Mt Whitney Webcam
Mt Williamson Webcam
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 155 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Whitney Fan #34034 11/12/13 12:29 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Just for contrast, Cardwell in Queensland gets close to seven feet of rain annually, yet is under Stage 1 water restrictions. Any ventures as to why?


Verum audaces non gerunt indusia alba. - Ipsi dixit MCMLXXII
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
wagga #34037 11/12/13 10:08 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Originally Posted By: wagga
Just for contrast, Cardwell in Queensland gets close to seven feet of rain annually, yet is under Stage 1 water restrictions. Any ventures as to why?


Care to share with us why?

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
wagga #34043 11/12/13 06:57 PM
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
Offline
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
Where's the fire?


Wherever you go, there you are.
SPOTMe!
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
wagga #34045 11/12/13 08:16 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: wagga
Just for contrast, Cardwell in Queensland gets close to seven feet of rain annually, yet is under Stage 1 water restrictions. Any ventures as to why?

Terrain is 2,500 ft coastal mountains with 2 meters of annual precip - all they need is a dam and small reservoir for the 1,250 residents. They got hit by a cyclone in 2011 that may have wiped out water treatment plants.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34047 11/13/13 12:52 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: SierraNevada

all they need is a dam and small reservoir for the 1,250 residents.

Therein lies the rub.

I'll be chatting with an expert in this field in the next day or two...


Verum audaces non gerunt indusia alba. - Ipsi dixit MCMLXXII
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
wagga #34048 11/13/13 08:19 AM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
What's the rub? There would be no civilization as we know it without stored water. Build the dam offstream to minimize environmental impacts if that's the "rub", assuming there's a good site for the reservoir.

Just wondering, how'd you get involved in a water project way down under, Wagga?

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34829 01/06/14 06:00 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
An article in the NYT today about the Colorado River and its ability to provide water to the Southwest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/us/col...dit_th_20140106

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
wagga #34863 01/08/14 11:55 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Originally Posted By: wagga
Just for contrast, Cardwell in Queensland gets close to seven feet of rain annually, yet is under Stage 1 water restrictions. Any ventures as to why?


Undoubtedly destroyed infrastructure.

But this represents an opportunity.

They could go the traditional route of building new large capture infrastructure, but that exposes them to another round of exposure to destruction, the time involved in design and building, and the associated water treatment infrastructure. A lot of time, and a lot of money.

Or, the could use permiculture principles: Harvest the rainwater in cisterns, which could be operational, uh, tomorrow. Use it to refill the groundwater, and pump it back up through wells....no treatment needed. Use Berms and Basins, Terraces, Infiltration Basins, Imprinting, Diversion Swales and Check Dams---to maximize rainwater harvesting in the natural environment, all to bring the water table up.

Undoubtedly, the situation on the ground may be considerably more complex: contaminated groundwater, or such. But the people on the Cassowary Coast are resourceful, and it seems to me open to new approaches.

However, building large infrastructure, which is the most expensive way imaginable, producing water that is very pure, but used (typically) only 2% for drinking, is very wasteful.

At any rate, that rainfall total is a hell of a resource which is being lost.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Ken #34864 01/08/14 10:58 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: Ken
However, building large infrastructure, which is the most expensive way imaginable, producing water that is very pure, but used (typically) only 2% for drinking, is very wasteful.

At any rate, that rainfall total is a hell of a resource which is being lost.

Unlicensed engineering advice from across the planet. Just what they need.

Ked is basically advocating a dam and reservoir, but just calling them other names like "berm and basin, diversion swales and check dams" Whatever you want to call a dam and reservoir, these should not be built on the cheap for public safety reasons. Dams are often the most economical solution, which is why we have tens of thousands of them in the US alone, and more built somewhere in the world every day.

With 7 feet of annual precip, it seems odd that they would need more groundwater. Relying on a groundwater system has it's own set of issues such as energy costs for pumps, chemical treatment, and the potential for ocean saltwater intrusion into the groundwater since this is right on the coast. This problem needs to be assessed by an expert, not an armchair engineer with an agenda.

Last edited by SierraNevada; 01/08/14 11:01 PM.
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34865 01/08/14 11:38 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
Wagga needs to followup on this and tell us more of the story. It definitely sounds interesting.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34866 01/09/14 12:45 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
You have to laugh at engineers, who only know one way of doing things: the way that maximizes their pocketbooks.

