The Real-Life Plan to Drain the Mediterranean and Merge Africa and Europe | Hacker News Reader

The Real-Life Plan to Drain the Mediterranean and Merge Africa and Europe

atlasobscura.com

119 pointsThevet81 comments

In the Bay Area, we had the Reber Plan[1], to turn the bay into two fresh water lakes by building dams between Richmond-San Rafael, and Oakland-San Francisco.

Great photo of what it could have looked like[2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reber_Plan [2] https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b5/1a/d6/b51ad6d2a...

You can visit the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bay Model in Sausalito. It is a huge room-sized model of the Bay you can walk around with rising and falling tides.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_Corps_of_Engineers_B...

There was also a plan in 1965 to fill part of the Bay by leveling San Bruno Mountain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_Mountain

Taking the move a mountain idiom a little too far.

This is amazing...

I didnt realize that there was enough elevation diff in order for such a plan to occur. Off-hand, do you know what the elevation difference is??

The bay is very, very shallow[1]. Off hand, the average depth is less than 7 feet. Most of the depth is around the golden gate itself.

Around the king tides, an island forms just off of Ashby Ave, in Berkeley.

[1] http://makerandmoss.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/81ackqtij...

You're not wrong about the bay being mostly shallow. To clarify though, the bay's average depth in the southern and northern areas is closer to 15-17 ft and near the Golden Gate Bridge and Treasure Island area is closer to 40ft[1]. Maybe the median depth is closer to 7 feet.

[1] http://omp.gso.uri.edu/ompweb/doee/science/descript/baysfran...

that airport terminal though, horrible idea in hindsight

With housing costs what they are in SFBA, this actually makes a lot of sense. I'd like to see some economics forecasts though -- and which municipality would control the new land?

This could be a chance for the state legislature to step in, declare it a state park, then add high-rises and lots of green open spaces. You could build the area up right the first time around, instead of this decades-old NIMBY thing going on now.

Sounds more promising than that HSR thing they're still arguing about.

Why not the whole bay in the plan?

Personally, I think we should go the other way and build this thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project

I'd prefer the Nile variant, which would be hard to do for sure. But like the Salton Sea, flooding parts of the desert seems to have ecological benefits.

Did you read up on the Salton Sea? [1]

Ecological Benefits: "Once known as the “California Riviera”, the Salton Sea is now called one of America’s worst ecological disasters: a fetid, stagnant, salty lake, that coughs up dead fish and birds by the thousands in frequent die-offs that occur."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagues_%26_Pleasures_on_the_S...

Not sure how I'm supposed to read up with a movie... But yes I've driven by a few times and the smell was less than awesome.

But you're talking about the technical debt of the Salton project. It was pretty great at first and we were adding a new species every week. But eventually, support for the project was diverted and it dried up. Now the whole thing reeks of code smell and everybody knows we need to fix the thing -- but it's in a remote area so it's hard to convince management that the project is worth the resources to save.

Have you stopped to consider that this might be the natural outcome of such an endeavor?

Perhaps support was diverted simply because the benefits simply weren't going to outweigh the costs... ever.

"Flooding the depression to -20 m would lower the height of the world ocean by 2.16 milimeters"

Hmm, maybe that could be a way to offset flooding from climate change, by redistributing the water elsewhere into low-lying but dry land.

I don't think there's enough "free" space we could flood. 2.16 mm does not even offset the sea level rise of any single year in the past 25 years, much less the rest.

I read that the mid-west (not sure if that's the correct location) in north America had heavily depleted water tables because of irrigation. When that evaporates off, where does that water go? Is it destined to stay over North America or does it end up in the sea? Or rather does this cause an imbalance? Is it more likely to rain over land?

Diversion of the Nile only so the water could end up in evaporation?

I see it as a reallocation of electricity to a different neighborhood, reduction of water to current cities, creation of new cities along the route of diversion, and unpredictable ecological impacts.

But on the bright side, I predict the constant evaporation would reduce over time with the establishment of cities and possibly air polluting factories, whose constant smog would crystalize the evaporated water into immediate rain.

Water evaporating is a major component of the hydrologic cycle. That's generally what happens to water that ends up in the Mediterranean, so we'd essentially be taking the water that ended up in the ocean and putting it into an inland sea instead.

