I find this to be scary. But then, the loss of our ice sheets IS scary.

Finding new, uncontaminated groundwater supplies is becoming increasingly difficult. Not only are the geologic formations not cooperative in many areas, there is a lack of recharge in a great many more areas, and what you do find often has a high potential from contamination.

This is but one "side effect" of global warming, that can have adverse implications for the humans and animals of the planet.

To me, all of us can reduce our contamination of our environment-- it makes sense that no one wants to drink water with pesticides in it.

Whatever the reason, whether mankind is contributing to a natural phenomenon, or if mankind is causing it-- the last time we had this much CO2 in the air was back in the Pennsylvanian and Mississippian eras, the Carboniferous period. Plants will love it, for sure...

Even though there has been no warming for fifteen years.

Please excuse me, but:

I think that people need to look at this as a geologist looks at it-- yeah, I know, so what-- but, geologists tend to take the long view of things. We look for general trends over longer periods of time. We look for anomalies and try to see what may have caused them, in the past. We live on a dynamic, ever-changing planet-- and mankind has only been here a very short period of time.

A lot of the changes between eras, (in Geologic time), were caused by periods of violent volcanic eruptions. We haven't had that, yet, to the scale that say, caused the Carboniferous. But we don't know just how much of the CO2 that's out and about is enough to tip the scale into another Carboniferous-like era.

Maybe it is a natural trend, that is a completely normal state of affairs,cyclicinoccurrence, and we justhappen to be in this 'cycle'. We still have todeal with it. We must still deal with the problems associated with it. Even if it is natural, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't stop polluting the few clean freshwater resources we have. Right?

It sort of already is a business. We pay our utility bills, of which water/sewer is a part. Many people have companies that find water, (as I did), and many people work for companies that remediate groundwater supplies, (as I did). It is a economically integral part of our country's business, as of right now.

The point is, why shit in our own bed? If it can be avoided, I mean...

Most people don't think about water as being a finite resource. In my particular part of the world, it isn't-- it is a renewable resource. But out west, where there is little rainfall, it is a finite resource that is being mined. The point will come when it will run out, and desalinization plants will have to be installed-- which are very expensive.

Several mid-east countries have corralled icebergs, floated them down to their country, put them in a reservoir and let them melt for fresh water. It seems to be a radical plan, but at least, while we have ice sheets, it is feasible. Long term cost is cheaper than desalinization-- and this is in a place where energy is very inexpensive. Out west, here in the US, energy is not that inexpensive, and desalinization is an expensive, high energy process.

Isn't this gorgeous? What could possibly a contaminant in this pristine area? My first question: Do they use a fungicide? If so, do they use the commonly used Guardsmen Max? Guardsmen Max has a hydrolitic half-life of 190 days, or 6 months, 10 days. So, if you put a well out here, from the point of the well, out to an area equal to 6+ months time of travel, (about 2,000' in all directions), you can't use Guardsmen Max because it will get into the water.

Also, have you heard of the water wars going on in Africa? Seems that several people own the only water source in an area-- they charge what they like for it. If the people can't afford to pay for the water, they can dig their own well, which has been poisoned by arsenic from some of the mining activities, or they can get it out of the river, which has waterborne pathogens.

This is serious stuff. The Discovery had a program not long ago that predicted the next wars will be fought over water.

I'm not trying to create panic, in any way-- but we need, as humans, to realize that changes are happening, and modify our behaviors in order to mitigate the effects of those changes.

My house has gas heat. I surely can't install solar panels on it, because we have 15 trees in the yard, nor can I install a windmill, for all the overhead power lines, etc. Our electricity comes from coal-fired power plants. Coal that is mined in my state, by 3% of our total work force, and used to fire our power plants. For us, it is cheap and easy energy.

I'm not suggesting that we blow a whistle and stop everything suddenly. But we can begin to modify our behaviors, where possible, to mitigate what is coming down the pike. Keeping the lid on a garbage can costs little, but is a truly effective way of minimizing runoff from all kinds of garbage.

