Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Our Drinkable Water Supply Is Vanishing

By Tara Lohan, AlterNet. Posted October 11, 2007.


Thanks to global warming, pollution, population growth, and privatization, we are teetering on the edge of a global crisis.
10112007story

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Tara Lohan

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, the Hungarian biochemist and Nobel Prize winner for medicine once said, "Water is life's matter and matrix, mother and medium. There is no life without water."

We depend on water for survival. It circulates through our bodies and the land, replenishing nutrients and carrying away waste. It is passed down like stories over generations -- from ice-capped mountains to rivers to oceans.

Historically water has been a facet of ritual, a place of gathering and the backbone of community.

But times have changed. "In an age when man has forgotten his origins and is blind even to his most essential needs for survival, water has become the victim of his indifference," Rachel Carson wrote.

As a result, today, 35 years since the passage of the Clean Water Act, we find ourselves are teetering on the edge of a global crisis that is being exacerbated by climate change, which is shrinking glaciers and raising sea levels.

We are faced with thoughtless development that paves flood plains and destroys wetlands; dams that displace native people and scar watersheds; unchecked industrial growth that pollutes water sources; and rising rates of consumption that nature can't match. Increasingly, we are also threatened by the wave of privatization that is sweeping across the world, turning water from a precious public resource into a commodity for economic gain.

The problems extend from the global north to the south and are as pervasive as water itself. Equally encompassing are the politics of water. Discussions about our water crisis include issues like poverty, trade, community and privatization. In talking about water, we must also talk about indigenous rights, environmental justice, education, corporate accountability, and democracy. In this mix of terms are not only the causes of our crisis but also the solutions.

What's gone wrong?

As our world heats up, as pollution increases, as population grows and as our globe's resources of fresh water are tapped, we are faced with an environmental and humanitarian problem of mammoth proportions.

Demand for water is doubling every 20 years, outpacing population growth twice as fast. Currently 1.3 billion people don't have access to clean water and 2.5 billion lack proper sewage and sanitation. In less than 20 years, it is estimated that demand for fresh water will exceed the world's supply by over 50 percent.

The biggest drain on our water sources is agriculture, which accounts for 70 percent of the water used worldwide -- much of which is subsidized in the industrial world, providing little incentive for agribusiness to use conservation measures or less water-intensive crops.

This number is also likely to increase as we struggle to feed a growing world. Population is expected to rise from 6 billion to 8 billion by 2050.

Water scarcity is not just an issue of the developing world. "Twenty-one percent of irrigation in the United States is achieved by pumping groundwater at rates that exceed the water's ability to recharge," wrote water experts Tony Clarke of the Polaris Institute and Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians in their landmark water book Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World's Water.

The Ogallala aquifer -- the largest in the North America and a major source for agriculture stretching from Texas to South Dakota -- is currently being pumped at a rate 14 times greater than it can be replenished, they wrote. And, across the country, "California's Department of Water Resources predicts that, by 2020, if more supplies are not found, the state will face a shortfall of fresh water nearly as great as the amount that all of its cities and towns together are consuming today," add Clarke and Barlow.

Demand is outstripping supply from the rainy Seattle area to desert cities like Tucson and Albuquerque. And from Midwest farming regions to East Coast cities.

The crisis is also worldwide, most noticeable in Mexico, the Middle East, China and Africa.

As population growth, development, consumption and pollution take its toll on our water resources, the ability to fight this problem has been further complicated by the spread of neoliberalism. The same ideas that have resulted in the booty of private contracts being doled out in Iraq also have contributed greatly to our water crisis. Neoliberalism is the belief in "economic liberalism," which espoused that government control over the economy was bad. It opened up the commons to commodification and let corporations privatize what once belonged to the public.

In 2000 Fortune magazine printed this telling statement: "Water promises to be to the 21st century what oil was to the 20th century; the precious commodity that determines the wealth of nations."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: pepsi, coke, nestle, bottled water, clean water act, clean water, water privatization, water

Tara Lohan is a managing editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Racist bullshit!
Posted by: TT5 on Oct 11, 2007 12:40 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Meant so spread more armageddon and anti-immigration hysteria! Just like "global warming"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time for you to stop commenting here. Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» That's the best you can do? Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: That's the best you can do? Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: xcuse me? You're kidding right? Posted by: apophenia_monkey
» RE: xcuse me? You're kidding right? Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» First of all .... Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: First of all .... Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: First of all .... Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: This is my last comment on this matter Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» You really don't get it. Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: You really don't get it. Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: acist bullshit! Posted by: the islander
» RE: acist bullshit! Posted by: jrobertclark
» RE: acist bullshit! Posted by: MAD
» No links today? Posted by: MAD
Water, Water, Everywhere?
Posted by: writerman on Oct 11, 2007 1:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fundamental foundations of the economy should be owed by the nation as a whole, and administered by the State, for the benefit of all.

