The MAGA Canal Proposal, to Solve Border Security, Increase American Wealth, Save the Environment, and Feed the World.

Proposal for Completion of Canal from California to Texas
To Contain Multiple Benefits in the Areas of:
Security for the Southern Border beyond weak existing fencing
Creation of 280,000 square miles of arable, drought-proof land, an area 6,627 x’s the size of the Simi Valley
The Creation of Trillions in Wealth
The Reduction of Transportation Costs
A Revolution in the Technology of Desalination
Common Sense Environmental Protections
Basic Engineering Overview and Sources
Historical Methods of Financing and Time Required
Political Obstacles and Possible Friends

Background:

The proposal has been sent, in rough form, to my Senator, Roger Wicker (R-MS), and by certified mail to Donald J. Trump in July of 2015, but we do not know if the proposal reached these decision makers. The idea was born from my children over Thanksgiving holidays, 2014. We have worked for years to overcome possible objections, provide additional research, and we encourage input from all concerned. We originally thought the idea was crazy, but the more we research, the more attractive the idea becomes.

We’ve found, within every 24-hour news cycle, completion of this project would eradicate many of our country’s problems. The ramifications are enormous. Please have access to a map of the southwestern USA for reference.

The Proposal:

To resolve our southern border issue in a beneficial way, we propose the building of a canal from California to Texas, slightly north of the legal border, to travel in a straight line.
Think Panama Canal x 40.

The canal would travel north of the Mexico/USA border and north of the major cities like San Diego, Yuma, Nogales, El Paso, to minimize disruption and lessen acquisition costs, and travel in straight lines, rather than following the curvature of rivers or arbitrary state lines.
The canal we propose is not merely a boon for shipping and commerce or only to provide security on our southern border. Along the way, we need places for ships to turn around for repair in case of a breakdown. This necessity creates wide bays or inlets of salt water. At these points, every 10-20 miles or so, we propose enormous salt water conversion facilities, accompanying fresh water reservoirs (similar to Sardis and Enid lakes), and accompanying fresh water canals which can extend as much as 100+ miles to the north and south. It is a modern version of the Nile River Valley.
Instead of a pure expense for a canal and as a supplement to border fencing, we found a way for the project to make the USA wealthy again.
We create an area, similar to the fertile California, Simi Valley x 6,627 in available square miles.
Arable land, which is drought-proof, can be used for farmland, residential or commercial development.
The canal would be built instead of, or within 10-100 miles of, a southern border wall/fence, providing additional security to the USA.
Beginning between San Diego and LA, using a beach-head of Camp Pendleton, a wide canal would be dug for shipping with locks, all the way to south of Odessa, TX, conveniently located close to the new Wolfcamp oil and natural gas discovery. At that point, the canal could splinter into two lanes, one to Padre island area and one to split Austin/San Antonio to the Gulf, maybe with the goal of networking refineries in Houston.

What makes a canal appealing and salable for both political parties, plus all Americans, and even the Mexican people? Let’s list the benefits by subtopics.

Security:  

~~ A canal of this size is impossible to dig underneath and any tunnel attempted would collapse under water pressure.
~~ Changing of locks to raise and lower ships and swift water flow eliminates individuals attempting to swim across.
~~ Forevermore, our southern border becomes more cost efficient and less hazardous to control at our man made choke points. We also create the ability for deployment of ne technologies in surveillance and facial recognition for our intel agencies.
~~ Shipping routes for the Mexican drug cartels are severely disrupted, saving lives in Mexico and the USA.
~~ The beach-head of Camp Pendleton, CA is coincidental but perfectly located for any threats of terrorism. Additional bases could be built at the Texas entrances to the canal.
~~ Along the length of the canal, we see many USA military bases already located close to the canal to protect this valuable shipping lane.
~~ Our resource, fresh water, could be shared with Mexico, but we will leave the negotiation to the Trump Administration.

Creation of arable land for farms, residential, and commercial development:

~~If our canal is 1400 miles long, running straight instead of following the curvature of a river, and fresh water tentacles stretch 100 miles to the north and south, we create a breadbasket of 280,000 square miles of drought-proof farmland. The state of Texas equals 268,597 square miles. We concede a specific “tentacle” may not stretch 100 miles but we submit, we have the capability.
~~If the Simi Valley is responsible for half the nation’s fruits and vegetables and only comprises 42.25 square miles (according to Google), then the canal creates an area 6,627 times larger.
~~No doubt, the canal would alleviate stress for fresh water to the Simi Valley and help win support from the CA voting block.
~~ Our canal creates the possibility for the USA to ease the world’s food supply. Endless studies from the United Nations and Aspen Institute point to drought/lack of food as the cause for unrest in Egypt and Syria, thus, Sec. Kerry and the Obama administration claim “climate change” as the most significant threat to stability in the world. We just solved the problem.
~~Large freshwater lakes located behind the desalination facilities create lakes for leisure and expensive lakefront property, marinas, etc. The suburbs of our canal would increase land value.
~~The residential and commercial economic development potential of the canal region is monumental.

Economic Benefits:

~~ It takes three days by truck or 5 days by rail to ship a lime from California to Boston. Shipping from Texas cuts time, saves fuel, and would deliver a better product. We could even expand exports of crops from California AND the entire canal zone.
~~ We do business in a dozen countries every day and have for over a decade. We are familiar with shipping times and costs. Consider if you will, the USA consumes, over the last decade, more than 25% of the world’s products. Traversing the existing Panama Canal adds 7-15 days of shipping time, plus fuel and crew costs. We lower the cost of distribution into the USA and lower the cost of exporting from the USA.
~~ Add trillions in wealth to the USA and millions of jobs. Additionally, we are creating wealth rather than re-distributing wealth.
~~ Build new modern cities and turn cities like Phoenix, Tuscon, Plano and Odessa into modern day Chicago’s of the 60’s.
~~ Allows for the creation of near perfect, modern facilities to export and refine Texas oil, with pipelines connecting North Dakota and Canada, using the safest and most cost-efficient methods available – pipelines and sea transport.
~~ As a business-owner who relies on imports, dock strikes like the one on the west coast, which cost American business an estimated 40 billion dollars, are inexcusable. Inland ports for embarkation in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas would alleviate the potential for American dependence on west coast-only ports and “un-clog” southern California.
~~ To ship a container from China to Memphis, TN (the heartland), costs $2800 in sea freight + $1800 for rail from CA to Memphis + $700 truck delivery + $700 in customs, approximately = $6000. If we could ship via sea freight to Odessa, we save approximately $1100 per container. Just think about all the containers shipped to Walmart in AR, every container shipped to St Louis, KA, Chicago, WI, Atlanta.
~~ The creation of localized water boards for earned revenue.
~~ Elimination of greater Los Angeles and San Diego requirements for fresh water. Reducing cost, saving resources for the rest of the state.
~~ Although we do not require Indian lands to build a canal, we would make Indian lands substantially more valuable.
~~ We checked food imports for many third-world countries, which are primarily corn, sugar and powdered milk. We could, as a tool for negotiation or humanitarian aid, use food, with a lower shipping expense. Please note, of the top five imports/exports of every single country in the world,…….. is oil, and shipping oil in a cost effective manner gives the USA an advantage.
~~ We create a very large supply of sea salt at the desalination facilities. Although the Italians funded their empire with salt trade, we don’t think the USA could do so. We did come up with an invention, attached to the back of a cargo ship, which acts like a salt-shaker, to return salt to the sea, but also distribute the salt over trans-oceanic shipments. Returning salt to the sea in a concentrated location would negatively impact marine life. We’ve resolved the problem.
~~ It would create an economic boom to lift America FINALLY out of the perceived Housing/Obama stagnant recession. It’s a turning point.  America is BACK. If coupled with a few select trade sanctions against the Chinese, the boom in American manufacturing would last for decades and firmly set China on their heels.
~~ Creation of hydro-electric power to supply these new booming cities, every time a lock empties water.

