Around 100 billion.
Well worth it my book and a pittance compared to the 2.1 trillion on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
It would be interesting if conservative Utah goes hat in hand for a bail out on this one. We shall see.
Well there ya go.
“Utah Department of Natural Resources Executive Director Joel Ferry told the crowd that a pipeline would cost anywhere from $60-100 billion.”
A state/federal partnership.
Very likely- and only if it’s even feasible ecologically on the coast. That’s a lot of ocean water being dredged up.
1 Like
Again … Not a problem. Sea levels are rising. 
1 Like
Decades ago they built pumps to drain a rising great salt lake just in time for the drought to do it naturally.
Here is a trio of screenshots of the Salt Lake area I got from Googlemaps.
The areas of artificial irrigation can be seen with ease.
FYI
lithium mining and copper mining each require a LOT of water.
Ever notice that the wet times which are not the norm in many Western States somehow become the backdrop for rosy projections where the “droughts” which are the norm keep on getting called droughts?
1 Like
Not to mention the mountain snow pack. Rainfall and snow pack are all sources of the lake’s water replenishment
Speaking of, Saudi Arabia (one of the driest countries in the world) will use cloud seeding to reduce and reverse desertification.
Also from the article (after a bunch of ads toward the bottom):
No.
Ever notice they installed pumps to drain the GSL back in the '80s?
Whuh?
Not really. Those were installed for flood mitigation.
However, the irony is palpable
Wait, some scientist in the 80s said the Great Salt Lake was going to flood?
Were dissenting views silenced?
No, it did flood.
1 Like
Good thing there was no global warming back then.
3 Likes
The twentieth-century was the wettest period in the Sierra Nevada and the southwest coast in general in the last 7000 years. Droughts of up to 200 years long are the norm for that region.
But most people living there think the wet twentieth-century is the norm.
3 Likes