Particularly when they say that something is the same as something that it is not, and is not a traditional engineering project. Of course, the fact that they have no training, experience, nor expertise in something, doesn't stop them from having an opinion. Oops, and "expert" opinion.

You can tell they are experts, because they are willing to put their names to their opinions, so you can actually check their credentials and licensing (if any).


Originally Posted By: SierraNevada
Originally Posted By: Ken
However, building large infrastructure, which is the most expensive way imaginable, producing water that is very pure, but used (typically) only 2% for drinking, is very wasteful.

At any rate, that rainfall total is a hell of a resource which is being lost.

Unlicensed engineering advice from across the planet. Just what they need.

Ked is basically advocating a dam and reservoir, but just calling them other names like "berm and basin, diversion swales and check dams" Whatever you want to call a dam and reservoir, these should not be built on the cheap for public safety reasons. Dams are often the most economical solution, which is why we have tens of thousands of them in the US alone, and more built somewhere in the world every day.

With 7 feet of annual precip, it seems odd that they would need more groundwater. Relying on a groundwater system has it's own set of issues such as energy costs for pumps, chemical treatment, and the potential for ocean saltwater intrusion into the groundwater since this is right on the coast. This problem needs to be assessed by an expert, not an armchair engineer with an agenda.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Ken #34867 01/09/14 07:36 AM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: Ken
You have to laugh at engineers, who only know one way of doing things: the way that maximizes their pocketbooks.

Particularly when they say that something is the same as something that it is not, and is not a traditional engineering project. Of course, the fact that they have no training, experience, nor expertise in something, doesn't stop them from having an opinion. Oops, and "expert" opinion.

You can tell they are experts, because they are willing to put their names to their opinions, so you can actually check their credentials and licensing (if any).

Yeah, those goofy dumb engineers, making all the money when they design billion dollar water projects, bridges, buildings, the computer you are typing on, and the chair you are sitting on. These should all be designed by retired doctors willing to experiment with public safety.

Coincidentally, the seminal event that started registration of engineers was the St. Francis dam failure of 1928, killing 450 people in southern California. It became obvious that self-taught engineers could be a menace to society.

As for new ideas, Ken, read this thread and the one you started on solar energy. You'll see I'm fully supportive of new and progressive ideas and I've incorporated new thinking throughout my career. But I feel a need to speak up when someone makes unrealistic claims about generally good ideas. People need to understand the limits of those good ideas, not be misled by someone trying to force them as the best solution for every problem, even on the other side of the world without knowing any details.

I almost forgot to mention, Ken has been a strong advocate trying to prove that solar powered toilets can't work at Outpost Camp or Trail Camp, even though they work fine in Colorado at a higher elevation. He seems to have been involved in the process of removing the old toilets and implementing wag bags without completing the environmental process, which is why the NFS can't do anything legal to enforce this "great new idea" of wag bags.

Advocating new ideas in a field where you have no formal training is one thing, but when you insult the entire profession and then try to lecture them, that's another thing. Ken, if you want to practice engineering, get an engineering degree from an accredited university, work under a licensed engineer for at least 2 years, get 3 licensed engineers to sign your application, and then pass 16 hours of exams. You probably want to get a Master's degree as well. If you want to be Geotechnical or Structural Engineer, you need 4 more years of experience, more signatures, followed by even more difficult exams. If you want to lecture engineers, get a PhD and find a university to hire you.

As the saying goes, "A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing." Combine that with unbridled hubris, mix in public safety, and you're really asking for trouble.

Last edited by SierraNevada; 01/09/14 09:58 AM.
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34871 01/09/14 11:55 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
I agree, those who pretend to be engineers on the internet, are dangerous people.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Ken #34873 01/09/14 03:17 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
I think the next post should be from wagga, to put this back on the right track.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Steve C #34874 01/09/14 04:45 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: Steve C
I think the next post should be from wagga, to put this back on the right track.

