Effects of U.S.-controlled Canada on Western river projects?

[Workable Goblin]

Given that Canadian resistance to "exporting" water has been a significant factor in shooting down many ambitious water diversion projects such as GRAND and NAWAPA, I was wondering what effect (what is now) Canada being an accepted part of the United States instead of an independent country might have on the feasibility of these types of project. While it would clearly weaken one obstacle (I can't see, say, what is now British Columbia being that much more eager to ship water south than Canada, but by itself it would have a lot less ability to stop the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation from doing whatever they feel like), I feel that the economic and environmental factors that led to the demise of these proposals--the increasingly marginal value of additional irrigation water and increasing recognition of the environmental damage caused by these projects--would still operate to keep them from being built in full (I mean, the Bureau didn't manage to get the Klamath Diversion done, and that didn't even cross state lines...). Still, it seems possible that you might have some preliminary or auxiliary works built.

Thoughts? Ideas? Note that I deliberately want to ignore the wider effects of Canada being part of the United States presumably for a very long time by the 1950s, whether on U.S. politics as a whole or on the globe. I'm sure that barring global thermonuclear war, inhabitants of the dry west will want to arrange for more water to get there, and the wet regions to the north will be an attractive source once the technology is there, so there will likely be some kind of analogous proposal to NAWAPA or GRAND even if there were no World Wars, the Civil War took place ten years earlier and led to Southern independence, or what have you.

 

[Llewwyy]

What about the Garrison diversion project? It was to be built over a 100 year time span, the Corps of Engineers thinks big. The project was to divert water from the Mississippi system to the Red river system in the Dakotas.

 

[Canuck Wingnut]

I'll just point out that any project to divert significant quantities of water from the 49th parallel down to the desert southwest would have to be an absolutely massive engineering project, taking significant periods of time and money and with serious risks if your calculations prove to be in error. Given OTL's history, I don't know of any proposal that really grappled with financing such a project, getting local approvals, and all of the other issues such a plan would need to get past in order to actually start construction. Such a project probably relies on government funding- I can't find any profit-oriented water diversion program on a remotely comparable scale.

As an example, NAWAPA was estimated to cost as much as the entire US Interstate Highway System, and that's after they factored in cost savings from using Nukes as entrenching tools. Financial and practical engineering objections seem to have been enough to stop the project on their own, whatever the attitude of the alt-North American government to right-of-way permissions.
OTOH I would absolutely read a timeline where the US government starts a 1950s megaproject by detonating a bunch of nuclear devices at the source of water they're intending to supply to cities- though it might be a bit grim for some.

(As an aside, the only GRAND water project I was able to find is aimed at the Great Lakes and doesn't seem to have any connections to the South-West, so I can't see it being implemented without a fresh water crisis in the Great Lakes drainage basin.)

 

[The Tai-Pan]

(As an aside, the only GRAND water project I was able to find is aimed at the Great Lakes and doesn't seem to have any connections to the South-West, so I can't see it being implemented without a fresh water crisis in the Great Lakes drainage basin.)

Now that is a wild plan.

 

[Migrant_Coconut]

Cascadia sometimes has water shortages of its own (case in point, last July), so pumping its reserves to LA and Phoenix sounds like a good way for both regions to run out.

 

[Workable Goblin]

Cascadia sometimes has water shortages of its own (case in point, last July), so pumping its reserves to LA and Phoenix sounds like a good way for both regions to run out.

Usually the idea was to pump from even farther north, i.e. Alaska, the Yukon, the lower reaches of the Red River, and so on. Obviously this would also be bad for those areas, but in '50s thinking no one lives there, so who cares?

I'll just point out that any project to divert significant quantities of water from the 49th parallel down to the desert southwest would have to be an absolutely massive engineering project, taking significant periods of time and money and with serious risks if your calculations prove to be in error. Given OTL's history, I don't know of any proposal that really grappled with financing such a project, getting local approvals, and all of the other issues such a plan would need to get past in order to actually start construction. Such a project probably relies on government funding- I can't find any profit-oriented water diversion program on a remotely comparable scale.