Global temperatures have not been "flat". This is from the NOAA:

The article, if you wish to see it, is here . While the changes appear to be small, globally, even a small change can make a real difference. I live in Louisville, and used to live in Indianapolis. When it snows in Indianapolis, we usually have freezing rain and rain, a difference of about .5-1o in temperature. Yet, "spring" starts about two weeks later, up there than down here, and Louisville is about 2 weeks behind Murray, KY, where I went to school. It doesn't take much change to make a difference.

I agree with you that there is panic, and that most of it is media generated. And I think that all of us can do our own little bit to prevent pollution of an important resource. I do believe that politicians have taken it out of context and blown it up.

Remember, I am a scientist. I could care less about politics, especially when it comes to global climate change. I'm in the trenches, trying to protect our drinking water supply. My viewpoint is somewhat skewed toward providing a safe, reliable, supply of drinking water. Watching our freshwater banks melt makes my heart sink.

Dowser ,

The title is odd . Have you ever heard of a precise measurable definition for " climate change" ? If you can't define it then you can't measure it .

As far as changes to glaciers , that is likely to be about changes in wind rather than temperature .

Even when this subject is presented as an individual responsibility, as you have done Dowser, there will always be resistance. Thanks for keeping the notion of personal responsibility in front of the class. Clean water should never be taken for granted.

Maybe a little math homework is in order. How many active natural gas wells are there? How much water does each well require on a daily basis? How much water is lost to natural gas production?

The Homework answer(s) also infringes on the amount and quality of drinking water right under your feet too. Above all, remember, when the horse led to water will not drink it, it's probably bad water.

Our water is very cheap, compared to other cities nearby-- our water/sewer bill is about $60/mo, of which $30 is our water bill. Just north of us, the water/sewer bill is about $150/month. They don't have a viable water supply near by, and must pay to pipe it in...

Petey. Where do wind temperatures come from? The land beneath it.

Sorry about the title being odd... I kind of took it a step further.

I don't think any body knows how many natural gas wells they are. During the fracking process, the water use is around 1 million gallons, of which 500,000 gallons are recovered and must be treated as a a hazardous waste. No municipal supply can treat it. Usually, it is injected into deep formations. How much is lost to natural gas production? I really can't even hazard a guess.

That's my point, and thanks, dear One. We all have a responsibility. Even something simple, like keeping the lid on the trash, can do its part in preventing pollution, and preventing some of the effects of the changes taking place.

I've been reading about the rise in sea levels. What are some of the most prolific aquifers? The coastal aquifers. How will we be able to withdraw fresh water from those aquifers if they are underwater? Answer: we can't. Not only is the land area lost to us, but also the resources beneath the land area.

The western states are currently mining ground water. Sad to say, but true. Therefore, the water supply will run out, some day. What we are losing, when these glaciers melt, is the fresh water in our bank.

Where do wind temperatures come from? The land beneath it.

Can't argue with that . But in the poles the temperature is going to be 32% F or less . It is the strength of the wind which causes sublimation of ice even at the poles .

The poles have weather patterns, as well. This isn't sublimation, Petey, no movement occurs during sublimation-- this is melting.

" no movement occurs during sublimation-- this is melting."


How do you know it is melting & not sublimation ? If parts of a glacier are removed by sublimation it could move more easily ...

Want to see some links about polar sublimation ... also polar winds ?

Glaciers move due to their own weight. Normal glacial movement is about 1" per year.

The ice sheet would be getting thinner, with less movement if this were sublimation, or evaporation of ice directly into the atmosphere. If it were just due to wind, wouldn't there be sculpting of the ice? I'd love some links, but let's start a new thread... OK?

Just so we can talk, back and forth...

Dowser ,

New thread ... like this ?

Normal glacial movement is about 1" per year.

What is the time period for that data ?

You'reabsolutelyright it's a toug h figure to nail down, a moving target if you will.