Now that would probably have consequences for the Nile Delta, particularly in terms of saltwater intrusion... but the the Nile Delta is already somewhat screwed this way.[1] But I'm a meteorologist and not a hydrologist, so don't take my word on it.

What I can say is that large bodies of water moderate temperature around them and create wildlife habitat, as North African lakes apparently did during the Pleistocene. The ecological impacts might be unpredictable, but they're definitely not unprecedented.

Also when you say "reduction of water to current cities", you sound a lot like people here in the U.S. who think they will get less Colorado River water if it's stored in Lake Mead than if it was in Lake Powell. That's not how politics works; and storing the water in two dams only increases evaporation so everyone gets less water :(

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_Delta#Sea_level

That article has this set of gems "The resulting lagoon, according to the CIA, would have four benefits:[8]

It would be "spectacular and peaceful." It would "materially alter the climate in adjacent areas." It would "provide work during construction and living areas after completion for the Palestinian Arabs." It would get Egyptian president Gamel Abdel Nasser's "mind on other matters" because "he need[ed] some way to get off the Soviet Hook.""

In the long term, maybe it's a fantastic idea. But in the short term, the economic damage of all those ports suddenly ceasing to be ports alone, to say nothing of all the other disruption, probably means the idea fundamentally has too high an activation energy to happen in any forseeable future.

(activation energy in chemistry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activation_energy )

But very interesting to think about.

Also XKCD did a comic series that probably technically constitutes the majority of XKCD's output by area which is worth looking at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(xkcd)

Don't think it's a good idea at all. Waste precious coasts to get more more mundane heartland? Who ordered that? For nations that do not grow? In the world where agriculture is barely profitable?

Why would you need land, seriously, in 2016? Look at Hong Kong and Singapore, land is liability. Interesting how perspective changed in a hundred years.

But the archaeology would be fantastic.

We'd only have to drop the water level by 10/20 meters or so for the archaeology wouldn't we?

The black sea was only ~5000 years ago, now that would have some good archaeology.

There's a few thousand years of Mediterranean cargo and shipping distributed over the seabed.

And I'm sure Atlantis is down there somewhere...

I'm sure there is, underneath the layer of 20th century sewage and trash.

A rather good point about the Mediterranean being used as a shipping channel! There would still need to be huge canals.

As expected, this was not thought up by anyone who actually lived or grew up in a country along the coast of the Mediterranean.

The way the Aegean islands were supposed to be replaced by a plateau is particularly freaky, like hearing a plastic surgeon tell you they plan to replace your head with that of a donkey.

A truly callous, tone-deaf proposal, even given its historical context.

What I don't understand is how Sörgel claimed that this plan would create more farmland. Wouldn't any land exposed by drops in sea level be irredeemably contaminated by salt, just like land being inundated by rising sea levels?

A fair bit of land in areas that was heavily glaciated was formerly below sea level and has been raised by post-glacial isostatic rebound - a lot of this is farmed so I don't think there is a fundamental problem.

I think the problem is getting enough rainfall to rinse salt from the topsoil.

I don't know how much is needed. Parts of Sweden were in the Baltic during Viking times but are now farmland, so perhaps no more than a few hundred years? Then again, there's more rain in those areas of northern America and Europe where the glaciers were than in the Mediterranean.

I think a very long time indeed. The classic way to render fields unfit for generations is to salt them.

I wondered how long it took for the fields of Carthage to be fertile again. If my supposition is correct, it should need only a few years for normal rain to carry it away, not generations.

I found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salting_the_earth which suggests that the salting was more symbolic, or a curse, and that "There is no evidence that sufficient amounts of salt were used to render large tracts of land unusable."

Given how expensive salt was, it seems like it would be horrendously expensive to do that in the classical era.

And yet the Central Valley of California has square miles of dead land, due to selenium salts(?) that build up. They don't go away. They creep to the surface and appear as a crusty deposit. Salt is weird, and irrigation water evaporates it doesn't 'wash away' anything.

Portions of the Central Valley do not flow to the sea. Salt stays in a basin. To note, we were discussing land which emerged from the sea due to post-glacial rebound, or where the sea was lowered through engineering effect, not basins. Nor is Carthage in a basin.

Agricultural water runoff is a thing. The water doesn't all evaporate. Quoting http://www.watereducation.org/post/salinity-central-valley-c... , "Every time a farmer irrigates a crop, salt ends up concentrating in the runoff and groundwater."

