I have been reading your Laws of Water essays with considerable attention (with my partner Claude!) — both Part 1 on Darcy's and Richards' equations, and Part 2 on the Budyko curve.
I wanted to share an analytical observation that struck me reading them together, and to introduce a project I believe you will find genuinely relevant.
Reading the two essays in sequence, I noticed they form a vertical analytical chain that I have not seen made explicit elsewhere. Darcy's law and Richards' equation describe what happens in soil during a specific rainfall event — the mechanics of infiltration, the K(θ) function, the difference between a soil that welcomes rain and one that sheds it. The Budyko curve describes the long-term equilibrium of a landscape between precipitation and evapotranspiration. What connects them is the parameter w in the Budyko framework. That parameter is, in effect, the aggregate long-run consequence of K(θ): restore soil structure through regenerative practice, raise K, and the landscape gradually moves to a higher Budyko curve — more water retained, more evapotranspiration, more contribution to the small water cycle. The chain runs from the pore structure of a single field all the way to the regional water balance. I think making this chain explicit — in a single analytical piece — would be a significant contribution.
The reason I am writing now is that I am leading a project called the World Transformation Programme (WTP), a 100-year (analytical and investment) initiative focused on preventing civilisational collapse by returning humanity's aggregate burden to within planetary boundaries. Water systems is one of our six core transformation domains. We have recently completed a Comprehensive Review of the Global Water Crisis — and I would very much like to share it with you, because your work on the small water cycle, groundwater, and now soil hydrology sits directly at the analytical core of what we are building.
Our review makes an argument that parallels the framing you and John Cherry have developed: that the water crisis is not primarily a climate consequence but the result of three distinct mechanisms being dismantled — the atmospheric water cycle through deforestation, groundwater through systematic mining, and green water through soil degradation. The "slow it, spread it, sink it" framework from your Part 1 essay maps directly onto our investment programme logic for Wave 3–4 countries building their water infrastructure from scratch.
I would be very glad to send you the review (White Paper) and to explore whether there is a basis for closer collaboration. Anastassia Makarieva is already part of our scientific community, and I believe your work belongs in the same conversation.
I was having this discussion in regards to tree planting and failures in the Sahal with the primary focus on using slow release spreader levees across flat land to restore the ground water before or along with the tree planting for greater success. The primary advantage we have as a species is to adjust the water cycle to maximize output and although the impact on global warming as a whole may be limited, the restoration of our flat degraded and semi arid land which cover over 20% of the globe will lower temperature extremes and create a much more habitable environment for all species. They are already doing this with great success in Australia and now I see pilot programs in Chad showing great success. You can think of these as Zia pits that cover thousands of acres at once which have the added benefit of lifting down stream water out of confining erosion gullies and spreading these for water infiltration even where there has been no rain.
Yes, the best things about it are scale, sediment drop and it does not even need to rain in that area just upstream somewhere ,it can work across many sizes of intermittent and perennial streams maybe even rivers if they wish to get inventive.
Thank you, Alpha. There seems to be a disconnect here in Colorado between wildfire mitigation “hardening” practices that are being quickly codified without any apparent reference to what you’ve outlined so clearly here. There are also existing water and land use laws that are out of alignment with how water cycles actually work. If you know of anyone who is convening around these disconnects, we need to who they are and what they’re doing ASAP.
Yeah a lot of the wildfire mitigation methods make things worse in the long run. I can let you know if I know of someone out there in Colorado, right now I dont.
Interesting article, and one that I will have to go back to in order to absorb in more detail. I suspect one thing missing in this analysis is connectivity to the oceans (as the ultimate source of water). I believe there is no point in trying to restore an area somewhere in the middle of the Sahara. Even if one could get enough trees to grow, they would not be able to increase the rainfall by much, isolated as they are. I see Theodore has commented on failure in the Sahel. The slow progress may indeed have been because they concentrated on trees before water harvesting, but I suspect another cause of failure is that they started in the middle, rather than at the coasts.
Yes restoring vegetation nearer the oceans can be helpful because that can transport more water in. That is happening to some degree. I've been looking at the data, as you go further into the Sahel you see rainfall exponentially increasing. Nearer the coast you do not see exponential increase in rain. If you plot increase in rain vs distance from coast you can clearly see its increasing a lot more as you go inland. So something is working in the middle of the Sahel in terms of restoration.
Can you share that data of rainfall increasing as you move away from the coast - in the Sahel (or anywhere else)? It would seem to contradict the Biotic Pump (which only argues that forests can maintain the rainfall inland) but also seems to contradict the principle of maintenance of mass - in this case mass of water. It would appear to be getting something for nothing.
There is more zai pits and half moon crescents being dug in Burkina Faso and Chad and elsewhere these infilitrate more and more rainfall over time, which means water in the land is growing exponentially, so then there is more to evapotranspire up. Also in general as you move inland, theres more and more precipitation recycling. So rain is still decreasing as you go inland, its just that that decrease is getting less over time.
I see in earlier comment I mistyped the correction being made as the actual rain , so exponentially rising is just the change in the rain, not the total rain as you go in
Dear Alpha,
I have been reading your Laws of Water essays with considerable attention (with my partner Claude!) — both Part 1 on Darcy's and Richards' equations, and Part 2 on the Budyko curve.