I don't think any body knows how many natural gas wells they are.

If anyone were interested these figures can be had. The drilling companies keep these kinds of records on a regular basis. BakerHughes.com

Baker Hughes has issued the rotary rig counts as a service to the petroleum industry since 1944, when Hughes Tool Company began weekly counts of U.S. and Canadian drilling activity. Hughes initiated the monthly international rig count in 1975. The North American rig count is released weekly at noon central time on the last day of the work week. The international rig count is released on the fifth working day of each month.

The practice of fracking and high pressure technology lends itself to high volumes of water to perform it in both the oil and gas production. The most recent report at Baker Hughes (16 May 2014) is just shy of 2000 rigs in North America. About 2000 wells at your water usage, aconservativeusage figure IMO, level is still a lotof water.

I really didn't expect the homework to be resolved, but was hoping someone would at least realize how much water is being lost to this process and coupled with your warning should bring home the point of water being a limited resource.

Thanks!

Well, seem like I found that out in the 80's... I believe that it actually varies, per glacier.

However, I just looked it up, and I was wrong : Look HERE . This says that it moves about a meter a day. Which I find hard to believe... But, so much of what I remember from back then isn't right...

At any rate, from the article:

Glacial ice is the largest reservoir of freshwater on Earth. ^[2] Many glaciers from temperate, alpine and seasonal polar climates store water as ice during the colder seasons and release it later in the form of meltwater as warmer summer temperatures cause the glacier to melt, creating a water source that is especially important for plants, animals and human uses when other sources may be scant. Within high altitude and Antarctic environments, the seasonal temperature difference is often not sufficient to release meltwater.

Because glacial mass is affected by long-term climate changes, e.g., precipitation , mean temperature , and cloud cover , glacial mass changes are considered among the most sensitive indicators of climate change and are a major source of variations in sea level .

Interesting!!!

And thanks, this is what I meant-- it's hard, once you get to the message section, to keep comments straight.

I can't get the info for KY... or I haven't found it yet. AND no one at the KGS will tell me.

That is a LOT of water, and wastewater.

Dowser--

I admire your attempt to foster real dialogue by bringing climate change from a global issue to an individual perspective--sadly, my hunch is that this effort isn't going to bear any more fruit than other approaches. You're asking people to consider the future of the planet compared to unsettling the capitalist applecart, and obviously, a lot of folks simply aren't able to take that step. From the responses you're getting so far, this is likely to be a nit-pick festival, no matter what kind of data you can produce.

Maybe when the cost of a gallon water is more than the price of a gallon of gasoline, folks will remember they heard about it from you...

Sweet friend, of course you're right!

If all of us just did a little bit, in our own lives-- we could make a difference.

I believe that it actually varies, per glacier.

That sounds right ...

Also here is some interesting historical info about Arctic sea ice :

wattsupwiththat...

Cache of historical Arctic sea ice maps discovered
Arctic Sea ice data collected by DMI 1893-1961

And here is info about global warming stalling :

weaselzippers.us

Well, I've bookmarked the 1st link, to read it more carefully!

As to the second link-- I only hope that it has paused! But, I can't really help but wonder who this fellow is.

As I said above, I don't care what is causing it, but I'm willing to do my part to mitigate the effects.

Thanks, BF. Glad you came by!

Here is another article about how warming is occuring:

Another Month, another...

I only hope that it has paused!

You can see it for yourself on the graph from NOAA that you posted above .

The graph shows an increase in temp, although slight, for the past 3 years... Maybe, we'll have to wait and see.

The graph shows an increase in temp, although slight, for the past 3 years

Well ... 1st of all it is only a 2 year difference . Secondly & more important is to look at the moving average rather than the individual years . That has been at a plateau for at least 16 years .

I agree do your part in trying to be a good steward of the planet.

Sometimes it seems like you're getting rid of all the dandelions in your yard while your neighbor loves his. LOL

Boy, thats the truth!