The 'market' should be put back in the market place and its influence in the rest of society rolled-back at least thirty years. The 'market' has to be controlled, or the 'market' will end up controling us, which is what's happening now to an increasing degree all over the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You forgot peak people Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: You forgot peak people Posted by: mmckinl
False water savings
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 11, 2007 2:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Toilets used to use 5 Gallons of water Per Flush (GPF). They worked fairly
well. Then the government limited them to 3.5 gpf and now to 1.6 gpf. It
doesn't save water since you have to flush a lot more times. It doesn't save
energy because it doesn't save water. Toilets that use a pressurized tank to
provide water under pressure actually use more energy because the energy stored
in the pressure tank has to come from the pump that pumps the water to you.
The Law of Conservation of Energy doesn't take a holiday. So-called "water
saving" toilets are fine for small children and midgets, but the hole in the bottom
of the toilet bowl is too small for an adult-sized turd to go down it. You get your
exercise operating the plunger. Toilets should be Teflon coated rather than
having that huge "water spot" that you can't get rid of in new toilets. Some aren't
even glazed, especially where you can't see, like where toilet paper gets glued to
the inside of the pipe. So you have to pay a high price for a pressure flush or
electric pump flush toilet. Many don't even have a 'jet' at the bottom. The "Jets"
aren't nozzles, just water holes at best. They don't hire degreed engineers at
toilet factories, but they certainly should. The "environmental" law is unable to
accomplish anything positive. It gets everybody upset. Most people blame
themselves or the victims when toilets just don't work like they used to.

Water gets recycled through the sewage plant and the next town's filtration plant
anyway. The so-called "water-saving" toilet law were passed because small
people living in the desert screamed a lot. They didn't have to choose to live in a
desert. People who live in the desert have created their own water problems. It
should not be everybody else's problem. If you want to live in a desert, get an
incinerating toilet. Then you won't need any water at all to flush your toilet. I
want the so-called "water-saving" toilet law to be repealed so that we can have
decent toilets. There is no reason to torture ourselves with toilets that can't work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: False water savings Posted by: marxalot
» Mine Works Just Fine Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Mine Works Just Fine Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» RE: False water savings Posted by: Monmon
» RE: False water savings Posted by: Krain61
Technology will solve it.
Posted by: jlohman on Oct 11, 2007 3:14 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some smart scientist will ultimately develop a chemical that when released into the atmosphere will balance the CO2 that causes global warming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Technology will solve it. Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» sadly true Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Reversing the change in rainfall patterns
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 11, 2007 3:25 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global warming certainly is changing the rain and snowfall patterns and melting
the glaciers that some people depended on for water. The solution for most of
those people is to stop and reverse global warming. If you live in a place that
never did get enough rain and you are mining the aquifer dry, your problem is
different.
We can easily reduce our CO2 production by about 1/3 by converting all coal
fired power plants to nuclear. Doing so will also cut pollution enormously and
improve safety. Many of you worry that uranium might be stolen from reactors.
That is impossible, but uranium has been stolen from a reprocessing plant.
Moslem terrorist groups will never be able to steal uranium in the US. The place
it goes that it isn't supposed to go is Israel. Moslem terrorists can't compete with
Mossad and Israeli dual citizens. This happened in a small town near Pittsburgh,
PA circa 1970. A company called Numec was in the business of reprocessing
nuclear fuel. Numec had a Jewish CEO. Numec did NOT have a reactor.
Numec "lost" half a ton of enriched uranium. It wound up in Israel. Numec is
no longer in business. Because of this theft, the US no longer reprocesses
nuclear fuel, but wastes it instead. Nuclear "waste" was the only solution to the
problem of Israeli theft of uranium that was politically possible at the time. My
solution would be to reprocess the fuel at a Government Owned Government
Operated [GOGO] facility. [George W. Bush would call this "socialism," which
is the other political problem.] At a GOGO plant, bureaucracy and the
multiplicity of ethnicities and religions would disable the transportation of
uranium to Israel or to any unauthorized place. Nothing heavier than a secret
would get out.
Israeli is the only nationality that is also a religion. There is no Belgian-only
religion or American-only religion, for example. Israeli is also the only
nationality that sticks to people for an infinite number of generations. The Lost
Tribe of Dan was lost for thousands of years in Africa, yet all members of that
tribe are instant Israelis. All persons who were "born of a Jewish mother" are
citizens of Israel, regardless of any other fact. It isn't possible to get rid of Israeli
citizenship if you want to. No loyalty oath or anything else will change it.
Lutherans aren't citizens of Norway regardless of never having been there.
Shintos aren't citizens of Japan regardless of being only one eighth Japanese by
ancestry. For every country other than Israel, dual citizenship decays over 1 or 2
generations. Israeli nuclear weapons are exact duplicates of American nuclear
weapons. Guess why. American security and secrecy are known around the
world as a joke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mining the aquafer dry
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 11, 2007 3:34 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you live in a place that never did get enough rain and you are mining the
aquifer dry, you have 2 choices: Quit farming or import fresh water. The latter
choice requires the construction of huge new infrastructure and a lot of energy.
If there are going to be more people, more energy will be needed. Some of that
energy will be needed to pump an maybe produce from salt water, fresh water
for farms in dry areas. There are 3 clean safe sources of the energy and we will
need all 3. They are nuclear, wind and solar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why terrorists can't rob radioactive materials from nuclear reactors
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 11, 2007 3:38 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suppose a gang of terrorists tries to do a bank robbery type of operation against a
nuclear reactor. What problems do they encounter that they wouldn't when
robbing a bank?
1. There is no nuclear fuel within reach of any human.
2. The fuel is inside a containment building that is harder to penetrate than a bank
vault.
3. The fuel is inside a machine that was not made for human access.
4. The fuel is not like money in several ways:
a. The fuel is radioactive enough to kill the robbers immediately.
b. The fuel is far too heavy for the robbers to carry.
c. The fuel is sealed in steel capsuels inside steel rods inside the
reactor core inside a coolant system, etc.
d. the temperature of the fuel is more than hot enough to burn them.
e. If they got the fuel out, they would have to carry it in lead containers that
would weigh many tons.
f. etc.

