Could Earth still survive if we lost almost 90% of all surface water?












1












$begingroup$


I have been toying with the idea that all oceans are gone. Underground water still exists but the Earth has essentially turned into the planet from Dune.



My characters all live / survive out where the oceans once were as it's the closest source for water. The Earth is now just one big desert.



My question is, instead of 100% of all surface water gone, is 90% more feasible? I plan on having larger civilisations, mining towns etc. I want water to be a rare commodity, but not so rare that only 5 people can live off it.



As the majority of the story takes place out in these vast oceans of desert, there are going to be some large swathes of distance in-between continents / countries. Initially people were going to get around on horse back, but there's too much distance for a horse to travel, then I considered intercontinental railroads but that is taking technology in a direction I hadn't planned on going. So, if I leave a small portion of the ocean, travel by boat could seem plausible.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
    $endgroup$
    – Physicist137
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Tomás Richardson
    2 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
    $endgroup$
    – John Dvorak
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    1 hour ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    47 mins ago


















1












$begingroup$


I have been toying with the idea that all oceans are gone. Underground water still exists but the Earth has essentially turned into the planet from Dune.



My characters all live / survive out where the oceans once were as it's the closest source for water. The Earth is now just one big desert.



My question is, instead of 100% of all surface water gone, is 90% more feasible? I plan on having larger civilisations, mining towns etc. I want water to be a rare commodity, but not so rare that only 5 people can live off it.



As the majority of the story takes place out in these vast oceans of desert, there are going to be some large swathes of distance in-between continents / countries. Initially people were going to get around on horse back, but there's too much distance for a horse to travel, then I considered intercontinental railroads but that is taking technology in a direction I hadn't planned on going. So, if I leave a small portion of the ocean, travel by boat could seem plausible.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
    $endgroup$
    – Physicist137
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Tomás Richardson
    2 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
    $endgroup$
    – John Dvorak
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    1 hour ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    47 mins ago
















1












1








1





$begingroup$


I have been toying with the idea that all oceans are gone. Underground water still exists but the Earth has essentially turned into the planet from Dune.



My characters all live / survive out where the oceans once were as it's the closest source for water. The Earth is now just one big desert.



My question is, instead of 100% of all surface water gone, is 90% more feasible? I plan on having larger civilisations, mining towns etc. I want water to be a rare commodity, but not so rare that only 5 people can live off it.



As the majority of the story takes place out in these vast oceans of desert, there are going to be some large swathes of distance in-between continents / countries. Initially people were going to get around on horse back, but there's too much distance for a horse to travel, then I considered intercontinental railroads but that is taking technology in a direction I hadn't planned on going. So, if I leave a small portion of the ocean, travel by boat could seem plausible.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I have been toying with the idea that all oceans are gone. Underground water still exists but the Earth has essentially turned into the planet from Dune.



My characters all live / survive out where the oceans once were as it's the closest source for water. The Earth is now just one big desert.



My question is, instead of 100% of all surface water gone, is 90% more feasible? I plan on having larger civilisations, mining towns etc. I want water to be a rare commodity, but not so rare that only 5 people can live off it.



As the majority of the story takes place out in these vast oceans of desert, there are going to be some large swathes of distance in-between continents / countries. Initially people were going to get around on horse back, but there's too much distance for a horse to travel, then I considered intercontinental railroads but that is taking technology in a direction I hadn't planned on going. So, if I leave a small portion of the ocean, travel by boat could seem plausible.







reality-check transportation ocean deserts






share|improve this question









New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 14 mins ago









Cyn

6,0111935




6,0111935






New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 3 hours ago









Tomás RichardsonTomás Richardson

61




61




New contributor




Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Tomás Richardson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
    $endgroup$
    – Physicist137
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Tomás Richardson
    2 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
    $endgroup$
    – John Dvorak
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    1 hour ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    47 mins ago
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
    $endgroup$
    – Physicist137
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
    $endgroup$
    – Tomás Richardson
    2 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
    $endgroup$
    – John Dvorak
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    1 hour ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    47 mins ago










1




1




$begingroup$
Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
$endgroup$
– Physicist137
3 hours ago






