Question on water during SHTF

5311 Views 29 Replies 19 Participants Last post by Gankom, Jun 4, 2012

libertyforall

Discussion Starter · Apr 28, 2012

Past threads have emphasized the need for country folks to have generators to run their wells....but I have heard no mention about those living in the cities getting their water from huge wells run by the city. If SHTF, and all electricity is lost, including backup generators, people living in the city are as much up a creek as us living in the country for that matter. The size of generators it would take to run those giant wells in the city would need to be enormous. I don't see how they could keep that up very long.

Save

1 - 3 of 30 Posts

goose3

· #5 · Apr 29, 2012

You have to assume the water is done when the water towers are empty.

Most cities will likely have generators to provide water (I live in a small town and I've asked this question--we do have generators).

But then I asked the more important question: How much fuel do you have to run them?

Answer? About 12 hours of continuous operation.

Even if there are generators, the limiting factor is fuel. But either way, you need water independent of the local water system, or you need a bugout location.

Save

Reactions: 2

goose3

· #10 · Apr 29, 2012

I don't want this to be a complete thread hijack, but the idea of people leaving the city when water runs out is something I debated with someone a couple years ago.

I contended people would leave the cities in a direction where they thought they could find food.

My interlocutor thought they'd head toward water. What we had in mind was Milwaukee and Chicago, i.e., that large numbers of people would head toward Lake Michigan, and people would camp out there because the water was there.

I didn't agree, but the idea was so novel that...I just had to keep it as a a potential scenario. I still think most people will instinctively move toward food, but it's quite possible a notable number will seek water first.

Save

Reactions: 1

goose3

· #16 · Apr 30, 2012

stephpd said:
Both are possibilities. My contention is foremost they'd just be thinking of getting out of the war zone. I'm not sure if either the source of food or water will give much weight. Probably they have friends or relatives outside the city they plan on getting to. Hoping that place will be better then where they currently are..

Kinda like the mass exodus from Manhattan post 9/11. Many had no bigger plan then to not be there anymore. Anyplace else had to be better. Same thing happens in war torn areas. Folks pack up what they can and just follow the crowd. usually they all end up together at some refugee type camp on a border. The neighboring country not allowing them to cross.

Even the Hoovervilles, or Obamaburbs (tent cities that have popped up) don't seem to follow much logic other then they're not being chased off that ground.

My guess is that, initially, most people *won't* leave a city unless things become untenable. They'll wait for the government to do something first; only when pain sets in, or thirst, or hunger, will they consider moving.

I can't imagine having an EMP, say, and suddenly the roads are clogged with people walking out of the city.

People will be confused at first, seeking information, looking for help. I'd doubt that any more than 1 or 2 in a hundred would have their wits about them enough to recognize EMP for what it was, and to know what to do.

That 1-2 percent would be, of course, us.

Save

Reactions: 1

1 - 3 of 30 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month