To get fuel out, the reactor must first be shut down. The robbers don't know
how. The reactor must be allowed to cool. Cooling takes time, like days. The
fuel can only be removed by a robot. The robot may not be present. The robbers
don't know how to operate the robot. The robbers don't have a way to move fuel
rods out of the containment building. The robbers would have to have a big truck
with a lead container to carry the fuel in. Big trucks are not good getaway
vehicles, especially when heavily loaded.
IF the robbers knew how to do all of the required jobs, it would still take them
weeks to rob a reactor. Do you think the cops and the army are going to give
them weeks? The result of such an attempted robbery would be robbers killed by
bullets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» i'm wearing new socks today Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Bush Paraguay Aquifer
Posted by: DeaconJ on Oct 11, 2007 4:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The last paragraph should've mentioned the massive land purchase the Bush Family made (100,000 hectares) over the Guaraní Aquifer in Paraguay. Their being privy to all real climate data most likely hastened their purchase by sending the wonder twins down there to inconspicuously acquire it for the family.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush Paraguay Aquifer Posted by: AsteroidMiner
It's up to each of us
Posted by: packofwolves on Oct 11, 2007 4:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the profits aren't there, the corporations won't take over and will look for other ways to make their billions. For one single person, it seems hard to think of something to do that would help fight against coporate take over of our most basic needs, such as water. I feel thirsty just reading ths article and I know that if we don't all do something soon, all of our money will go to water and gas. And although the mega corporations are about as evil as evil gets, it is up to you and me to make the difference. They are only as evil as we allow them to be. If we didn't buy bottled water, the corporations wouldn't be sucking our aquifers dry to supply us with our demands. If we didn't drive around in gas hogging vehicles we might not be at war to gain control over more gas. Although I think corporations have exploited our weaknesses, and they should be ashamed for their greed, it is our weaknesses that drive this craziness and until we stop allowing corporations to exploit us nothing will ever change. We have become a society of demand and waste and we are weak and vulnerable because of it. The old adage that says that in order to change the world you must first change yourself is true. So...do you really care about the future of our world? Do you really want to elliminate or mitigate the potential suffering that lay ahead if we don't make necessary changes now? If so, then your demands must change. Corporations go where the money is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Real Problem
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Oct 11, 2007 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Demand for water is doubling every 20 years, outpacing population growth twice as fast. "

Population growth is the issue. There are finite water resources.