$begingroup$
Given majority of trade is done by moving cargo across the water (be it ancient times or modern times), if 90% water vanishes, it is guaranteed there will be a global economic crisis of unprecedented levels.
$endgroup$
– Physicist137
3 hours ago














$begingroup$
Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
$endgroup$
– Tomás Richardson
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Yeah we're well and truly past the point of global economic crisis at this part of the story ;)
$endgroup$
– Tomás Richardson
2 hours ago




2




2




$begingroup$
Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
$endgroup$
– John Dvorak
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Earth will survive just fine without water. Now, life on Earth is a different story...
$endgroup$
– John Dvorak
2 hours ago












$begingroup$
The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
1 hour ago






$begingroup$
The immediate problem is that with the oceans gone, the hydrological cycle slows to a crawl -- basically, there is no more rain, and all Earth is a fierce desert. What little water is left will naturally pool in the deepest parts of the ocean basins, where the high pressure will make for hellish temperatures. Plants will die, and with plants gone almost all oxygen will be consumed in less that a million years.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
1 hour ago






1




1




$begingroup$
Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
$endgroup$
– JBH
47 mins ago






$begingroup$
Mandatory XKCD. draining everything dry means all (or nearly all) the aquifers are dry, too. Everything dribbles to the lowest point.
$endgroup$
– JBH
47 mins ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

There are a number of issues with eliminating our planet's oceans...



Our planet's gravity holds onto our water pretty tightly. The energies needed to evacuate several oceans worth of water out into space would probably also take our atmosphere along for the ride. You could send the water deeper into the planet's crust, but that leads to other issues...



50-85% of our oxygen comes from phytoplankton which live in the oceans near the surface. Eliminate the oceans (or even just poison them badly enough) and that oxygen goes bye-bye. Similarly, if the water submerges deeper into the crust, the percentage that remains near the surface will decrease greatly, leaving less room for the phytoplankton. So no matter where the water goes, oxygen will be in short supply after it is gone.



To combat the oxygen loss, you could evolve the phytoplankton to no longer require an aquatic environment. They could continue doing their job for us, living off of the nutrient rich silt and rotting fish corpses which cover the newly exposed ocean floor. That would give you a green and smelly desert, but at least your characters would still be able to breathe.



There would be other issues such as climate change and storm intensification. We might even discover that the former ocean waves served a hidden function, absorbing momentum from the winds which would otherwise rise to constant storm force everywhere. Your ocean-less planet is quickly transforming into a literal hell on Earth.



Earth would undoubtedly survive without its oceans, but its current infestation of organic life would probably not remain upon it for long.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
    $endgroup$
    – jdunlop
    30 mins ago



















1












$begingroup$

The single biggest issue you'll face is the loss of thermal mass. One of the key reasons that deserts are so hot during the day, so cold at night is that there's no water that soaks up the heat and releases it slowly through the night. In your world, this is now the norm so your days will be extremely hot, and nights extremely cold.



Within the bounds of habitability? With underground homes, perhaps. I wouldn't want to be living on the surface though.



Water in such an environment is very precious, and your inhabitants will most likely have mechanisms similar to those described in Dune for rendering water from the dead and other biological material for re-use. Their Stillsuits would also be a likely invention as you wouldn't want to waste sweat or urine because of the water content.



Of bigger concern would be the impact on vegetation, both marine and land based. The real issue here is that trees (which you'll still need to generate oxygen, especially now the phytoplankton is gone) need lots of water to grow, and they expect to live in an environment where they regularly get rainfall. You've also got the food issue as crops need water. Meat is definitely out because you won't have enough water for grass, and the amount of water required to 'raise' a meal of red meat by comparison to a vegetable based meal is massive.



Even with 10% of the previous water levels, I don't see you rebuilding large cities of any kind because the amount of water required in most mining and industrial applications is prohibitive and the infrastructure required to do so requires seeding from an industrial complex probably from before the water loss.



I'd see society degenerating into small clans, fiercely protecting what water holdings and crops they have the manpower to defend. Clan structures don't scale well, the lack of water also makes trade next to impossible because of the increased cost of 'shipping' and as such, societies won't reach the critical mass of size where there is sufficient food and protection in place to support a small core of researchers or scientists tasked with making things better.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "579"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Tomás Richardson is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f137219%2fcould-earth-still-survive-if-we-lost-almost-90-of-all-surface-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    There are a number of issues with eliminating our planet's oceans...