In the Netherlands they farm on reclaimed land without any problems.

This seems relevant to your questions. Among other things, it discusses which crops are best suited for salinated soil as well as improving conditions for crops in salinated soil using potasium fertilisers. Also relevant to your question, it discusses desalination strategies. http://www.fao.org/docrep/x5871e/x5871e04.htm

What's not even mentioned in the article is that this could protect the entire Mediterranean coast line against rising sea levels[1].

[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11069-015-1821-8

I was thinking the same. We'd need only the dam of Gibraltar for that and let enough water in to compensate evaporation. The article includes a warning about long term increases of salinity and the need to pump salty water from the deep layers of the Mediterranean to the Atlantic.

How would sea creatures get in and out?

That seems like a minor objection.

What do you mean?

I don't think many, if any, cross it as it is. Not as a necessity in their life cycle anyway.

The strait is really narrow, with really strong currents and a huge change in salinity.

Not fun.

I didn't think about this. A quick search and I found one population of tuna that live in the Atlantic and breeds in the Mediterranean http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/unraveling-the-se...

Probably they're not the only sea creatures that cross Gibraltar so this is a concern. Non a minor objection, but one among the many that would be raised. Think also about the political and military implications of a bridge from Africa to Europe.

Fish catapults?

If you pumped all of the Mediterranean into the rest of the world oceans, that would raise sea level about 7.4 meters. (The volume of the Mediterranean is about 3,750,000 km^3, the surface area of the rest of the world oceans is about 507,500,000 km^2.)

I think a few existing coastal cities might object...

Alternatively, you could pump the water to land for desalination and agriculture.

Where do you think the water goes after being consumed by humans or plants?

If we're talking about fantasy-scale ecological modifications, there's no reason to ever turn off the pumps, is there?

Yes we do!

I live on a small island that's just above sea level and of course the main city and other towns are on the coast. We'd lose about 50% of the land here.

Sorry, I was unclear. By "this", I just meant the dam across the strait of Gibraltar. That would allow the Mediterranean sea to be kept at its current level. I was not referring to the plan to drain the whole Mediterranean.

Title is inaccurate. Atlantropa was never meant to "drain" the Mediterranean, just lower the water level by 200m--compare to the current 1500m average/5267m maximum. Most of the original water surface area would remain, as the diagram in the article shows. Still pretty impractical, of course.

Dividing the new land would be crazy. Maybe even inner countries (Germany, ...) would want a piece.

And there is also this theory that the great Bible flood was the Mediterranean Sea spilling into the Black Sea. If the Gibraltar dam fails we would see the mother of all floods from the Atlantic rushing in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis

> inner countries (Germany, ...)

Inner country in what sense? Germany has two coasts. A claim would still be reasonable, as Mallorca is Germany's 17th state. An epic battle would arise early in the morning, as usual started by the Germans claiming the land by putting towels on it, but soon they would have to fight off Brits in their sunburned bright red warpaint.

> A claim would still be reasonable, as Mallorca is Germany's 17th state

For those wondering what the hell this is about, apparently it's a running joke about the number of German tourists there.

And not only tourists. There are so many Germans than in a town they elected a German major.

Economically Spain is benefiting in two ways from the freedom of movement of the EU: Old people from Germany moving to Spain, spending, young people from Spain moving to Germany, earning.

Socially this might not be desired and environmentally – at least on Mallorca – it is a disaster.

How is young people moving to Germany contributing to Spain?

Earning? They spend most of their money where they live.

In the past engineers used to create wealth in Spain, creating 30 to 40% of the Gross product in Industry in Spain. Now it is 10%.

I am engineer and I have a company in central Europe, I know.

Educated people moving to Germany to create wealth there is a disaster for Spain. You are payed in salary 10 because you contribute at least 20 or 30 to the country you work in.

Training an engineer cost Spain 40 to 50.000 euros in public education. Them moving to USA or Germany is an enormous transfer of wealth.

I wonder why I don't know any IT consulting giants in Italy or Spain.

I mean, climate is awesome and prices are lower than in Switzerland or UK where many of those are located, and quality of life is much better than in Poland or Ukraine where more of them are located. Where's your IT consulting? Maybe you ought to remove a few roadblocks for them? I'll be the first one to move to Italy and pay taxes there if provided with workplace and visa.