There is an infinite expansion of the population... until it can't expand anymore.

You do the math. The problem is real and uses actual math we use in every day life. Unless governments come up with magical sources of fresh water the equation will continue to be unbalanced until a large number of people simply won't have any.

Oh, magic doesn't exist. The math still stands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To paraphrase a certain dead president, "Well, there we go again"
Posted by: sausage on Oct 11, 2007 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The looming worldwide water shortage is old, old news. Now that's not to diminish it's impact or importance but here again is another instance were we, the American people, have been victimized by a combination of our own national gullibility and willful ignorance.

I remember hearing and reading warnings about the decline of the Oglala Aquifer in the Sixties and Seventies. I mean the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, opened for business in December of 1970, during Nixon's administration. I can even remember when Earth Day actually meant something.

But by 1981, what did we get? Ronald Reagan. Why? Well as one barstool philosopher told me, "Jimmy Carter's too honest." And, you know, I think that rummy was right.

We, the American people, didn't want to hear, our environment's a mess, we've got to consume less energy, conserve water and our other resources. Oh, no, we were too smart for that. We wanted to hear, "Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem." We wanted plywood, not spotted owls.

I even remember a scheme in the 1980s to divert, some would say steal, water from Northern California to Los Angeles. It was stopped back then. But quess what! It's back and guess who's all for it! "Ironically, [U.S. Senator Diane] Feinstein vividly recalls that she was the first to sign petitions leading to the 1982 vote against the canal."

But, hey! who cares! We Americans want to gamble our savings away in Las Vegas and live in Phoenix, two of the nation's fastest growing cities in one of the driest areas of the country! We can solve that! We'll just build a pipeline from the Great Lakes! Ain't that the redneck way? Just take some we need from somebody else?

Like I said here yesterday, we can't reverse these trends in environmental degradation, we can only ameliorate the worst conditions and learn to live with the consequences of our present actions. Melting of the polar ice caps will happen, sea levels will rise, costal cities worldwide will be inundated, people and entire species of wildlife will die. Alea iacta est.

Face it, we're screwed. Had the United States taken strong, nearly draconian preventive measures beginning thirty to thirty-five years ago to slow, and perhaps halt, environmental degradation we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hemp yes, take care of what we have.
Posted by: garry minor on Oct 11, 2007 8:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe if we didn't pollute what water we have with fuels, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and industrial waste, we would have plenty. Our rivers have become sewers, the land a sponge soaking up filth.
Hemp industrialization solves the problems. It grows without most fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides, and with less water! It grows in soil and conditions other crops won't grow. Everywhere from the Equator to the Arctic circle. Everyone can cash in.
Cannabis/hemp can be used to make all paper, plastics, packaging, paints, varnishes, textiles, rope, netting, lubricants, fuels, pressed board, many structural materials and medicines. All these can be made with environmentally friendly hemp. Anything made with oil, coal, timber, or cotton can be made better with it and it won't pollute our World! Hemp paper doesn't require the chemicals wood pulp does and it's products, even plastics, could be chopped up and used as fertilizer. One acre of hemp equals four of timber for pulp and you harvest hemp every year, tree's take a lifetime. Do the math on that! It is ten times more efficient than corn for ethanol production. It could replace the need for cotton which is the most disastrous crop to grow for the soil. Canvas is Dutch for cannabis, for thousands of years all ships sails, ropes, many clothes, and fine paintings were of cannabis fibers, which are the longest and strongest in nature!
In 1938 Popular Mechanics wrote that hemp is the most desirous crop to grow, would be the first billion dollar crop, and that over 25,000 products could be made with it! They wrote this article not yet realizing that a year earlier the Government, Hearst and Dupont Corporations had eliminated it as competition by changing it's name, marijuana, calling it a deadly killer, and making it illegal to grow. They demonized the competition and brainwashed the public with the media, just like "weapons of mass destruction" of today. People are so easily misled.
Henry Ford built and fueled a car primarily with hemp. Synthetic plastics were developed with cellulose plastic technology. Neither he or Diesel intended to run their engines on petroleum. Petroleum was forced upon us and remains so today. The hempseed is the single most nutritious thing you can eat. Our Government stockpiles it under Executive order 12919, yet "we the people" can't have it! Most of us know nothing about it's healthy benefits, did you? This seed could also replace the need for hormones and remnants being added to our feedstock which is why American beef is banned in Europe. These remnants are believed the reason for the spread of BSE's in our foodchain which have been linked to plaque and mental deterioration is some people.
You and I have cannabinoid receptors throughout our body! In Canada and Europe cannabis has been found to increase brain cell growth and destroy tumors. It is being used to treat Alzheimers, autism, MS, epilepsy, migraine, arthritis, depression, chronic pain, glaucoma, nausea, obesity, asthma, emphysema, herpes, Parkinsons, Huntingtons, Tourettes, Crohns disease, and more! And the only side effect is that it makes you happy! For some reason modern science is only now beginning to study it even though centuries before Christ it is listed #1 on a list of 10,000 medicinal plants in the Zend -Avesta!
Cannabis/hemp industrialization will clean up an awful lot of messes that we are yet to even realize we have. It's not a band-aid but a cure. It will help what water we do have to stay clean, and start to reverse the negative impact we have on our environment. It will change the way we think!
We have to do something, it's up to us.
Kaneh bosm!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:You forgot something Posted by: Sushi
» You forgot something else - Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Desalinization
Posted by: wheresarah on Oct 11, 2007 9:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am very concerned about this issue, but not as knowledgeable as I'd like to be. I remember seeing something on television about desalinization of ocean water... can anyone who is well-informed about this issue offer pros and cons?
Thanks