Of course it does--this is going to be Corps and Bureau of Reclamation all the way, not a dime of private money involved.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

Opposition to the NAWAPA wasn't just from Canada. I think environmentalists would be opposed either way.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

Given the royal navy and other factors making US ruled canada ah unlikely as an AH concept you could justify anything imo. Diverting all of Canada's lakes/rivers south to refill lake lahontan? restoring the ice age lakes? Go hog wild. Don't stick with "economically feasible."

 

[Draconis]

One factor that doesn't get addressed sufficiently about these massive water diversion projects from OTL Canada's Western provinces and territories or an ATL American prairies is the huge electric power requirements that would be needed. This doesn't apply as heavily to the GRAND project but GRAND wouldn't benefit the U.S. Southwest.

Regardless of whose country the land is in it doesn't change the geography. Moving water from Canada's West to the American Southwest involves pumping water up hill for most of the distance. For example Lake Winnipeg, the source for the diversion lies about 700 feet above sea level. The elevations between it and California range from a few thousand feet in the High Plains to many thousands of feet in the Continental Divide. This terrain has to be crossed.

To supply the Gigawatts required to pump water uphill and through pipelines for a couple of thousand miles will require a massive increase in electricity generation. And whatever the type of power stations selected they must be built. That would be hugely expensive in itself.

So, why not build these power stations in Southern California and use them to power desalinization plants instead? What ever project is chosen new power plants must be built anyway. Using them to power a localized massive desalinization program eliminates the need to build canals, dams and pipelines. Saving a huge expense and avoiding the environmental damage and the well justified political objections.

Other positive effects. The water currently being diverted to Southern California from the Colorado River and other sources could, if the desalinization plants provide enough water for SoCal, be rediverted for agricultural and domestic use in Eastern California and Arizona.

Also having more electricity generation capacity in California would mean no more rolling blackouts as some of the power sent to the desalinization plants could be used in the local grid when necessary.

 

[Workable Goblin]

One factor that doesn't get addressed sufficiently about these massive water diversion projects from OTL Canada's Western provinces and territories or an ATL American prairies is the huge electric power requirements that would be needed. This doesn't apply as heavily to the GRAND project but GRAND wouldn't benefit the U.S. Southwest.

Regardless of whose country the land is in it doesn't change the geography. Moving water from Canada's West to the American Southwest involves pumping water up hill for most of the distance. For example Lake Winnipeg, the source for the diversion lies about 700 feet above sea level. The elevations between it and California range from a few thousand feet in the High Plains to many thousands of feet in the Continental Divide. This terrain has to be crossed.

To supply the Gigawatts required to pump water uphill and through pipelines for a couple of thousand miles will require a massive increase in electricity generation. And whatever the type of power stations selected they must be built. That would be hugely expensive in itself.

So, why not build these power stations in Southern California and use them to power desalinization plants instead? What ever project is chosen new power plants must be built anyway. Using them to power a localized massive desalinization program eliminates the need to build canals, dams and pipelines. Saving a huge expense and avoiding the environmental damage and the well justified political objections.

Other positive effects. The water currently being diverted to Southern California from the Colorado River and other sources could, if the desalinization plants provide enough water for SoCal, be rediverted for agricultural and domestic use in Eastern California and Arizona.

Also having more electricity generation capacity in California would mean no more rolling blackouts as some of the power sent to the desalinization plants could be used in the local grid when necessary.

Well, that's why NAWAPA suggested building multiple nuclear power plants to power the pumps. As for "why not build desalinization plants," remember that at the time that these schemes were being proposed in the 1950s and 1960s, desalinization was rather undeveloped and not really a very realistic alternative to pumping around freshwater. Of course, the development of desalinization could very well lead to such schemes being cancelled only partially complete.

Also, while everybody has been focusing on the Southwest, and that is sensible since it is the most water-stressed region of the United States, I never actually said that the water had to go to the Southwest. After all, the dry west encompasses a lot of land beyond the Colorado basin.