Steve, while we're waiting for Wagga, can you please vouch for me by confirming (confidentially) that I'm a licensed Civil, Structural, and Geotechnical engineer. My licenses can all be looked up in one search on the CA Board of Professional Engineers website at:

http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllqryna$lcev2.startup?p_qte_code=ENG&p_qte_pgm_code=7500

My General Contractors license can be looked up at the State Contractor's Board (Look up under Business using Last Name/First Name) at:

https://www2.cslb.ca.gov/OnlineServices/CheckLicenseII/CheckLicense.aspx

There's nothing unusual about wanting to remain anonymous to the general public on internet forums. That's why there's set up that way with Private Messaging and Moderators. Who knows, someone pretending to be an engineer might use my license.

Thanks. Maybe you should look up Ken's MD License while you're at it. thanks

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
SierraNevada #34878 01/09/14 08:26 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Bee Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Originally Posted By: SierraNevada


Thanks. Maybe you should look up Ken's MD License while you're at it. thanks


File this under the "It's a Small World" Catagory: One of my best friends was Ken's professor in Med School, so I can vouch for his credentials cool


The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Bee #34879 01/09/14 09:22 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Quote:
There's nothing unusual about wanting to remain anonymous to the general public on internet forums. That's why there's set up that way with Private Messaging and Moderators. Who knows, someone pretending to be an engineer might use my license.


It is EXCEEDINGLY unusual to post on an internet forum anonymously, and expect to claim credentials as any kind of expert. It is not possible to confirm credentials, and just as importantly, it is not possible to ascertain conflicts of interest. For example, it would tremendously bias anyone's opinion of what you say, if you did contract work on water structures for the State of Ca. But there is no way to know.

you also have a tendency to simply make pronouncements as obvious and established fact, as opposed to citing links supporting your position. Surely your profession has robust literature??

In my profession, I'm required, anytime I get up in front of an audience, to state any conflicts of interest and financial interests. It's that important.

Over on Supertopo, people solicit Ed Hartouni's opinion on the spread of nuclear fallout from Japan (essentially none). A lot of people have opinions, but he is an expert, and does not hide his identity.

You appear to take the position that no one who is not a licensed engineer could possibly know anything about water, and that engineering solutions are the only solutions, and that anyone else is a doofus.

I could list the almost infinite mistakes and disasters that licensed engineers have caused, but that's true of any occupation. the whole global warming thing is because of things designed and built by engineers, where they didn't consider the consequences. In fact, a broad perspective is much much better.

Here in Los Angeles, we have a different perspective than you appear to have:

Quote:
The City of Los Angeles

The City of Los Angeles’ Water Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) started with a simple yet ambitious vision: City Departments working with the community to manage water resources holistically. This innovative approach led the City down a seven-year path toward a plan for Los Angeles’ future. The IRP integrates supply, conservation, recycling and runoff management with wastewater facilities planning through a regional watershed approach, enlisting the public in the planning and design development process.

Departing from traditional single-purpose planning efforts, the IRP resulted in greater efficiency in water resource management and multiple citywide benefits, including energy and cost savings, reduced dependence on imported water, reusing stormwater and conserving drinking water.

Rainwater harvesting was foundational, identifying local solutions as pillars for sustainability—resulting in a downspout program that will be expanded citywide.

Transforming the City’s water footprint is the Elmer Avenue green street project that includes an infiltration gallery that captures runoff and recharges it underground. Neighbors embrace the bioswales with drought-tolerant native plants and permeable surfaces that adorn this appealing greenspace.

The South Los Angeles Wetlands Park will convert an asphalt/concrete rail yard into a 4.5-acre stormwater treatment wetland habitat that captures and treats pollutants and also will include a pocket park—another win-win for the community.

The IRP also produced a far-reaching Low Impact Development ordinance and a 20% reduction in water use due to conservation incentives and education.

Los Angeles’ water consumption today is the same as it was 30 years ago despite one million more users.

As implementation continues, the City keeps stakeholders engaged and involved—putting Los Angeles on the path to becoming the greenest and cleanest big City in America while ensuring a waterwise and sustainable future.


As a member of the Steering Committe of the IRP, I was proud when we were awarded the United States Water Prize 2012 for what we've accomplished.

http://www.uswateralliance.org/u-s-water-prize/2011-prize-winners/

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Bee #34880 01/09/14 10:13 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: Bee
Originally Posted By: SierraNevada


Thanks. Maybe you should look up Ken's MD License while you're at it. thanks


File this under the "It's a Small World" Catagory: One of my best friends was Ken's professor in Med School, so I can vouch for his credentials cool

Bee, I was being facetious. This is ridiculous. I don't actually question that Ken is medical doctor.