    Our planet's gravity holds onto our water pretty tightly. The energies needed to evacuate several oceans worth of water out into space would probably also take our atmosphere along for the ride. You could send the water deeper into the planet's crust, but that leads to other issues...



    50-85% of our oxygen comes from phytoplankton which live in the oceans near the surface. Eliminate the oceans (or even just poison them badly enough) and that oxygen goes bye-bye. Similarly, if the water submerges deeper into the crust, the percentage that remains near the surface will decrease greatly, leaving less room for the phytoplankton. So no matter where the water goes, oxygen will be in short supply after it is gone.



    To combat the oxygen loss, you could evolve the phytoplankton to no longer require an aquatic environment. They could continue doing their job for us, living off of the nutrient rich silt and rotting fish corpses which cover the newly exposed ocean floor. That would give you a green and smelly desert, but at least your characters would still be able to breathe.



    There would be other issues such as climate change and storm intensification. We might even discover that the former ocean waves served a hidden function, absorbing momentum from the winds which would otherwise rise to constant storm force everywhere. Your ocean-less planet is quickly transforming into a literal hell on Earth.



    Earth would undoubtedly survive without its oceans, but its current infestation of organic life would probably not remain upon it for long.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
      $endgroup$
      – jdunlop
      30 mins ago
















    3












    $begingroup$

    There are a number of issues with eliminating our planet's oceans...



    Our planet's gravity holds onto our water pretty tightly. The energies needed to evacuate several oceans worth of water out into space would probably also take our atmosphere along for the ride. You could send the water deeper into the planet's crust, but that leads to other issues...



    50-85% of our oxygen comes from phytoplankton which live in the oceans near the surface. Eliminate the oceans (or even just poison them badly enough) and that oxygen goes bye-bye. Similarly, if the water submerges deeper into the crust, the percentage that remains near the surface will decrease greatly, leaving less room for the phytoplankton. So no matter where the water goes, oxygen will be in short supply after it is gone.



    To combat the oxygen loss, you could evolve the phytoplankton to no longer require an aquatic environment. They could continue doing their job for us, living off of the nutrient rich silt and rotting fish corpses which cover the newly exposed ocean floor. That would give you a green and smelly desert, but at least your characters would still be able to breathe.



    There would be other issues such as climate change and storm intensification. We might even discover that the former ocean waves served a hidden function, absorbing momentum from the winds which would otherwise rise to constant storm force everywhere. Your ocean-less planet is quickly transforming into a literal hell on Earth.



    Earth would undoubtedly survive without its oceans, but its current infestation of organic life would probably not remain upon it for long.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
      $endgroup$
      – jdunlop
      30 mins ago














    3












    3








    3





    $begingroup$

    There are a number of issues with eliminating our planet's oceans...



    Our planet's gravity holds onto our water pretty tightly. The energies needed to evacuate several oceans worth of water out into space would probably also take our atmosphere along for the ride. You could send the water deeper into the planet's crust, but that leads to other issues...



    50-85% of our oxygen comes from phytoplankton which live in the oceans near the surface. Eliminate the oceans (or even just poison them badly enough) and that oxygen goes bye-bye. Similarly, if the water submerges deeper into the crust, the percentage that remains near the surface will decrease greatly, leaving less room for the phytoplankton. So no matter where the water goes, oxygen will be in short supply after it is gone.



    To combat the oxygen loss, you could evolve the phytoplankton to no longer require an aquatic environment. They could continue doing their job for us, living off of the nutrient rich silt and rotting fish corpses which cover the newly exposed ocean floor. That would give you a green and smelly desert, but at least your characters would still be able to breathe.



    There would be other issues such as climate change and storm intensification. We might even discover that the former ocean waves served a hidden function, absorbing momentum from the winds which would otherwise rise to constant storm force everywhere. Your ocean-less planet is quickly transforming into a literal hell on Earth.



    Earth would undoubtedly survive without its oceans, but its current infestation of organic life would probably not remain upon it for long.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    There are a number of issues with eliminating our planet's oceans...



    Our planet's gravity holds onto our water pretty tightly. The energies needed to evacuate several oceans worth of water out into space would probably also take our atmosphere along for the ride. You could send the water deeper into the planet's crust, but that leads to other issues...