I wanted to share an analytical observation that struck me reading them together, and to introduce a project I believe you will find genuinely relevant.
Reading the two essays in sequence, I noticed they form a vertical analytical chain that I have not seen made explicit elsewhere. Darcy's law and Richards' equation describe what happens in soil during a specific rainfall event — the mechanics of infiltration, the K(θ) function, the difference between a soil that welcomes rain and one that sheds it. The Budyko curve describes the long-term equilibrium of a landscape between precipitation and evapotranspiration. What connects them is the parameter w in the Budyko framework. That parameter is, in effect, the aggregate long-run consequence of K(θ): restore soil structure through regenerative practice, raise K, and the landscape gradually moves to a higher Budyko curve — more water retained, more evapotranspiration, more contribution to the small water cycle. The chain runs from the pore structure of a single field all the way to the regional water balance. I think making this chain explicit — in a single analytical piece — would be a significant contribution.
The reason I am writing now is that I am leading a project called the World Transformation Programme (WTP), a 100-year (analytical and investment) initiative focused on preventing civilisational collapse by returning humanity's aggregate burden to within planetary boundaries. Water systems is one of our six core transformation domains. We have recently completed a Comprehensive Review of the Global Water Crisis — and I would very much like to share it with you, because your work on the small water cycle, groundwater, and now soil hydrology sits directly at the analytical core of what we are building.
Our review makes an argument that parallels the framing you and John Cherry have developed: that the water crisis is not primarily a climate consequence but the result of three distinct mechanisms being dismantled — the atmospheric water cycle through deforestation, groundwater through systematic mining, and green water through soil degradation. The "slow it, spread it, sink it" framework from your Part 1 essay maps directly onto our investment programme logic for Wave 3–4 countries building their water infrastructure from scratch.
I would be very glad to send you the review (White Paper) and to explore whether there is a basis for closer collaboration. Anastassia Makarieva is already part of our scientific community, and I believe your work belongs in the same conversation.
Yeah good observation, w is very connected with K........ Yeah I can take a look at paper.
I was having this discussion in regards to tree planting and failures in the Sahal with the primary focus on using slow release spreader levees across flat land to restore the ground water before or along with the tree planting for greater success. The primary advantage we have as a species is to adjust the water cycle to maximize output and although the impact on global warming as a whole may be limited, the restoration of our flat degraded and semi arid land which cover over 20% of the globe will lower temperature extremes and create a much more habitable environment for all species. They are already doing this with great success in Australia and now I see pilot programs in Chad showing great success. You can think of these as Zia pits that cover thousands of acres at once which have the added benefit of lifting down stream water out of confining erosion gullies and spreading these for water infiltration even where there has been no rain.
interesting idea to slow water
Yes, the best things about it are scale, sediment drop and it does not even need to rain in that area just upstream somewhere ,it can work across many sizes of intermittent and perennial streams maybe even rivers if they wish to get inventive.
sorry they call it dyke building in Chad across runoff channels from watersheds. Andrew.Millison has done a few quick vids on this recently.
Thank you, Alpha. There seems to be a disconnect here in Colorado between wildfire mitigation “hardening” practices that are being quickly codified without any apparent reference to what you’ve outlined so clearly here. There are also existing water and land use laws that are out of alignment with how water cycles actually work. If you know of anyone who is convening around these disconnects, we need to who they are and what they’re doing ASAP.
Yeah a lot of the wildfire mitigation methods make things worse in the long run. I can let you know if I know of someone out there in Colorado, right now I dont.
Interesting article, and one that I will have to go back to in order to absorb in more detail. I suspect one thing missing in this analysis is connectivity to the oceans (as the ultimate source of water). I believe there is no point in trying to restore an area somewhere in the middle of the Sahara. Even if one could get enough trees to grow, they would not be able to increase the rainfall by much, isolated as they are. I see Theodore has commented on failure in the Sahel. The slow progress may indeed have been because they concentrated on trees before water harvesting, but I suspect another cause of failure is that they started in the middle, rather than at the coasts.
Yes restoring vegetation nearer the oceans can be helpful because that can transport more water in. That is happening to some degree. I've been looking at the data, as you go further into the Sahel you see rainfall exponentially increasing. Nearer the coast you do not see exponential increase in rain. If you plot increase in rain vs distance from coast you can clearly see its increasing a lot more as you go inland. So something is working in the middle of the Sahel in terms of restoration.
Can you share that data of rainfall increasing as you move away from the coast - in the Sahel (or anywhere else)? It would seem to contradict the Biotic Pump (which only argues that forests can maintain the rainfall inland) but also seems to contradict the principle of maintenance of mass - in this case mass of water. It would appear to be getting something for nothing.
There is more zai pits and half moon crescents being dug in Burkina Faso and Chad and elsewhere these infilitrate more and more rainfall over time, which means water in the land is growing exponentially, so then there is more to evapotranspire up. Also in general as you move inland, theres more and more precipitation recycling. So rain is still decreasing as you go inland, its just that that decrease is getting less over time.
I see in earlier comment I mistyped the correction being made as the actual rain , so exponentially rising is just the change in the rain, not the total rain as you go in