Blow the graph up, Robert. If you click on it, it will show it as a picture, and you can blow it up further. Once you do, you can see more details.

I agree about "panic". But, it is never too late for each of us to begin to do the little things that add up to make a difference.

No, I'm saying if you blow it up bigger and LOOK at the flat part, you'll notice a slight rise in the last 3 years of the graph. I honestly don't know, nor do you, if it is part of a larger trend, or just a slowing down...

I'm not telling you to do anything that will inconvenience you, Robert. I'm just saying, if you can keep the lid on the trash can, when it rains, water doesn't get in the trash with all the garbage. Even if your garbage can doesn't leak, garbage trucks do. There are all kinds of little things that add up, that don't mean much to us, really.

I don't blame you for not freezing in winter. I don't freeze, either-- I can't afford to be sick. Let's hope that global warming has a positive side, as you so well state.

Sounds like a good plan!

Gene,

Why are you talking about Ozone? It doesn't affect global warming. It protects us from UVA and UVB.

AndStyrofoam is one of the worst stuff for landfills and should be done away with.

Great article Dowser. I think taking care of earth should be our primary concern. The fight about AGW or global warming will go on for years, but there are small things that each of us can do to help us live a better life on this planet now and leave a better one generations to come.

Thanks, Perrie!

It doesn't take much, for all of us to really do some things that will help. And it saves us money, too.

Uh... I'm not being nasty, but I don't think it works that way.

Hey, maybe it does! It's been 40 years since I last studied Weather and Climate!

Okey dokey! It's been a long time since I studied climates...

Gene,

First, the ozone "hole" is the smallest it has been since it was first measured in the North Pole, but it has grown in Antarctica. That is because of good control of CFC's. But the ozone layer does not protect the earth against warming. It stops UVA and UVB, which is the major cause of skin cancers and the death of plankton, which is the food for all life in the ocean.

And yes while the EPA cares about CFC's for this reason, and refrigerants do have a major affect on the Ozone layer, it doesn't cause global warming.

On the other hand ground ozone does affect temperature, but CFC's don't cause that. Human activity only in the summer months does that and that is the strange smell you get after a light rain in the summer.

Here is an interesting article from the EPA about good ozone v bad ozone:

epa

I don't have access to my earth science material online, but I think that this article explains it well and since you took the EPA course, you will trust it more than if it came from me.

Usually, the way that Mother Earth heals herself is to scrap what's there and start over... I'm thinking of the Great Extinctions of the past.

I'm not so sure I'm ready to be extinct. But then, it sure would take care of a lot of problems...

Gene,

I know you didn't read the link. But whatever.

But at least read what I wrote. I didn't say that CFC's only came from Freon. But Freon is one of the top 10. And you keep repeating that UV rays affect the worlds temp, when they don't. This is science fact. I could provide more links, but I can see that you are not interested.

BTW Gene, I am not talking out of my butt here. I taught earth science for over 20 years.

Marsha,

You are right. There comes a breaking point where the earth can't heal and an extinction does follow. Sadly, it would not only take us, but most of the other earth's animals. We are a destructive species who are blind to our own actions and live for instant gratification.

Usually, the way that Mother Earth heals herself is to scrap what's there and start over...

We do seem determined to prove that Malthus was right...

Swammi,

There is a poem I offer up often about this subject. I will do so now:

Sara Teasdale (August 8, 1884 January 29, 1933 / Missouri / United States)

Beautiful poem...

Have either of you ever read Will Cuppy's The Plesiosaur? Funny! I have the story... Can't find it on line, but here is a good quote:

During the Cretaceous Period many of the inland seas dried up, leaving the Plesiosaurs stranded without any fish. Just about that time Mother Nature scrapped the whole Age of Reptiles and called for a new deal. And you can see what she got. [Footnote: Here we see the working of another Law of Nature: No water, no fish.]

It is one chapter of his book, "How to Become Extinct".

