Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebula3lem123
I think the point is that a potential pipeline would allow even more economic activity, be it through tourism of the lake, better snow allowing better skiing, supporting a much higher population, and sustaining agriculture that actually contributes heavily to the gdp. I think a pipeline would be great as well, but it's definitely a far-future thing.
|
Correct. The idea would be to pump sea water to the GSL which creates a lot of valuable land and therefore tax revenue. It would become, if done well, an national destination during the summer time. It would have the aesthetic of something like Channel/Catalina Island(s). Dry, but with managed beaches/sand, could be very nice to be on Antelope or Stansbury. The cities could then desalinate water or just capture more of what comes out of the Wasatch.
This would be energy intensive (until new materials like graphene replaces the current polymers) and only sustainable with solar/wind for example. I am a believer that we are entering an age of super cheap energy and with solar there will be excess that can be sold at very low cost for those that can accept intermittent power. A pipeline can run at variable flows depending on power availability.
This isn't just a Utah project. I would envision a pipeline that runs up I-15 and/or across I-80/70 and then state(s) such as TX, NM, UT, CO, NV, AZ or Southern CA who can pay for spurs to support their populations. This would make it more politically feasible as it cuts across red and blue states. It could free the West from the unpredictability of drought cycles.
There are obviously major potential issues such as possibly enabling explosive sprawl as water accessibility is THE deciding factor whether developers build homes. Also, what to do with the brine waste is not a trivial question.