Revolution in Various Technologies:

When the USA went to the moon, our indirect tech advances were far greater than Tang instant beverage drink, Velcro, and LED watches. There is no way, in advance, to measure the possibilities which might happen with the perfection of desalination, modernization of locks, hydroelectric power, and new irrigation methods. We do know, that if America leads, we can revolutionize water supply, and commerce, for the rest of the world. The revolution in desalination could be equivalent to the computer age. More details in the engineering section.

Common Sense Environmental Protections:

~~ Currently, if a tanker has an accident and spills oil off of Baja or San Padre, an environmental disaster occurs. The EPA and volunteers are mobilized, often costing billions of dollars in cleanup, fines to the company, and years of expensive litigation. Often, irreparable damage is done to the environment. If a tanker accident occurs within the canal, we can contain the oil spill within the locks, clean it up quickly.
~~ To move a ship from coastal California, through the Panama Canal, to Houston’s port, takes 10-14 days. These ships traverse some of the world’s most pristine marine parks and fishing areas. Our canal cuts the time to 3-5 days, saving fuel and removes many of these commercial ships from shipping lanes.
~~ Israel has the largest reverse osmosis desalination plant in the world and it provided approximately 20% of the country’s water supply in 2013. According to David Talbot of MIT Technology Review, these plants are expected to produce 50% of the country’s supply by 2016. (https://www.technologyreview.com/s/534996/megascale-desalination/ ) Update for January of 2019: Israel’s desalination facilities now supply well over half the countries fresh water needs. There is an abundance of freshwater in Israel. We can create unlimited fresh water for southern California and bring water to the desserts. This eases the stresses on “natural” fresh water supplies of rivers and streams.
~~ Desalination removes salt from sea water and would leave behind a massive amount of salt. A.) This could eliminate the need for underground mining of salt domes and B.) We understand a concentrated return of salt to the sea can harm wildlife. We have invented a “salt-shaker”, placed on the back of a container ship, which would slowly distribute the salt to the sea over trans-oceanic shipments.
~~ Construction of the canal allows for pipelines to be constructed alongside the canal to move oil, natural gas, monorail for people (?), etc., in the safest and most efficient manner.
~~ Yes, of course we have thought about the potential of an endangered species holding up the project. We have painstakingly checked every county the canal might traverse, and in every single instance, each endangered species are also located in another county within CA, AZ, NM, or Texas.
~~Note on EPA: Howard Baker (R-TN) in 1978 formed the “God Committee” when a snail darter threatened the Tellico Dam project in Tennessee. The snail darter has since found in seven other rivers and is now thriving. Sometimes, the EPA designates an endangered species as an excuse to stop a project (political) and sometimes the evaluation is legitimate. The “God Committee” is a group of federal department agency heads who decide whether to proceed with the project or not. Ultimately, the committee sided with the EPA for the snail darter, but Carter, facing midterms in ’78, overruled and approved the project. General consensus is the Dem’s are nothing if not self-interested. Faced with unlimited fresh water supplies for southern CA, additional electric from hydro-power, the ability to contain an oil spill within a lock for quick cleanup, and the biggest public works project in human history, the Dem’s may pave the road for the Republicans instead of providing opposition. It is, nonetheless, a winnable argument.

Engineering:

~~ We have checked land surveys from the Corps of Engineers and elevations rise to a level of approx. 2300 ft. in New Mexico but the Erie Canal/St. Lawrence seaway rises over 560ft and it was built by hand, successfully, almost 200 years ago. The modern St. Lawrence seaway was done in the 1950’s and took 50 years to get the project approved. The ridiculous length of the approval process for St Lawrence can be used as a selling point to make completion more expedient.
~~ The closest thing in the USA to this kind of a project would be the Mississippi Levee System and Boards. Therefore, we ran the concept through several Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi, levee board friends privately. It can be done. Their eyes sparkled with the engineering possibilities. It would be the biggest project in the history of the world and akin to the Roman aqueducts or the Nile River Valley. Perfect for Americans and it puts the Three Gorges Dam/Yangtze River project to shame. One engineer described it as, “Not just the build of my lifetime but the build of my generation”.
~~ Two ships could be within the same lock but heading in different directions. Engineers insist we need 2 lanes, one from east to west and one from west to east so locks can raise lower depending on which way a ship is going – or citing the extra one as a breakdown lane. Turnaround spots must be available every 20 miles, approximately. Bays or inlets for desalination facilities (and behind them, enormous freshwater  reservoirs and fresh water tentacles) or emergency ship repair should be available every 10-15miles, estimated.
~~ Engineers like the plan because basic engineering and architecture can be repeated, over and over again, in 10 or 20 mile segments.
~~ It’s not like building a house, where bathrooms and kitchens are more expensive, garages are cheaper, and finishing costs vary widely. A canal with bays and desalination is more like building the exact same master bedroom, every ten miles, 140 times. The geography and water pressure will change but economies of scale will make the project easier to build and save costs. The repetition also helps in-field engineering and lowers the learning curve.
~~ Water flows downhill. Every lock must be filled with water from the higher lock, in a stair-step fashion. So, the highest lock at the highest elevation, must have an adequate supply of water at all times. The Panama Canal uses a natural lake to solve this problem and at times has a problem maintaining water level from rainfall. We solved the problem easily and efficiently. Water rises through a series of very large pipes, every 10 miles to a bay/inlet where the desalination facilities are and a ship can turn around. Initially pumped to reach a peak, the water then flows by draft. Anyone who has used a garden hose to siphon gas from a car understands the principle. Then, this becomes a highly efficient way to move massive volumes of water.
~~ We have checked the route from California to Texas. Although we are certain eminent domain would have to be used in some places, the vast majority of the pathway is federally controlled lands and are undesirable and inexpensive.
~~ The pathway of the canal needs to be moved north of major cities for expediency. The beach-head of Camp Pendleton in California is key, removing land acquisition costs of the expensive California coastline.
~~ Engineers believe sections can be started independently of each other and a race for the coasts (like the race for the golden spike in the Transcontinental Railway) would quickly develop. They also believe the canal from Odessa to San Padre could be completed quickly and might serve as a model or motivation for other states.
~~ Because we lived in New Orleans, we know New Orleans is below sea level and relies on a system of pumps for survival. We consulted friends here as well, to estimate the length of fresh water tentacles we could possible irrigate.
~~ Because we have built several small lakes, we are keenly aware of problems with lakes “leaking” because of underground sand, clay, etc. We are, however, very familiar with Carlisle Syntec, which has a factory in town, and who has built a million-gallon reservoir (can be bigger – no limit), in Utah, using their lining materials.
~~ It goes without saying, we expect significant upgrades in rail, interstate, airports, sea-cargo ports, etc. to accompany this project. These developments will happen magically as private money will swarm around this project. Engineers strongly advised a guidance council of sorts so municipalities do not step on each other, to allow the development of a master plan.