Very apropos, PH... I first read that when I was quite young, when Ray Bradbury used it in one of the short stories collected in "The Martian Chronicles".

While I don't think that (short of nuclear war) humanity has the capacity to really 'do in' the planet & most of it's life, we certainly are capable of screwing things up so badly that we can't maintain the pollution-spewing technological civilization we depend on to support all our billions of people. As I've noted before, the central problem is pretty simple: too many people, not enough planet. If/when we do enough damage to collapse our own techno-complexity and about 2/3 or more of the population dies off from starvation, pollution and disease, the Earth will indeed recover & go on. Humans may be a 'self-limiting' problem as far as the planet is concerned...

Dear Swamijim, I do. At the rate we are polluting our drinking water, we're all going to be hurting for certain.

Dowser ,

The title of your article is not about the main concern in your comments .

Well, shoot.

As if I have anything to do with the comments that others are making...

My main concern, and always has been and always will be, is the amount of clean, fresh water available for our use. From what I'm reading, that, too is an issue.

I'm not talking about other's comments . I'm talking about yours . If you wanted to write about water pollution then put that in the title .

I am going to ask you, nicely, PLEASE go away.

Groundwater Pollution/Climate Change/Melting of the Ice are all related to amount, quality, and quantity of water available for our use.

I am going to ask you, nicely, PLEASE go away.

In that case take my name off your title .

You raised the stink, you get the credit.

Just so we're clear : You :
1] disagreed with what I said
2] kicked me out of your article
3] described my polite disagreement as "raising a stink "
4] put my name in your title

I'm calling Bullshit . If you can't explain your position then stop with the bullshit tactics . If you really want me gone , remove my name from your title .

I didn't kick you out-- I politely asked you to leave. There IS a big a difference.

Call BS, Petey. Call a moderator and have it moderated, please. Or I will. If a moderator tells me to remove your name, I will. And gladly.

So ... clearly you don't want me gone . Here is my POV on what you has happened . You are playing a slimy slippery game . You claim this issue is about climate change when it is really about water quality .

If you can show a direct connection between the 2 then do so . But in either case I'm gone .

Can you not see that they are related? It is about water quantity, and water quality, and losing the storage of 68% of our fresh water storage.

I'm not trying to be mean to you, in any way. But, for heaven's sake, I changed the title, as you wished.

Dowser, I agree with all your efforts mentioned to protect groundwater and especially like this one:

Every "thing" that goes on the ground, or in the ground, is going to end up in the groundwater-- and the groundwater feeds the surface water.

Pretty simple logic. I sure hope that filtering will get all of Japan's radioactive particles in their ground water aquifers.

It was a good try, D, but you never had a chance. PC doesn't acknowlege climate change, no matter how you approach it. The 'title change' he really wanted would be to eliminate the words 'climate change', then remove all suggestion of it from the article, and request a mod to delete any comment that raises the issue. Being 'reasonable' simply wasn't a productive strategy in this case...

Yep.

Well, I tried.

We all hope that, for sure! I feel so sorry for them!

You know what, Marsha.. why don't you try this.

Do the article over again, and just stick to the issue in the title. Then the message won't get lost in maylay.

I sure do too, Dowser. The effects last for generations as we know. What a horrific situation.

Both the usage AND the pollution potential, are related to populations in an area. Higher populations. More usage. More wells. More farms. More irrigation. More pesticides, and other human and human related contaminations. Of course we all benefit from California crops. So we use that water too, even if we live in New York. Depleting the resource called water. And we pollute through our desire to eat. And in our selfish desire to breath, we pollute.

Robert, yes, you are right. But we pollute not only for our desire to eat, but through our carelessness, and in the course of our activities, and where many companies don't care if they pollute. Many of us do not know what we can do to reduce the amount of pollution, and don't understand the mechanics of pollution and groundwater. I honestly don't know of how we pollute in our selfish desire to breathe. That's a new one on me! Help me, please, on that one!