    50-85% of our oxygen comes from phytoplankton which live in the oceans near the surface. Eliminate the oceans (or even just poison them badly enough) and that oxygen goes bye-bye. Similarly, if the water submerges deeper into the crust, the percentage that remains near the surface will decrease greatly, leaving less room for the phytoplankton. So no matter where the water goes, oxygen will be in short supply after it is gone.



    To combat the oxygen loss, you could evolve the phytoplankton to no longer require an aquatic environment. They could continue doing their job for us, living off of the nutrient rich silt and rotting fish corpses which cover the newly exposed ocean floor. That would give you a green and smelly desert, but at least your characters would still be able to breathe.



    There would be other issues such as climate change and storm intensification. We might even discover that the former ocean waves served a hidden function, absorbing momentum from the winds which would otherwise rise to constant storm force everywhere. Your ocean-less planet is quickly transforming into a literal hell on Earth.



    Earth would undoubtedly survive without its oceans, but its current infestation of organic life would probably not remain upon it for long.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 31 mins ago









    jdunlop

    7,53311643




    7,53311643










    answered 2 hours ago









    Henry TaylorHenry Taylor

    44.7k870164




    44.7k870164












    • $begingroup$
      +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
      $endgroup$
      – jdunlop
      30 mins ago


















    • $begingroup$
      +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
      $endgroup$
      – jdunlop
      30 mins ago
















    $begingroup$
    +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
    $endgroup$
    – jdunlop
    30 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    +1 for the last paragraph - Earth'll be fine. We won't, but that's not the question being asked. ;)
    $endgroup$
    – jdunlop
    30 mins ago











    1












    $begingroup$

    The single biggest issue you'll face is the loss of thermal mass. One of the key reasons that deserts are so hot during the day, so cold at night is that there's no water that soaks up the heat and releases it slowly through the night. In your world, this is now the norm so your days will be extremely hot, and nights extremely cold.



    Within the bounds of habitability? With underground homes, perhaps. I wouldn't want to be living on the surface though.



    Water in such an environment is very precious, and your inhabitants will most likely have mechanisms similar to those described in Dune for rendering water from the dead and other biological material for re-use. Their Stillsuits would also be a likely invention as you wouldn't want to waste sweat or urine because of the water content.



    Of bigger concern would be the impact on vegetation, both marine and land based. The real issue here is that trees (which you'll still need to generate oxygen, especially now the phytoplankton is gone) need lots of water to grow, and they expect to live in an environment where they regularly get rainfall. You've also got the food issue as crops need water. Meat is definitely out because you won't have enough water for grass, and the amount of water required to 'raise' a meal of red meat by comparison to a vegetable based meal is massive.



    Even with 10% of the previous water levels, I don't see you rebuilding large cities of any kind because the amount of water required in most mining and industrial applications is prohibitive and the infrastructure required to do so requires seeding from an industrial complex probably from before the water loss.



    I'd see society degenerating into small clans, fiercely protecting what water holdings and crops they have the manpower to defend. Clan structures don't scale well, the lack of water also makes trade next to impossible because of the increased cost of 'shipping' and as such, societies won't reach the critical mass of size where there is sufficient food and protection in place to support a small core of researchers or scientists tasked with making things better.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      The single biggest issue you'll face is the loss of thermal mass. One of the key reasons that deserts are so hot during the day, so cold at night is that there's no water that soaks up the heat and releases it slowly through the night. In your world, this is now the norm so your days will be extremely hot, and nights extremely cold.



      Within the bounds of habitability? With underground homes, perhaps. I wouldn't want to be living on the surface though.



      Water in such an environment is very precious, and your inhabitants will most likely have mechanisms similar to those described in Dune for rendering water from the dead and other biological material for re-use. Their Stillsuits would also be a likely invention as you wouldn't want to waste sweat or urine because of the water content.



      Of bigger concern would be the impact on vegetation, both marine and land based. The real issue here is that trees (which you'll still need to generate oxygen, especially now the phytoplankton is gone) need lots of water to grow, and they expect to live in an environment where they regularly get rainfall. You've also got the food issue as crops need water. Meat is definitely out because you won't have enough water for grass, and the amount of water required to 'raise' a meal of red meat by comparison to a vegetable based meal is massive.