Financing and Time Required:

~~ The Erie Canal project, 363 miles long, was originally slow-going but we can learn from history. In fact, 200 years ago, one mule and a team of three men took a year to dig one mile. Then, the USA LEGALLY immigrated 5000 Scotch-Irish workers to dig the canal, which was finished in four years. Ultimately these immigrants settled throughout upstate NY.
~~ The research on the Erie Canal shows the most effective way to finance projects like these are through bond issues. When Sundance, at The Conservative Treehouse, suggested today a proposal to tie repatriation of corporate cash to the purchase of USA infrastructure bonds, which could then be traded in an open market, my brain began churning. As a former partner in a brokerage firm, the idea makes perfect sense.
~~ The faster the project is completed the less it will cost and the less problems we will have. Remember, the original cost of “The Big Dig” in Boston was 2 billion as opposed to finished cost of 12 billion. Availability of funds and an enticement to invest removes the problem of necessary funds and helps ensure completion.
~~ Ultimately, the engineering and architectural firms will provide estimated costs and completion dates. As an owner of a construction company, I know they will all be wrong.

How to Make the Canal a Reality:

~~ Leadership is required.

~~ Political timing is imperative and Trump’s election makes the project conceivable/possible/probable and something that very definitely would Make America Great Again. Yes, we did intend to send the idea to Ms. Clinton if she was elected, as we believed this is a non-partisan issue. We were under no illusion she would do anything.
We defer immediately to President Trump. He’s probably already thought of a dozen more benefits and hiccups we had not foreseen in two years of concentrated effort.
~~ With Republican governors in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico, the process for approval becomes easier. The only hiccup is the very congested coast of CA. The key is Camp Pendleton which gives the canal a “beachhead”. The canal could be completed up until the California coast, where we anticipate objections for some unknown reason…., which would be a good time to turn off their water.
~~ It’s a public works project the Republicans can get behind because of the potential for business expansion. It might be a good bargaining chip with The Chamber of Commerce who is losing on amnesty to Trump. The canal might help to “take the lumps out”, as Trump’s dad would say.
~~ It’s a huge public works project the Dem’s and green activists can get behind because it solves the water problems for the southwest, especially California, and because of potential oil-spill disasters being contained within a lock.
~~ Native Americans benefit and are involved because of proximity to some of their lands. The canal makes them money and brings opportunity for their next generation.
~~ Wall Street would LOVE the idea. At cocktail parties, they might quibble, pretend to know better and offer unsolicited advice (because they always do). Yet, bottom line, they cannot possibly afford to sit on the sidelines of this deal.
~~ Throughout the process, we create and perfect salt water conversion, borrowing technology from Israel and others. Our altruistic cause would benefit the rest of the world and make progressive billionaires “dreamy” with praise.
~~ The canal is an ideal government steered project which Conservatives and even staunch libertarians can get behind. For Trump supporters, again, America leads. We love Trump and trust his judgement.
~~ We do note one issue. Because the canal will pass north of major cities like El Paso and others, the canal would create an area above our actual border (wall/fence) but below the canal. This could be some kind of enterprise zone or special immigrant status zone, before approaching chokepoints at the canal where security and legal immigration can more easily be checked. We defer to the administration for leadership and legality here.

Summary:

It’s American leadership. It’s proactive.  Salt water conversion has been tried and tested in small projects throughout California for years. This problem needs a NASA-like solution, “We’re going to the moon by the end of the decade.

The idea literally comes from the mouths of babes and America’s next generation. Disregard if you choose. We’ve tried to take a problem and create multiple benefits.

We have 1930’s WPA projects to point to for ‘as built’ examples on a smaller scale. Both Democrats and Republicans often speak of infrastructure projects but the trillion dollar stimulus from the Obama Administration was “not so shovel ready”. Instead of sprinkling taxpayer funds into thousands of projects, let’s go with a big idea, to Make America Great Again.

end

147 thoughts on “The MAGA Canal Proposal, to Solve Border Security, Increase American Wealth, Save the Environment, and Feed the World.

  1. There you go. There’s the whole thing, minus all the survey maps, county by county research on endangered species, and the history of bond applications for the funding of other such projects.

    Liked by 17 people

  2. I will note, yesterday, Fox Biz did a segment about China seeking influence at both ends of the Panama Canal, and seeking influence over the government of Panama, who is so far resisting.

    Liked by 13 people

  3. In CA, the route would be going straight across very canyony, and mountainy areas that include multiple Indian reservations and current farmland and an observatory. Some habitat yes. Lots of ranches and 1000s of homes. Through 2 forests BUT it would connect to the salton sea which is in dire need of water and relief. Thats just south of Joshua Tree park. There’s a lot of “protected” everything there. Then youre into the desert straight away.
    Otherwise the idea is pretty good.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. The key is Camp Pendleton. That gets us about 20 miles inland. It’s the best route we could find. AND, we could do 20 miles within Camp Pendleton, and bring the eastern link right UP TO that one remaining neighborhood to bring pressure.

      Liked by 10 people

    2. Fortunately, the mountains run perpendicular to a ‘straight’ canal. Easy to blow through a mountain range and carve a path, making the canal a lower elevation. Scenic trip, to be sure, almost like a man made Colorado River.
      And yes, we hit many national and state forests along the way. It would help to speed the process if we operate on gov’t land. With this project, instead of ‘dollars’ being the only solution to pay private landowners, we COULD trade land – which would ONLY become more valuable once the canal was completed.

      Like

  4. How awesome are you, Daughn!

    It’s beyond my estimation …

    Thank you, Thank You!, THANK YOU!!!

    24-7-365, indeed.

    POWERHOUSE! You, and yours.

    And you COOK! lol

    Liked by 12 people

      1. Daughn, I just love it. It’s bringing back the pioneer spirit to our country–I mean in the sense of forging new ways of doing things. It’s just exciting.

        Liked by 4 people

    1. Here is a link to Nestle Waters, they own quite a bit of the water as do other big corporations and even the Bushes have bought land in South America with aquifers. I started with Arrowhead water by Palm Springs ( and am still putting the picture together, but I think China owns a bunch, CA politicians have literally sold CA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_Waters
      https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2014/07/12/nestle-arrowhead-tapping-water/12589267/

      Love the canal idea, I think it would be good use for desert. 🙂 Very exciting; in CA we need to get rid of the elite criminals and this project could help, so many new jobs!