Here is a good article that may explain my thinking: Effects of Climate Change on Our Groundwater Supplies.

Yes, it is. I feel for those who don't have water to drink that is safe.

Dowser,

You have been a good sport on this article. Some of these arguments are just because people don't want to face the facts. Even if we remove climate change from the equation, we do much to damage our water supplies.

Robert, some real facts about where our water goes.

California does NOT get it's water from NY. In fact, NY, which is mostly an agricultural state, get's it's water from a series of very large reservoirs. They are highly protected by the state, to try and prevent contamination. Long Island does not get it's water from these reservoirs. We get well water, which has been contaminated from industry on Long Island. Dowser knows this as a fact, since she actually worked here on LI.

California takes it's water from diversions of Colorado River.

Yes we need to eat and drink and breath. And because of that, that should be priority number one. Being short sighted for the sake of industry and waste, is just self destructive.

Gene,

Sure you can. It just costs industry money. But there is also new businesses that come out of our reduction of waste. Like recycled products, that do away with landfills. Even human waste can be reduced into something that is usable. It is actually usable as fertilizer, which is more safe than the chemical ones that we are using now. Each thing takes a little bit more care, but it is all doable.

As a Indian, you should know that the earth is priority one. It is the giver of life. If we don't do these things, we will be as extinct as the dinosaurs, the only difference is that they didn't do it to themselves. No other animal on this planet is as destructive as us, and we do it because we are lazy and want instant gratification.

Hal,

To kill grubs in a safe way, in the early spring apply dormant oil. It clogs their skin so they can't breath and they die, but it isn't harmful to other life.

Then your dogs can poop and pee till the cows come home.

Of course you could do yourself a favor and take the dogs out for a walk ( or are they walking you?)and just collect the poop. Urine is not dangerous to the environment. You can actually drink it, although I doubt most of us want to.

Great idea! In fact, people who sail long distances actually do bring along water purifiers for that reason!

Sorry that I've not been around for this, er, fascinating discussion, but I was at work, and IE and NT don't get along at work... ARGHH! It's been killing me! All day!

We've got three dogs, two of which are fortunately smaller ones, the other one poops like an elephant. So, occasionally, we go out and pick it all up and throw it in the trash, destined for a landfill. Which is likely awful, but I don't know what else to do with it.

I'm all done in, from work. I've been downloading Best Management Practices for the various commercial properties in our Wellhead Protection Area-- to be made into fact sheets to give to managers and owners. We can all do our part, I guess...

OK Hal,

Just for you, natural grub killer.

Home Remedies

To make your own grub killer you may need nothing more than a few items you already have around the house. According to the Home and Environment Resource Center, you can make an alternative grub control mixture with 1 cup each of mouthwash, liquid dish soap and water. Add 2 cups of lemon juice and pour the mixture into a spray bottle then spritz it all over your yard to deter grubs. To increase the potency of this treatment, pour 1 cup of boiling water over a teaspoon of chewing tobacco. Strain the mixture and add it to the mouthwash solution before spraying it over your lawn. The nicotine in chewing tobacco is highly effective as an insecticide.

homeguides.sfgate

Look. The most prolific aquifers of the US are along our coastlines. IF the glaciers and ice caps continue to melt at the rate they are going right now, and yes, that is IF, then sea level is going to rise. When sea level rises, it will cover a lot of the coastal areas, including the interior coastal areas along the MIssissippi River valley, rendering them useless as a source of supply for drinking water.

Forgive me my one-minded-ness about the importance of a clean, safe, reliable water supply. It's only what I've done for 34 years. So, when I see glaciers melting, I immediately think of the loss of the fresh water stored in them. I immediately think of the contamination by salt water, of the prolific and beautiful aquifers along the coasts and the MIssissippi River. I hope that we won't be affected here, in the Ohio River Valley, but then, we likely will be, because all those people that live on the coast have to go somewhere...