      Even with 10% of the previous water levels, I don't see you rebuilding large cities of any kind because the amount of water required in most mining and industrial applications is prohibitive and the infrastructure required to do so requires seeding from an industrial complex probably from before the water loss.



      I'd see society degenerating into small clans, fiercely protecting what water holdings and crops they have the manpower to defend. Clan structures don't scale well, the lack of water also makes trade next to impossible because of the increased cost of 'shipping' and as such, societies won't reach the critical mass of size where there is sufficient food and protection in place to support a small core of researchers or scientists tasked with making things better.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        The single biggest issue you'll face is the loss of thermal mass. One of the key reasons that deserts are so hot during the day, so cold at night is that there's no water that soaks up the heat and releases it slowly through the night. In your world, this is now the norm so your days will be extremely hot, and nights extremely cold.



        Within the bounds of habitability? With underground homes, perhaps. I wouldn't want to be living on the surface though.



        Water in such an environment is very precious, and your inhabitants will most likely have mechanisms similar to those described in Dune for rendering water from the dead and other biological material for re-use. Their Stillsuits would also be a likely invention as you wouldn't want to waste sweat or urine because of the water content.



        Of bigger concern would be the impact on vegetation, both marine and land based. The real issue here is that trees (which you'll still need to generate oxygen, especially now the phytoplankton is gone) need lots of water to grow, and they expect to live in an environment where they regularly get rainfall. You've also got the food issue as crops need water. Meat is definitely out because you won't have enough water for grass, and the amount of water required to 'raise' a meal of red meat by comparison to a vegetable based meal is massive.



        Even with 10% of the previous water levels, I don't see you rebuilding large cities of any kind because the amount of water required in most mining and industrial applications is prohibitive and the infrastructure required to do so requires seeding from an industrial complex probably from before the water loss.



        I'd see society degenerating into small clans, fiercely protecting what water holdings and crops they have the manpower to defend. Clan structures don't scale well, the lack of water also makes trade next to impossible because of the increased cost of 'shipping' and as such, societies won't reach the critical mass of size where there is sufficient food and protection in place to support a small core of researchers or scientists tasked with making things better.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        The single biggest issue you'll face is the loss of thermal mass. One of the key reasons that deserts are so hot during the day, so cold at night is that there's no water that soaks up the heat and releases it slowly through the night. In your world, this is now the norm so your days will be extremely hot, and nights extremely cold.



        Within the bounds of habitability? With underground homes, perhaps. I wouldn't want to be living on the surface though.



        Water in such an environment is very precious, and your inhabitants will most likely have mechanisms similar to those described in Dune for rendering water from the dead and other biological material for re-use. Their Stillsuits would also be a likely invention as you wouldn't want to waste sweat or urine because of the water content.



        Of bigger concern would be the impact on vegetation, both marine and land based. The real issue here is that trees (which you'll still need to generate oxygen, especially now the phytoplankton is gone) need lots of water to grow, and they expect to live in an environment where they regularly get rainfall. You've also got the food issue as crops need water. Meat is definitely out because you won't have enough water for grass, and the amount of water required to 'raise' a meal of red meat by comparison to a vegetable based meal is massive.



        Even with 10% of the previous water levels, I don't see you rebuilding large cities of any kind because the amount of water required in most mining and industrial applications is prohibitive and the infrastructure required to do so requires seeding from an industrial complex probably from before the water loss.



        I'd see society degenerating into small clans, fiercely protecting what water holdings and crops they have the manpower to defend. Clan structures don't scale well, the lack of water also makes trade next to impossible because of the increased cost of 'shipping' and as such, societies won't reach the critical mass of size where there is sufficient food and protection in place to support a small core of researchers or scientists tasked with making things better.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        Tim B IITim B II

        26.9k659113




        26.9k659113






















            Tomás Richardson is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Tomás Richardson is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Tomás Richardson is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Tomás Richardson is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f137219%2fcould-earth-still-survive-if-we-lost-almost-90-of-all-surface-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Loup dans la culture

            How to solve the problem of ntp “Unable to contact time server” from KDE?

            ASUS Zenbook UX433/UX333 — Configure Touchpad-embedded numpad on Linux