      Liked by 4 people

  5. “Gavin Newsom, wants to tax drinking water”

    I’m waiting for the ultimate tax – a tax on taxes.

    Levying, and collecting, taxes from the populace is a BURDEN on government.

    Tax-payers should bear this burden, by being taxed on the tax liabilities they incur.

    It’s only fair! Government shouldn’t have to pay for the tax burdens of people … the PEOPLE should bear these burdens!

    While they’re at it, they could introduce a Bill to tax the tax that we’re taxed! It takes FUNDING to tax, and to tax the tax, and to collect the taxes on taxes of taxes!

    Reductio ad absurdam …

    Liked by 6 people

    1. The Canal project, indirectly, gets to the underground economy, since it involves the delivery of water and charging for water, as in a water bill. As new Water Boards are formed locally, we could take a look at who is here legally???? Not sure how that would work with the 9th circuit of judges.
      Those who live illegally in the shadows still have a water bill.
      Those in Section 8 housing, would not have a water bill, obviously, BUT the water would be cheaper, saving taxpayer dollars. Have to think about that one.

      Liked by 5 people

    1. Snip from the article above: Keep in mind, each facility can provide enough water for about 1.2 million homes AND commercial facilities, and they can be located every 3 miles.

      “The project to convert ocean water into high quality desalinated potable water is in response to state and court-ordered reductions in the community’s primary sources of water, the Carmel River and the Seaside Aquifer. The state requires a significant reduction in pumping of the Carmel River by 2021. Completion of the facility will restore flows to the Carmel River, providing benefits to endangered species and habitat that depend on the river, and provide the Monterey Peninsula with a reliable, drought-proof water supply, say project officials.”

      Liked by 5 people

  6. WOW! I’m Like Holly–I need to read back thru and grab a map–You and your family are AHMAZING thinkers/planners + Doers!! My favorite section –“How to Make the Canal a Reality”–Shows just how to take real action and Most Certainly ties into Making America Great Again. Congratulations on a Magnificent Project.! (Filed in the Category of I knew her when…)
    You might get this Q Tree a visit to/from the White House after all!!!

    Liked by 11 people

      1. I feel like when Pat was talking about Wolfie as Batman and she was worried about Walmart Bananas–When my family gets together we play Giant Jenga and cook alot 😉

        Liked by 4 people

  7. I love the proposal! It could get traction if only you could get an invitation to present it to our MAGA President. Your screen name now makes complete sense (you must really work 24/7)!

    Liked by 9 people

              1. Thanks…… As to Steves point(s) about the elevation changes……… It might take lots and lots of earthwork to lower the peaks of the mountain ranges…. If we could get to the moon….. I think this could be done.

                Liked by 2 people

              2. You will laugh.
                I had one guy ask, “What are we going to do with the leftover earth?”
                Another guy suggested we put it on a train and dump it into the Atchafalaya basin, because they keep losing earth due to erosion.
                Won’t work though, mess up shrimp and oyster seasons.

                Liked by 1 person

              3. Well, one guy said, to make the reservoirs, we would need a lot of dirt, obviously. Another suggested we have another reservoir at the end of the tentacles, wherever that might lead.
                I just can’t imagine how many backhoes and trackhoes it would take.

                Liked by 2 people

              4. Funny story.
                I had just moved back from the big city to the country. Was dating guy who would become husband. His best friend was a big farmer, Steve.
                Steve showed up one day and invited us to go and blow a case of unstable dynamite. It was ‘starting to sweat’. I was blissfully ignorant of any kind of explosive.
                We got out to a big bridge and he had long, water-proof fuses, to blow beaver dams. He lit one and we waited.
                Steve’s wife and I were expecting a big boom. Nothing.
                We carefully looked over the side of the bridge, nothing.
                We turned to go back to the guys – as in, ‘what the heck?’
                The guys were crouched behind the truck with fingers in their ears. They knew better.
                All of a sudden, there went the dynamite.
                BOOM!
                It was so much fun!

                Liked by 4 people

            1. Let’s take the dicey part, first = California.
              Start at Camp Pendleton, go between Valley Center and Escondido. Pick up, Salton Sea, otherwise have to destroy too many houses.

              Liked by 2 people

            2. Keeping going east, next big problem is between Las Cruces and ElPaso/Juarez. Going to have to go through it, no way around it. Attempt to stay as far north/less disruption in ElPaso there is a lot of farmland there.

              Liked by 2 people

  8. If you open up Google Maps and zoom in, you can see best pathway. From west to east, start in California.
    Come in at Pendleton. Question as to whether or not to take the Lake. Stay north of major cities and avoid Indian reservations. Travel east through panhandle of Texas, south of Odessa. At that point, it could split.
    One leg south to Padre Island and one leg to pick up the refineries outside Houston that leg would get more difficult as Houston is crowded. One suggestion was to travel further east, to Louisiana and pick up refineries from east of Houston as well as Louisiana.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I didn’t see this before I posted below…but it makes no material difference to what I wrote; there’s a 4280 foot hump (or more) that you have to get across in New Mexico, the further north you go the higher it is (I-40 crosses the divide at over 7000 feet), and this route is hundreds of miles from the border.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I’m listening to the Corps of Engineers who poured over it for months. Going nowhere near 7K feet. One thing, don’t measure the elevation of the peak, measure the elevation of the valley. I made the same mistake.

        Liked by 4 people

          1. You’re right, Steve. Those Corps of Engineers guys couldn’t possibly now what they’re talking about. Let’s throw the whole idea away and keep arguing about another solution, shall we?

            Liked by 3 people

              1. Steve, my file on this thing, over 4 years, is about 6″ high and about 3′ x 2′ because of all the arch sized maps in it. You want the whole thing? Give me your address.
                I was the biggest naysayer there was.
                I kept saying no.
                Over and over again.
                One guy finally just looked at me and said, “It’s really just an engineering problem”.

                One note: Check the height of the rim for Grand Canyon, if I remember correctly (it’s been a long time) I think one side was 2200 feet and one side was 1000 feet above base.
                We’re not going anywhere near Grand Canyon, of course, and we’re at the bottom of the Rockies.
                Point is, if we had to blow 500-1000′ of elevation, okay fine. It would be ‘pretty’ when finished.

                It’s not as bad as you think it is.

                Liked by 4 people

              2. I don’t want that much.

                I just want to see a reasonably-large scale map (say, about state road map sized) with the proposed route drawn on it; as long as I can follow the route on a detailed topographic map over here. Or, alternatively, I can connect the dots if I know every place the canal “bends” (since you’ve said it’s mostly straight lines). Or if they want to say, “it follows the contour from Point X to point Y,” that’s a curved line, but I can follow that on a map. (And hearing “it follows the contour” would be music to my ears, because it means “no locks on this stretch.”) I want this, so I can see how much the canal rises and falls as it crosses the country.

