Boots wrote:Would love to have Muddy think on this one. Whatchoo think Muddy? Do we adjust the lie of the land, to aid absorption, or do we aid the lie of the land to aid bulk collection? And once collected, do surrounding areas deplete a catchment?
Well, Boots, I've tried to formulate some thoughts several times about this, but the truth is you are in a situation that I, and I would guess most people in Britain, have no experience of at all. We are in a wet country here, and the current water shortage we have in the south east is not because there is no water about, but because there is a high density of population. The 'drought' conditions we are experiencing is due to demand rather than dryness. In reality, there is no drought at all, just high consumption. But you're facing practical challenges on a daily basis that few people here would consider doing. I really don't know enough about geology or hydrology to make many meaningfull comments.
Is a large catchment more likely to evaporate and absorb than a series of small ones?
This is in no way to be considered authoritative, but I would guess that total surface area is the main factor to consider in terms of storage - not only the top surface that will affect evaporation, but the surface between water and ground, that will affect absorption. Keep these to a minimum to reduce both. So I'm guessing that a single deep collection point may be better than two shallow ones. But how absorbent the ground is will need considering, too. And maybe pressure, as well (deeper water = higher pressure). Blimey, what a poser! I guess I don't know.
But I do think that water is different to other resouces that we consume; it's
not like oil or gas reserves, or mineral deposits that we extract, because with those, once we have used them up they are gone forever. But we don't really consume water at all, we just use it - it goes in and it comes out again, whether into your washing machine, or your bath, or your body. It's amazing really - unlike food or air, we don't actually take anything out of the water, and nor do we change it in any way. We may add stuff to it (and that can be a problem, depending upon what we add and how much of it), but the actual water itself remains unchanged, and the total is undepleted.
I think the problem, in a macro-environmental way, is that the water doesn't always go to where we want it. This is to do with weather, climate and geology. If your underground aquifer is not being replenished as fast as you draw from it, then it would seem inevitable that eventually you will have to find other resources, or be forced to decamp. That, really, is the long and the short of it, but I guess there could be all sorts of politicking around that situation, as usually happens when a resource is in decline. For example, the person who draws the most from the aquifer could assume a position of power, and the small time user have little influence on how the resource is distributed. Or worse, you have someone who assumes outright control over of the whole resource.
In terms of pure geology, it would seem that many aquifers are sandwiched between layers of impervious rock, the water having got there by creeping along seams of porous rock, rather than simple having soaked through the ground from directly above. Depending upon the local rock strata, the supply to the aquifer that you have your borehole in may be remote from you.
The cycle of water seems very complicated; there seem to be two halves to it - weather and climate affect the 'top half' (where it rains), and geology affects the 'bottom half' (where it goes to afterwards). I read that water never stops moving, wherever it is, not only in terms of rivers and the sea, but following strata underground, collecting in aquifers, and then overspilling to form springs, eventually all to be sucked up again into the air by the influence of the sun, and circulate around the atmoshere. I've never really thought of this before, but I wonder just how much water there is below the surface of the ground at any moment?
I'm rambling away a little too much here, eh? And that's after I've just deleted another five paragraphs. I think, in short, Boots, I have failed to offer any constructive comments here, but it sure has been an interesting thinking about it.
Sweat goes into the atmosphere... mmm ok, so it comes out somehow.
) Better to just keep the goats running down the dam inlet whenever possible and keep all water movement down to the dam as clear as possible, I think.
)
.)