email List" <profox@leafe.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Today in San Diego
Ken - I like this idea - I like it so much I am suggesting we raise the NY
STATE auto license fee to pay for it .. Inter State commerce at is best.
mondo regards [Bill]
ps -
if you're want to pay that much [vbg] then it makes more sense to
actually capture all of the rainwater run off [some ppl call em flood
waters] between Chicago and New Orleans and pump it westwards towards
California. hmmm - I'm thinking most of the western
gas pipelines running from Kansas to Los Angeles were built for less than
that - and you could carry
about 1 trillion gallons of water per day using the same size pipe...
what are your thoughts ?
--
William Sanders / Electronic Filing Group Remove the DOT BOB to reply via
email.
FREE LONG DISTANCE -> mailto:excel-info .at. efgroup DO.T net
Free Satellite Receivers and installation ->
http://www.vmcsatellite.com/?aid=58456
mySql / VFP / MS-SQL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken McGinnis" <nospam99@kenmcginnis.com>
To: "ProFox Email List" <profox .at. leafe DO.T com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Today in San Diego
> I'll bet for about 5-10 trillion dollars they could put sprinklers all
over southern California. It could employ a lot of people.
> We could raise the auto license fee to pay for it.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Madigan" <mmadi10699@yahoo.com>
> To: "ProFox Email List" <profox .at. leafe DO.T com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: [OT] Today in San Diego
>
>
> I think the problem with seeding is that you disrupt the natural
> course of the weather. LA is supposed to be desert.
>
> One excellent suggestion I heard today was the creation of a
> North American firefighter army that could be put into operation
> in a day. Equipped with c130 aircraft water tankers and an
> standing army of firemen that could be deployed quickly into a
> fire. They could cover Canada, Mexico and the US. Kind of like
> a Delta force for fire fighting.
>
>
>
>
> --- Bill Arnold <billjarnold@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Yeah, I realize that, but unless something is done to bring
> > water into
> > the areas that get so dry, it's just going to happen again and
> > again. I
> > was thinking seeding clouds because that's probably the least
> > expensive
> > solution (grab every raincloud that comes by and seed it), but
> > the
> > approach that I think makes the most sense is desalinization
> > and
> > creating lakes/rivers inland that in turn feed more clouds.
> >
> > In any case, good luck to you and all the people threatened by
> > the
> > fires!
> >
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > >It would seem California might want to take a look at
> > Russian cloud
> > > >seeding technology to keep from getting so dry?
> > > >
> > > >http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/06/03062003170214.asp
> > >
> > > Hi, Bill
> > >
> > > I don't think it would work. You have to have clouds to
> > seed, and on
> > > Sunday the humidity in most of the back country was 10% or
> > > less! That's
> > > one of the problems, with it so dry the air heats up
> > > instantly. The wind
> > > has changed now and humidity is going back up, which the fire
> >
> > > crews say
> > > will help a lot.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Post Messages to: ProFox .at. leafe DO.T com
> > Subscription Maintenance:
> > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
> > OT-free version of this list:
> > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
> > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the
> > opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical
> > advice. This statement is added to the messages for those
> > lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
>
>
> =====
> Since we haven't found Saddam Hussein yet, does that mean he never existed
either?
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
©2003 Ken McGinnis |