                They are right about one thing. On one level, it is indeed purely an engineering problem. It’s physically possible to construct the thing, wherever it goes, even if it’s three or ten times as bad as I’m afraid it is. Locks can be built as necessary, even if there’s a 10,000 foot cliff to scale (and there isn’t). The “ditch” can be dug as necessary, as deep and as wide as it needs to be to accommodate big oil tankers (the Panama Canal can’t), through solid rock with dynamite if it has to be. And the Army Corps of Engineers certainly knows how to do those things. Hand them the resources and tell them “Go!”

                That’s another fundamental driver by the way: the size of the ships you want to be able to accommodate. It controls the amount of digging and the size and expense of the locks, both constructing and operating them (since it will govern how much water must be pumped in operating the locks).

                But then economics intrudes, because this can only actually happen in the real world as long as there’s enough money to pay for it. And the more that must be done (the more locks, the bigger the ditch’s cross section, the bigger the locks), the more money it will require.

                As a related aside, check out the Falkirk canal lock. It’s extremely efficient because as you lower a boat, you raise the water you’ll need to lower the next boat (or possibly raise it and a boat as well); the two act as counterweights (even if there are boats on one side and none on the other, the weights are identical) so very little energy is used lifting water (just enough to cover the inevitable losses). The problem is…it’s probably too small for this application, and I have no idea if it’s possible to scale it.

                https://duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DqHO9gARac-w

                Liked by 2 people

              3. I’m the accountant, from the family of engineers, who think they can do anything with an unlimited budget.
                Cost is my driver.
                Can YOU make the map?

                Liked by 4 people

              4. I can make a map.

                But from what you’ve said, your engineer friends have identified a possible route. I can put that route on a map if it’s described in sufficient detail.

                Liked by 3 people

              5. Yes, the Corps guys did play with it for months and identify best path.
                I’m the pragmatic one, however.
                We all know that SOMEONE will come up with an objection and it will have to be moved slightly, if and when we ever got that far.
                Otherwise, I will leave exact determined pathway to people smarter than me.
                How about that?

                Liked by 3 people

              6. Oh, yes, should this go forward, politics will inevitably force changes to the best engineering decision. (“You can’t build it there, that billionaire will lobby the Adam Schiff out of congress to stop you. You have to go around his land!”)

                I would assume the Corps guys did indeed find the best path, given certain parameters (i.e., they needed to be within some distance of the border). I’m NOT suggesting I can improve their path. I WOULD like to see the path they chose.

                Liked by 2 people

              7. I was surprised. never expected anything but a kid’s college essay out of the idea.
                Yet, my Congressman called a few weeks ago and asked me to send the plan.
                Who knows if it will go anywhere.
                He is a freedom caucus guy and a peon.
                And if it did go anywhere, they don’t need me.
                They have their own experts. They might call the Corps guys, and frankly, that’s probably the agency who would get such a project review for viability.
                It would be amazing to see.
                Solves so many problems.

                Liked by 3 people

              8. Hey Steve, one note, and I didn’t know this at all before a few weeks ago.
                Because of some obscure treaty we have with Mexico, no permanent structure can be placed in the flood plain of the Rio Grande.
                Which means, even a border wall would have to be set back, thus illegals would step on USA soil before getting to a border fence.

                I don’t want to go anywhere near actual border (too many Indian reservations = problems) and was forced to go north, straighter route, less expensive.
                At least that was what we were thinking.

                Liked by 3 people

              9. It’s already the case that illegals set foot on US soil before they reach the wall. We have to set it back at least a little, or we can’t get at the south side of it for maintenance without stepping into Mexico. It’s just a lot more extreme in the Rio Grande.

                My very first look at this weeks ago assumed the canal would follow the border fairly closely, and it was AWFUL, the canal would have to go up one side and down the other of hills and buttes that could be completely avoided by backing off a couple of miles. I lost count of how many but I figure it wouldn’t be that far off to say that each one would add a billion dollars to the cost if we didn’t go around them.

                If this goes forward, someone will have to survey the route, but even before that, to pick the candidate routes, someone will have to take USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps and try to draw a route that optimizes distance versus elevation changes. How much it winds is going to depend greatly on how hilly the terrain is, and that can be controlled by staying away from significant hills and ridges….but doing that will make the line very much not-straight.

                If you look at a road map of Nevada, follow US 50. It winds around a lot, because the people who made the highway tried to make it as level as possible. The road runs a lot down the bottom of valleys between the Great Basin ridges. It ends up being a much longer route than simply drawing a straight line from Reno to Wendover would have been, but cuts across a lot less topography, which would be expensive for roads and would be very expensive for canals.

                Liked by 2 people

          1. It’s actually beneficial because the mountains run perpendicular to the ‘straight’ canal. It’s easy to blow through a mountain, keeping elevation lower.

            Liked by 1 person

  9. The real motivator is Texas and they are the easiest sell.
    Elevation from Gulf (at zero) to south of Odessa is only about 700 feet above sea level. And those folks are DYING to figure out a cheaper way to get the oil and LNG out.
    Abbott would love the idea and in Texas, the darn thing would be up and running before we could blink.
    That would make other states jealous….
    …. which could be a good thing.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. This could be a good test case, then.

      If building an Odessa – Gulf canal can pay for itself, with 14 sets of locks at 50 feet per lock, it can become the start of the main project. If even this is too expensive, then…the whole idea is impractical.

      Liked by 3 people

  10. I think you’ve seriously underestimated how many locks will have to be built. I simply don’t see how you got a maximum elevation of 2,300 feet.

    When I looked along the New Mexico/Chihuahua border I saw elevations as great as 5000+ feet. How far back from the border are you drawing this?

    My sources say that at no point in the lower 48 (to include New Mexico) does the continental divide dip below 4,280 feet. I was able to do a quick look at VFR (aviation) charts and they seem to confirm this. They’re color coded by altitude and basically, nothing in New Mexico near that border is below 3000 feet. The lowest point in New Mexico, in fact, is near it’s southeast corner, nowhere near the border, and is at 2844 feet above sea level. This adds up to there being no possible way you could cross New Mexico at less than 4200 feet, and that’s before looking at proposed routes.

    El Paso TX is at 3740 feet, and it’s in a river valley, of course. Presumably the canal would pass near here but the surrounding terrain will be higher than 3740 feet. So just to get to El Paso from the Gulf Of Mexico, you need enough locks to raise your ships almost 4000 feet. The good news is ships travelling westward to El Paso will never have to be *lowered* and then *raised* again, it’s a climb all the way. This won’t be true overland from El Paso to the California coast; you’ll be crossing multiple ranges, including the continental divide, depending on where you put the canal. If you insist the line be perfectly straight, you will undoubtedly cross even higher ground than 4280 feet multiple times, as there are plenty of ridges higher than that in New Mexico that aren’t part of the divide. And then, when you get to California, you have to lower your ships to below sea level for the imperial valley, then get over the coastal ranges. So at a bare minimum, going westward, you have to raise your ships to 4280 feet, then lower them to 150 or so feet below sea level in California, then raise them again something like 3000 feet, then lower them again, and that’s assuming you never have to dip down and then back up again because of multiple ridge lines. That totals to 4280 (up) + (4280+150 down) + (150+3000 up again) + 3000 (down) 14,580 feet of total raising and lowering with locks, and if a lock is good for 50 feet, that’s 297.2 locks, call it an even 300. But this is a wildly optimistic assumption: In fact, there are multiple ridges to cross in both New Mexico and California. (Drive on I-8 some time, from Yuma to San Diego). Every one of those ridges is another series of locks on both the eastern and western slopes. I wouldn’t be surprised if the proposed route involved six hundred, or even a thousand locks.