I sent you a PM with my name to look up my engineering registrations. It's actually quite unusual to have 3 engineering licenses. Steve already has my personal info and he can see from my LinkedIn site where I work and who I work with professionally. Please use my name in the links above and get Ken off my back with his nonsense. If he or anybody else wants to put personal info out there, fine, not everybody does.

Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Ken #34881 01/09/14 10:47 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted By: Ken
It is EXCEEDINGLY unusual to post on an internet forum anonymously, and expect to claim credentials as any kind of expert. It is not possible to confirm credentials, and just as importantly, it is not possible to ascertain conflicts of interest. For example, it would tremendously bias anyone's opinion of what you say, if you did contract work on water structures for the State of Ca. But there is no way to know.

This is exactly why people don't want to put personal info out there. There is nothing I've written that would indicate a conflict of interest, that's nuts, but someone like you might start causing trouble for people.

Originally Posted By: Ken
you also have a tendency to simply make pronouncements as obvious and established fact, as opposed to citing links supporting your position. Surely your profession has robust literature??

It's actually quite the opposite, Ken. You make wild claims about being able to eliminate water imports to southern Cal. I provide graphs showing there just ain't enough water to do that. You claim that solar toilets can't possibly work at 12,000 ft on Whitney, I provide engineering reports from NPS where they're working fine at 12,000+ ft elevation on Long's Peak in Colorado. Etc etc.

Originally Posted By: Ken

In my profession, I'm required, anytime I get up in front of an audience, to state any conflicts of interest and financial interests. It's that important.

You might think that's special, but it's basic professional ethics in any field (except maybe politics).

Originally Posted By: Ken

Over on Supertopo, people solicit Ed Hartouni's opinion on the spread of nuclear fallout from Japan (essentially none). A lot of people have opinions, but he is an expert, and does not hide his identity.

That's his choice. I'm not here to express professional opinion, I'm just trying to correct your misguided engineering that you profess. People can judge for themselves.

Originally Posted By: Ken

You appear to take the position that no one who is not a licensed engineer could possibly know anything about water, and that engineering solutions are the only solutions, and that anyone else is a doofus.

You seem to have some serious issues to deal with regarding engineers. I'm curious what tramatic event started this for you, but not really. There's probably a 12-step program for you somewhere. Low blow edited out. But your prejudice against engineers is glaring and insulting.

Originally Posted By: Ken

I could list the almost infinite mistakes and disasters that licensed engineers have caused, but that's true of any occupation. the whole global warming thing is because of things designed and built by engineers, where they didn't consider the consequences. In fact, a broad perspective is much much better.

I couldn't begin to list the thousands of people who die each year from medical mistakes.

Originally Posted By: Ken

As a member of the Steering Committe of the IRP, I was proud when we were awarded the United States Water Prize 2012 for what we've accomplished.

http://www.uswateralliance.org/u-s-water-prize/2011-prize-winners/

Thank you for sharing. You should be proud of that accomplishment, and I've agreed with these basic concepts and ideas over and over, if you take the time to actually read what I'm writing. But you go way too far with these ideas thinking they can replace our current system entirely. When I point it out, you go on the attack attack attack. That's why I do not trust you and that's why I prefer to remain anonymous.

Last edited by SierraNevada; 01/10/14 07:26 AM.
Re: Dr. Ken Murray on LA and water
Ken #34882 01/09/14 10:51 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
Ken, I can vouch for Sierra Nevada's credentials -- I have even seen his employment history -- independently of anything he's provided. If he doesn't want to reveal his ID publicly, that's his business. MOST people in the past have not revealed theirs, and often for their own safety reasons.

And I can vouch for most of what he has written. There are no glowing and fantastic remedies for our state's water shortages, and it will only get worse as time goes on. (In a university course that I recall, a professor pointed out that most of the country's dams will be full of silt and gravel in several hundred years! We'll be gone, but not our offspring.)

I think SN is only pointing out that every good idea also has potential problems. And it is necessary for the planners and builders to try to look at all the angles before proceeding on a plan.

I really think you and SN are on the same program. People pointing out negatives in any issue are not automatically the enemy.

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4
(Release build 20200307)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.059s Queries: 54 (0.051s) Memory: 0.7024 MB (Peak: 0.8580 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 17:38:41 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS