Rainfall: Fill & Download for Free

There is an old joke about an Indian minister who was suggesting a solution to the quagmire faced by the army in Kashmir and said: let’s send our navy instead.This point about desalination reminds me of that. Let’s say a farmer in Krishnagiri district needs water for irrigation. Do tell us how you are going to send your “desalinated water” to them? Are you going to take a massive pipe comparable to the size of the Cauvery river for 300 km from the coast? Are you going to make such pipes around the country for each district in the interior [most of India’s population live far from the coast]?Desalination can be a source of drinking water to a coastal city. It can be a solution to Chennai’s water problems. But, it is not a solution to the farming water needs of Mandya, Mysore, Krishnagiri, Karur, Trichi or Thanjavur. The solution for those is better management of rain water and selection of the right crops.EDIT: People here are commenting about Israel, UAE etc. We are not a desert and neither is our population that small. Let me put up a calculation for how much abundant water we have.Tamil Nadu gets about 100cm rainfall in an average year [http://www.tn.gov.in/crop/rainfall.htm] and it has an area of about 130,000 sq. km.130,000 sq km * 0.001 km of rainfall = 130 cubic kilometers of rainfall. That is 130 trillion liters of rainfall that fall on an average year over the state of Tamil Nadu itself. Each person in Tamil Nadu gets over 1.5 million liters of rainfall. This desalination plant provided by earth in partnership with Sun is sufficient for our water needs.In case of Karnataka the numbers are even big. The state gets 25% more rainfall, has 50% more area and 20% less population. Add it all up, the state gets more than 240 trillion liters of rainfall & about 4 million liters of annual rainfall per person.Why is this simple rainwater management not getting more attention before going for unrealistic desalination methods?

From the details:There's water erosion on the sphinx, rainfall hasn't occurred in Egypt for well over 10,000 yearsThis is an image of Cairo, from the 26th of January, 2016:(Source: Cairo witnesses heavy rain, fog; unstable weather to last till end of week)The Sphinx is 23km away from the dead centre of Cairo.I would be willing to bet that the same shower which you see in this image, also gave the Sphinx a good smattering of precipitation.Here is a graph of the rainfall in Cairo:Note how distinctly not zero that graph is.Cairo gets a fair amount of rain. Hence, due to proximity, so does the Sphinx.It has rained on the Great Sphinx of Giza in the last 10,000 hours - let alone the last 10,000 years!Your argument is invalid.As an accused part of the global “Jewish Conspiracy” (despite not being Jewish), I hereby use my poorly defined “global influence” to revoke your internet license, until you learn to fact check better.Edit:A lot of people are coming to the comments and treating me like some kind of moron.So let's get one thing straight:I am not claiming that this amount of rain is sufficient to cause the erosion seen on the Sphinx.I am making no statements about historical rainfall records.The questioner makes an assertion:It has not rained in Egypt for 10,000 yearsAnd from that assertion they are concludingTherefore the Sphinx is over 50,000 years oldI am not proving that the Sphinx is under 50,000 years old.What I am showing is the argument used to get to the conclusion is false.It has rained in Egypt in the last 10,000 years. It has even snowed. The amount of those is utterly irrelevant.Since my answer shows that the asssertion is incorrect - the conclusion is no longer sustainable.If more evidence about how old the Sphinx is is presented - then we need to talk about amount of rain yada yada.But my answer is the same if Egypt received 1mm of rain every year, or 10m.So if you could all stop calling me a “liar” and a “dumb idiot” for not recognising that the rainfall is very small, then that would be fab - because all it is showing is that you didn't understand what I was saying.Peace y’allX

Is the middle of Australia completely uninhabitable? If so, is lack of water, heat, and desert the reason?No, central Australia is not completely uninhabitable.That being said, it is unlikely that the Australian interior will ever support large numbers of people.This map might help explain why:Shown above are all of Australia’s perennial and seasonal rivers. As you can see, there is bugger all permanent surface water in the interior, other than in the south-east.In Australia, drylands cover a total of 5.3 million square kilometres, which is about 70% of the mainland area. Half of that 70 percent is desert.While Australia’s deserts aren’t dry by world standards, they are arid. (Aridity is annual rainfall as a proportion of annual potential evaporation.) There is very little in the way of runoff, particularly in the western two-thirds of the continent. What surface flow does occur ends up in the innumerable playas (salt lakes) that dot the interior.Even on the coast, surface water availability is somewhat limited. In the north of Western Australia, only the lower reaches of the Ord River are perennial. All of the other rivers in the region are seasonal. On the west coast, most of the rivers are seasonal, and on the western south coast, about half are seasonal and brackish.As a whole, Australia receives an average of 419 mm of rainfall annually. Median rainfall is somewhat less than 300 mm. The mean can, and does, vary widely. In 2019 the total, nationally averaged, was 277.6 mm.Total runoff nationwide is 9% of rainfall. In the interior it varies between nil and stuff all.Groundwater recharge is 2% of rainfall. It is the only source of water in many areas of the country, and its extraction requires careful management.Evapotranspiration is 89% of rainfall. Annual potential evaporation is an order of magnitude greater than rainfall in some parts of the country.Perth, a city of about 2 million people on the lower west coast of Western Australia, used to receive about a third of its water from dams in the hills to it’s east:The other two-thirds was pumped from the ground.Since the 1960s, rainfall in the south of Western Australia has declined by about 30 percent. Runoff into dams has declined by more than 80 percent over the same period.These days the water supplied to Perth and the adjacent agricultural regions is a shandy of desalinated seawater (48%), groundwater (40%), dam water (10%) and treated wastewater (2%).