So, Robert, if you wish to discuss glaciers and ice caps melting, or ground water supplies, or what little things we can do to help, please let's discuss that. Otherwise, it is time to move along.

I changed the title, notice? I satisfied Petey, now what will it take to satisfy you?

Thank you for sticking to subject, and please quit being so picky. Pollution and glaciers are related, through ground water. I've been working on an illustration to show how, but haven't finished it yet. It takes time, and I'm not an artist.

Meanwhile, what, where, and how much waterdo we use from glaciers, currently, in the US? Or from glaciers anywhere? From the "available fresh water" standpoint, are we using glacial melt for fresh water in the US?

Currently, nowhere that I know of in the US goes up to a glacier and hacks a chunk off to melt for a water supply, although, since the 1970s, corralling icebergs, (chunks of glacial ice), and steering them down to countries has been done frequently and is still being done in some of the Mideast and southern Mediterranean countries that have access to a port. It's a whole lot cheaper than desalinization.

However, many cities and towns in the US rely on glacial meltwater, which feeds the surface water, that is used as a source of supply. To figure out where and who, you have to look at each individual watershed and trace it's origin. The base information is available on the USGS, but I've had a lot of trouble finding the info that I want, lately. They've redone their website and all my old links are gone.

Many many many cities use glacial outwash sand and gravel aquifers as a source of supply, in the US. The glacial outwash usually has limited recharge, as the aquifers are encased in till, but the water is pretty dang good, if you can find it. Tracing it and locating it is difficult, at best. There is usually no indication at the surface that there is a buried bedrock valley, and one must rely on well logs and records to determine where the outwash valleys may be located.

The glacial outwash sand and gravel units are the remnants of the last period of glaciation, you know, about 10,000 years ago. While prolific or good producers, the pumping rates from these aquifers must be balanced with the available recharge to them, or they go dry. Meaning: just because you can pump boocoo millions of gallons per day from some of them, doesn't mean that you should, because it is unsustainable.

Why this is a big deal-- The glaciers and ice caps are like money in the bank. We hope we don't have to use it, but if we do, it sure is nice to have.

Gunny, no we can't fix it all, but we can fix what we can, and all of us can do our part toward that solution.

For example, not using a lot of pesticides. Hey, you don't spend money on what you may not really need. You only use them when you absolutely have to!

Geologically speaking, we call water that has melted from a glacier, glacial meltwater. Up close to the glacier, it is usually cloudy, because it has dissolved rock chips, silt-sized particles, in suspension. A glacier is a glacier because it accumulates enough snow to move or flow downhill from it's own weight. Here is a picture of glacial meltwater that is cloudy:

Not that you're dying to try this, but I've done it, and it is neat. To see how a glacier moves, take an ice cube, and wrap it in part of a towel. Using your hands to put as much pressure from your hands on both sides of the cube, try to twist the cube. When it moves, it makes sort of a squeaky snow sound, but when you unwrap it, your ice cube is an ice cube in two directions... Pretty neat!

Spring meltwater is different. Glaciers melt continuously from friction of the heavy weight of the ice, scrunching along the bottom of the ground. Rise in temperatures can also cause glaciers to melt, i.e. normal spring melt...

Paraquat, that's what got you, dear friend. A VERY bad herbicide that has been banned for use for years... I'm so sorry.

I know, it is hard to be optimistic, especially when you've been burned, time and again. You're doing all the right things, dear friend, and I love you, even if you would do all the wrong things. From one soul to another, thank you.

All of us can do a little, and it will help. We may not solve everything, but we can make a start, no matter how small...

I should really write a rebuttal article to this one . Basically the idea that CO2 emissions are responsible for "climate change" is unproven and even unlikely .

Please, go for it! I would enjoy reading it!

It will take a while to get it down in bytes ... I'll be back .

OK , I'm back :

thenewstalkers

Thanks for the link!

Geez ... now I'm going to need to link back here !

Nah, don't worry about it! Unless you just want to!