    Someone would have to go along a proposed route and count how often it rises and falls, and by how much, and assess the number of locks required. Every range that is crossed over requires a certain number of locks on both the eastern and western slopes. This would mean a lot of locks, and locks are expensive. There’s a reason canals tend to follow contour lines as much as possible! It’s far cheaper to dig a longer canal than to build locks on a shorter route. Some knobs of higher land, you will have to go around, unless you want the US to go bankrupt building this thing. But even if you wind the thing around and avoid all those extra ridgelines (somehow), and make the canal MUCH longer…you can’t do it for less than 14,860 feet in elevation changes, lifts plus drops.

    Like

        1. I’m the accountant and from the family of engineers, who think they can build a bridge to the moon with an unlimited budget.
          Cost is my driver.
          The biggest thing I wanted was a total cost for Israel’s desal plant and how many gallons, cubic meters it put out, compared to average household or commercial use.
          That way I could extrapolate.
          See what I mean?
          Israel is hiding the numbers though, and they’ve expanded their facility rather than building from scratch, hard to get a number – but I am not the President.

          Liked by 2 people

    1. Note: If you’re looking at an aviation chart, you’re looking at peaks – so airplanes don’t run into the peaks. Gotta get on the ground. It save hundreds if not thousands of feet.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Aviation charts do show peaks prominently (and they will print a number on each grid square of the highest thing in that square so you know that you won’t hit anything if you stay above that altitude), but they also show contour lines and color all of the land according to its elevation, so you can get an idea of how low the land gets, too. I looked at one as a quick check, but also dug further on the internet to find the figure of 4,280 feet as the lowest point on the continental divide.

        A LOT depends on the precise route. I was following the border through NM and AZ fairly closely and seeing bad news. Being willing to go away from the border AND bend the canal around local high ground and basins (you indicated straight line however) would cut a lot of problems, but, I still see a big M: Gulf Of Mexico (0), Continental divide (4280 minimum), Imperial Valley (-150 or so feet), coastal ranges near San Diego (~3000 feet), and the Pacific (0 feet). If you want to go through Palm Springs and San Bernardino, you might do better (but I haven’t looked, and I wouldn’t count on it). And I fear that without a LOT of circuitous routing, a closeup view of that M would have many parts of it look like a saw blade.

        It may not seem like it to you, but I want to be convinced. I do.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. daughnworks,

        I found on Wickedpedia this list of rail lines crossing the Continental Divide:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_railroad_crossings_of_the_North_American_continental_divide

        There are 9 rail lines that cross it in New Mexico. Three cross it at over 7,000 ft of elevation. One just shy of 6,000.

        These are the best 5, with location and elevation of the crossing point:

        Wilna. 4,584 ft (1,397 m)
        Hachita. 4,495 ft (1,370 m)
        Vista. 4,650 ft (1,417 m)/4,694 ft (1,431 m) (2 tracks have different elevations)
        (name unknown) 4,525 ft (1,379 m)
        Antelope. 4,510 ft (1,375 m)

        For one more data point, I-10 crosses the Divide between Lordsburg and Deming at an elevation of 4,585 ft.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. Well sure. We have to have a wall/fence, quick-fire-electrocution-if-you-touch-it-kind of wall on the actual border, which defines US territory.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. Daugn……. I like your “vision”….. Yes, Trumpian even.
    If the “will” is there, it could be done…..
    But, given the current CONgressional makeup….. I don’t believe it will be.
    Hell, we can’t even get $5B for a wall/fence…..
    Have to PAY OFF the Demoncraps somehow (Get out of JAIL card?)

    Liked by 3 people

      1. If you want to desalinate water for SoCal, and the San Joaqin valley, then you can simply build the desalination plants on the coast, and pipe the fresh water inland; there’s no need to build a canal to take saltwater to an inland desalination plant. The pipelines over mountain ranges would be relatively cheap and since they’re under pressure, locks aren’t an issue and the siphon effect can be exploited. In fact, similar things are done to bring in the water they have now; it’s just not coming out of a desalination plant, and it’s no coming from the coast, but there are aqueducts carrying tremendous amounts of water across the state, and sometimes pipelines over mountains. In fact, I saw one of the aqueducts between I-8 and the border barrier west of Yuma.

        This could have been done already, without a canal, cheaper than the canal…and yet, it’s not, because it’s very, very expensive and generally resorted to only when there’s no other alternative.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. I found desal attempts throughout California since the 1980’s and never successful. I looked. Many reason as to why.
          When we add in other cost benefits, it becomes easier to swallow.
          Israeli tech is reliable and proven, bigger scale, more cubic meters.
          And replicating plant after plant brings costs down.
          The commerce alone would save trillions in costs.
          The desal is merely an added benefit.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. Expensive? That’s odd and relative. I recall the Canadians went forth with St Lawrence on their own because of our delays and because they were hungry for the hydroelectric power. Needed our permission in the end and Eisenhower finally agreed.

          Liked by 2 people

  12. this seems like exactly the type of thing that would interest the President…I say mail it again…if he can build it, he will…he loves to build–and solve problems!

    Liked by 6 people

  13. I’ve found this, which is better than I had thought: (From wikipoo)

    Energy consumption of seawater desalination has reached as low as 3 kWh/m3,[23] including pre-filtering and ancillaries, similar to the energy consumption of other fresh water supplies transported over large distances,[24] but much higher than local fresh water supplies that use 0.2 kWh/m3 or less.[25] [SteveInCO note: I am surprised it’s this low, but it’s still not cheap.]

    A minimum energy consumption for seawater desalination of around 1 kWh/m3 has been determined,[26][27] excluding prefiltering and intake/outfall pumping. Under 2 kWh/m3[28] has been achieved with reverse osmosis membrane technology, leaving limited scope for further energy reductions.

    Supplying all US domestic water by desalination would increase domestic energy consumption by around 10%, about the amount of energy used by domestic refrigerators.[29] Domestic consumption is a relatively small fraction of the total water usage.

    In terms of energy, desalination has now reached an energy cost approximately equal to bringing fresh water from somewhere using a pipeline.