You cannot compare Ukrainian prices to Italian. Italy's GDP per capita is almost 5 times the Ukrainian and the German is not even 1.5 times the Italian. Add in a language barrier and you have your answer.

Also northern Italy is where all the industry sits and its productivity is comparable to north-western Europe, the south is dragging Italy down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...

There's no reason why the language barrier will be there in Italy but not in Ukraine. Will definitely not affect offshore devs coming on your turf (like with Poland, which imports a lot of Ukrainian and Russian IT workforce).

If London and Zurich can afford IT consultancies, why not Italy? 'cause I've not heard of those.

WRT "south dragging Italy down", I actually don't think this is true. I think it's more like an excuse.

> In the past engineers used to create wealth in Spain, creating 30 to 40% of the Gross product in Industry in Spain. Now it is 10%.

Spain also had a big fat housing bubble inflating the GDP and probably this statistic aswell.

> How is young people moving to Germany contributing to Spain? > Earning? They spend most of their money where they live.

They have an oversupply of unemployed people. Paying unemployment benefits does not help Spain to get competitive.

I have read multiple stories claiming that most expats do not want to stay forever and in fact do not. Moving from Spain to Germany is more like moving to a part of Spain that speaks a different language than moving to the US. It is not like they need a visa and give up everything back home.

Many are supporting their parents, they continue to develop their career, they learn another language, maybe they build some wealth, they definitely will develop relationships. They will keep all of this, which will help Spain when they move along.

This is not something, that only happens in Spain.

Turkey is a good example. They benefit tremendously from the large Turkish community in Germany. When Turkish-German people move back, they transfer knowledge and bring access to the German market. Access beyond just theoretical laws, but actual knowledge of the language, the society and even business contacts. Turkey can then use this and mix it with its own competitive advantages.

I have seen a few documentaries of Germans of Turkish descent moving back to Turkey working there for a few years and then ironically moving back to Germany again, because they experienced a culture shock. I think this back and forth helps both countries, because they build relationships and exchange knowledge. Nobody loses, but each has now gained a competitive advantage to other possible partners.

Two other examples, which are a bit different, but still show how beneficial interchange is:

* People living in Poland, supporting their families there, but working in Germany (elderly care, craftsmen, e-commerce fulfillment), essentially just an injection of cash into their market increasing their local purchasing power. The growth of the Polish economy clearly shows, that it is not losing here.

* The same happens in Southern Germany with people working in Switzerland or Luxembourg, but living in Germany. In return Swiss people buy groceries in Germany. One of the richest regions. It benefits enormously from it. As usual only house prices are hideous.

So my conclusion is: As long as there is a back and forth and not just a flow in one direction, this interchange helps both countries' economies. It is a super effective way to remove trade barriers. And I have not even talked about the social benefits for society and individuals.

I guess the exact same way Polish people working in the UK benefit Poland, even if they pay taxes in the UK. They come back eventually, and use the money saved to buy/build a house, start a business etc. I know people in building companies saying that more than 50% of all new houses they build are funded by people who worked abroad and saved for them.

Major? Or mayor?

Ah, sorry: mayor. Thanks.

> started by the Germans claiming the land by putting towels on it

Bwahaha

Speaking of a drained Mediterranean, Harry Turtledove wrote a called Down in the Bottomlands, about a world where the Mediterranean did not refill after the Messinian Salinity Crisis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_in_the_Bottomlands

Turtledove was my favorite author for about 2 months until I was unable to tell any of his characters apart because he gave them all the same dry, ultra sarcastic humor and vulgar vocabulary. Still his ideas were very interesting.

There is a one-hour documentary about the Atlantropa project on Vimeo:

https://vimeo.com/92381391

Moving water really enhances places aesthetically.

I noticed that the disused Clyde docklands in Glasgow (UK), were being filled in a few years back. A missed opportunity for waterside property.

The Mediterranean was also damned at Gibraltar in the Star Trek The Motion Picture novelization.

In TNG the built a whole new continent int the Indian ocean.

Where would all that water go? Atmosphere? Isn't water vapor a greenhouse gas?

Wonder how much this would have raised global sea levels.

The Mediterranean Valley would have been hella deep.

1500 m average

During the Messinian Salinity Crisis the deepest parts of the Mediterranean basin would have had summer time temperatures of up to 80 C.

So that's what they meant when they said they'll stop illegal migrants drowning, they'll drain the sea.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com