    However, desalination creates the fresh water at the sea coast (or our canal) for that cost–and then the water still must be sent where it is needed via a pipeline or aqueduct. (Note, if it’s at the canal, the water must be brought to that part of the canal, so it does not completely eliminate transportation cost.) It’s therefore twice as expensive as simply piping fresh water from somewhere where it’s already fresh. And this does not include the cost of actually building the desalination plant or disposing of the salt; this is simply the energy cost of the actual process of removing the salt from the water.

    We haven’t become desperate enough yet to pay over two times as much for water, but I can see it happening at some point in the future, especially if environmentalists manage to thwart further water projects. And even if they don’t, pretty much all freshwater in the West is being exploited already. We’ve already reached a point on the Colorado river where building another dam would lead to net water loss because of the increased evaporation off of lake surfaces.

    The last paragraph is interesting; it says we could supply ALL domestic (i.e., household) water by desalination for 10% more energy, equivalent to as if everyone were to double their use of refrigerators. But this does NOT cover farm irrigation, which uses huge amounts of water. I don’t know how much that would be in comparison to household use but I suspect it’s much, much more especially since wikipoo calls domestic consumption a “relatively small fraction.” We’d need lots and lots more energy production in the United States to make a significant dent in those unproductive deserts. (It might be worth it just to watch environmentalist heads explode.)

    It looks to me like something could potentially be used to alleviate the cost of the canal. Someone could argue that–since the canal is already going to be there anyway–you might as well use it as an aqueduct to move water inland for desalination. Thus, part of the cost of transporting the water to its destination would be sunk, IF the canal were constructed. But I doubt I could sell the cost of the canal to a Donald Trump doing hard-headed cost analysis, on the grounds that it will make desalination slightly less expensive than it is. The reason is even with the water brought for free to the hypothetical plant in the California imperial valley–and it won’t be for free, but roll with me–desalinating it might still be too expensive to be useful, and the net benefit of this aspect would then be zero since no one would actually bother to desalinate the canal water. However their attitudes could change if their other sources of water (literally) dry up.

    I suspect this is one of those things that with cheaper energy AND improvements in technology AND population increase AND limited sources of natural fresh water, could make sense thirty to fifty years from now, but right now, based on these admittedly very approximate numbers, it doesn’t look like it makes sense now. Again, I’d love to be proved wrong, but in the end my strongest piece of evidence that it doesn’t make sense is that cities on the coast, with NO transportation cost to add on top of the cost of the actual desalination, aren’t considering doing this even for high-value domestic water.

    Like

    1. Take a look at the link I posted up top. Monterey Peninsula already under court order to decrease usage in one river.
      California MUST find other sources.
      I did one analysis of water bills for a local LA suburb. Was surprised, family of four was about 2X’s my water bill and I have 13 bathrooms and 80 loads of laundry a week.
      Israel is guarding their numbers.
      Yet, how valuable would it be to bring unlimited fresh water to a desert?

      Like

    2. Steve……… focusing on one stat for increased energy for cost of water, yet ignores the hydroelectric produced.
      Ignores, 260K sq miles of potential farmland, drought proof, some with 3 growing seasons.
      Cost?
      How much would you say Chicago, Duluth, Detroit, and Cincinnati are worth, exactly?

      Liked by 2 people

          1. The St. Lawrence is a river.

            This will be a canal.

            Are you proposing to generate hydroelectric from high points on the canal to low points?

            If so I have to warn you, it’s a physical impossibility. It will take at least as much energy to get the water up to the high points as will be generated by the water coming down. That’s basic physics, conservation of energy.

            The reason the St. Lawrence works is that the water starts at a high elevation, having fallen as rain or snow.

            Like

  14. I imagine when they were digging the Erie Canal, President Jefferson never imagined the following:
    Cool history for the Erie Canal – this is what American did about 200 years ago.

    “The problem was that the land rises about 600 feet (180 m) from the Hudson to Lake Erie. Locks at the time could handle up to 12 feet (3.7 m) of lift, so even with the heftiest cuttings and viaducts, fifty locks would be required along the 360-mile (580 km) canal. Such a canal would be expensive to build even with modern technology; in 1800, the expense was barely imaginable. President Thomas Jefferson called it “a little short of madness” and rejected it; however, Hawley interested New York Governor DeWitt Clinton in the project. There was much opposition, and the project was ridiculed as “Clinton’s folly” and “Clinton’s ditch.” In 1817, though, Clinton received approval from the legislature for $7 million for construction.[3]

    The original canal was 363 miles (584 km) long, from Albany on the Hudson to Buffalo on Lake Erie. The channel was cut 40 feet (12 m) wide and 4 feet (1.2 m) deep, with removed soil piled on the downhill side to form a walkway known as a towpath.[3]

    Its construction, through limestone and mountains, proved a daunting task. In 1823 construction reached the Niagara Escarpment, necessitating the building of five locks along a 3-mile (4.8 km) corridor to carry the canal over the escarpment. To move earth, animals pulled a “slip scraper” (similar to a bulldozer). The sides of the canal were lined with stone set in clay, and the bottom was also lined with clay. The stonework required hundreds of German masons, who later built many of New York’s buildings.[citation needed] All labor on the canal depended upon human (and animal) power or the force of water. Engineering techniques developed during its construction included the building of aqueducts to redirect water; one aqueduct was 950 feet (290 m) long to span 800 feet (240 m) of river. As the canal progressed, the crews and engineers working on the project developed expertise and became a skilled labor force.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_Canal

    Liked by 1 person

  15. GREAT IF TRUE!

    Liked by 6 people

    1. What are the sources?

      And even if it’s true he’s preparing a draft declaration, this doesn’t mean it’s imminent. It may be he’s trying to scare them into compliance. On the other hand, he may already realize this is futile (I suspect he realized it long ago) BUT he’s doing this to give them one more warning for appearances’ sake. I guess what I’m saying is we may STILL be weeks away from the declaration of an emergency.

      Whenever that golden moment comes, I expect lots of exploding heads, specious lawsuits in the Ninth Circus, and other measures to prevent this from going forward. I’m sure PDJT has already figured out what he’s going to do with the Ninth Circus lawsuits.

      One thing is: I have confidence in him to handle this mess the best possible way; his experience is in applied human psychology AND he knows the players a lot better than I have any desire to. I would have done something impatient and made a hash of it and probably been impeached and removed by now.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Peach Steve C O!
        Mr. President, you’ve lost the support of every single senator and congressperson.
        And the Vice President.
        And the First Lady.
        And the chef.
        It’s time to go.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. My input:

    OH, HELL YEAH !!!

    With Pres. Trump in office, now is the perfect time to submit this proposal. Best chance for “on time and under budget” plus “done right, the first time”, unlike any municipal project that I’ve seen here in New York.

    My only other input would be to consider starting down near the southernmost point of Baha, extending East in a straight line to The Gulf of Mexico, with bulkheading to a height for an effective southern border wall, and the annexation of that part of Mexico.

    I guess you should start working on a plan for another canal to the north from the West End of Lake superior to the Pacific Ocean !!!

    Nice work Daughn & “kids” (et. al.) !

    MAGA/KAG

    Liked by 4 people

    1. It’s an interesting piece of trivia, that a canal across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec was once considered. That’s the skinny part of Mexico and the canal would have been on a straight north-south line. It’s quite a bit south of what you’re talking about, so it’s probably a project best left to the Mexicans, if they ever can manage to do it.

      If we were to annex the part of Mexico you’re talking about, (I am thinking you mean all of the Baja California peninsula, plus Sonora, about half of Sinaloa, Durango, Chihuahua, and parts of Coahuilla, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas) we’d be basically occupying an area full of millons of people who have no interest in learning English or being Americans. Sort of like California today, actually, but maybe five times worse.

      As much as I have been complaining about the route in Daughn’s proposal, I think this route would actually be MUCH worse from an engineering standpoint. Judging from Google Maps in “terrain” mode, the terrain is markedly higher and rougher in Sinaloa. There are other mountain ranges further east but the worst of it could be avoided by going well north of Monterrey then turning a bit southward before going to the Gulf. It becomes a lot more doable (but by no means easy!) if you were to (say) start quite a bit further north on the Mexican west coast and go by Hermosillo.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Thanks Steve.

        I kind a shot from the hip-didn’t Put too much thought into the details, but my sentiment still stands.

        As far as people there go, the economic boom, and ensuing benefits would cause the better amongst them to “clean their own house” !

        Liked by 3 people

            1. BUT not impossible, if we did come up through Baja, we could ‘share’ tech, water, with that part of Mexico and extract untold goodies from them.
              Who knows, maybe?
              Good idea though!

              Liked by 2 people

              1. IF we could get them to agree to use the Colorado River as the seaway into the canal, it eliminates the need for climbing over some very nasty terrain near the coast of California. (In fact the California coastal range portion is the steepest terrain in the whole project, with locks having to very close together in all likelihood–this would have to be two separate paths because it will be very slow going for ships and oncoming traffic would have to wait forever.) However, that means traffic from our west coast going east would have to go all the way around the peninsula.

                Liked by 1 person

              2. In fact, as a SWAG, I’d say not having to go over the California range might knock 20 percent or more off the cost of the project.

                Of course, Mexico could later down the road decide to close the lower Colorado river, at which point we build the rest and show them or middle fingers.

                Like

  17. DW247– Have you looked at the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River navigation system between Tulsa, OK and the Mississippi River, for barge traffic to New Orleans? Elevation change = 420’ between Tulsa and Mississippi. Built by Corp of Engineers. Incorporates locks, rivers, and special channels to allow barge traffic.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. This is pretty cool. They basically upgraded the Arkansas river by making a bunch of dams/locks to create lakes to make it deeper and wider.

      Probably pissed off a lot of environmentalists, to boot!

      Liked by 4 people

      1. We vacation there and have property there. It’s GORGEOUS. Actually made the property base more valuable, higher taxes. Great little airstrip at Gaston’s. You would love it.

        Liked by 3 people

  18. DNW, I am sending this link with an explanation to engineers of all stripes in hopes someone can get the pols to see it and get someone to act on it. It’s time for prayer.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. I congratulate you, daughnworks, on a fascinating, innovative proposal. Thanks for sharing it. The more people who know about it, the more chances that it will get into the right hands.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Let’s take the dicey part, first = California.
    Start at Camp Pendleton, go between Valley Center and Escondido. Pick up, Salton Sea, otherwise have to destroy too many houses.

    This is my best guess–and I do mean guess–as to the first part of this. I am sure some of the “low” areas I followed are steeply climbing valleys. That small lake in the middle actually should be *avoided* because you don’t want to mix the saltwater in the canal with the fresh water in the lake. A substantial part of the route follows some California state highways.

    I would be greatly surprised if this isn’t by far the most expensive part of the project, not only for having to buy the land, but having to build a lot of locks.

    To do better than this I’d have to be looking at real topo maps or I could zoom in piecemeal.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Let’s take the dicey part, first = California.
    Start at Camp Pendleton, go between Valley Center and Escondido. Pick up, Salton Sea, otherwise have to destroy too many houses.

    Stay south of Blythe, underneath I-10, south of Phoenix.

    I feel a little bit on firmer ground here even though I haven’t looked closely at the terrain. I’m dodging ranges of obvious hills.

    The Salton Sea is saltwater, I don’t see much of an issue with actually running the route through it. The canal to the west can serve as a way to refresh the water in the sea. Much farmland is south of it.

    Salton Sea is actually below sea level. The “dicey part” brought us over a mountain range and back down to sea level.

    This map takes us across the Colorado River into Arizona. By the way, how are we going to cross a saltwater canal over the Colorado River? I can imagine a very big bridge full of water. It’d have to be extremely strong, probably the heaviest load of any bridge on earth.

    This map ends inside a national monument of some sort. The reservation is the gray area in the lower right.

    Like

  22. South of Tucson, I think there is an Indian Reservation there we have to avoid west of Tucson.

    Ducking south of Tucson. Again, I’m doing this by eye and trying to avoid anything that looks like a ridge. I have no idea how much I’m actually climbing or descending, except that having crossed the Colorado river, I hope it’s all climbing or straight and level, never down, because then you just have to climb all over again.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Keeping going east, next big problem is between Las Cruces and ElPaso/Juarez. Going to have to go through it, no way around it. Attempt to stay as far north/less disruption in ElPaso there is a lot of farmland there.

    Somewhere on this, we cross the continental divide. I showed an alternate route in red. It may be significantly better from an engineering standpoint, but it’s further from the border. Note that we are significantly south of I-10 for most of this map.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Texas.

    There are multiple ways to go here, but just eyeballing it I get this, largely following I-10.

    However it doesn’t go anywhere near Odessa, so I’m sure it’s not the route your friends were thinking of.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. This is awesome!

    Sadly, any corruptible Dem who is in on this will be in it for the corruption and grift. I can see Chi–Spy-Di-Fi’s eyes glazing over thinking of the billions she could skim off the top of this project-for-a-generation. It would feed corruption for a generation… so this must be an ‘After The Plan’ project…to bring us together!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I was thinking.
      We do a LOT of biz in northern India.
      The line from Mumbai to New Delhi is in desperate need of freshwater resources.
      Northern Indians hate the southern ones and the northern ones tend to rule and have more money. That whole region, Jaipur, etc., is prime.
      Once we perfected the tech, there is no limit.

      Liked by 1 person

  26. In summary, whatever we decide today will be changed for a multiple of reasons.
    The pathway will change because of local politics or a landowner.
    The elevation is immaterial, it’s just an engineering problem.
    The cost can be estimated, but after 25yrs in the construction biz, we know the final cost will change.
    And, the benefits are impossible to calculate today. What is the value of a fully developed region, roughly equivalent to the square miles of the state of Texas? What would it add to USA GDP? What would be the impact on our economy and transportation systems?
    How would this project impact the economy of the world?
    The ripples created would be enormous.
    The project would, absolutely, make the USA more secure on the southern border and lower the pure cost of ‘security’ at the southern border.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s