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Desalinization Posted by: wheresarah
» RE: Desalinization? Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Desalinization? Posted by: Desalinator
» RE: Desalinization? Posted by: wheresarah
» RE: Desalinization? Posted by: Desalinator
» RE: Desalinization? Posted by: Desalinator
» RE: Desalinization Posted by: Ames
» RE: Desalinization Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Desalinization Posted by: Ames
The gross amount of water
Posted by: Constitutionalist75 on Oct 11, 2007 11:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
held and processed in the bodies of 6.7 billion people and counting, and the gross amount of water held in dams, water towers, water heaters, etc. amounts to over a trillion gallons that is not free to move throughout the Earth's weather cycles that need all the water they can get to function as part of a living biosphere. In other words, the Earth's "carrying capacity" is being exceeded by the massive and growing amount of our daily needs. But the so-called "economists" say we can go on consuming and growing forever, onwards and upwards to the stars, that we can have our cake and eat it too. Not so, and the consequences are now too obvious to be ignored by any but a few fanatical laissez faire libertarians who need their stock portfolios to grow forever, regardless of anything, no matter what.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Whatever happened to the zpg movement? Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» ZPG made a huge impact on ME Posted by: veggiegrrrl
Water wars and energy
Posted by: jearls on Oct 11, 2007 12:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The water and the oil crises are totally entwined. Wars over water will increase as the supply decreases and the corporations push to take over more and more of what is still available. The push for control of the Paraguay aquafer will be resisted by the population while the US gov't will back up the corporations -- and it could eventually lead to war. There are many other potential water-war areas.
The big point is that war demands tremendous energy use and mainly of oil derivatives -- as shown in the huge amount of oil used by the US in its eternal Iraq war (something like 500,000 barrils/day). Water is also used in the extraction of oil and as the use of lower quality deposits (like shale oil) increases so does the amount of water used in getting it. Also, the conversion of agriculture to maize for ethanol production requires more water -- maize needs more than does wheat for food. What we have is a totally systemic crisis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Better learn to live with less.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 11, 2007 12:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the bottom line. That means focusing on drought-tolerant crops, for example. It means that showers will have to be shorter (horrors! inconceivable!). It means you can't have swimming pools and green lawns in Southern California (unless you want to go the 'paint-your-lawn-green' route - with biodegradable dyes, it's very eco-friendly). Go swimming in the ocean, instead - but be sure to keep some antibiotics on hand in case you get a nasty infection from all the sewage outflow.

If you can't handle the desert or the arid Mediterranean climate, move back east and enjoy your hurricanes and humidity.

It's called adapation to your local circumstances. Mining groundwater in the desert is an idiot's game. However, it's not quite as idiotic as using fossil-fueled desalination plants as an antidote to fossil-fueled global warming-induced droughts.

On the positive-plus side, the Australians have come up with some nifty concentrated solar power desalination systems. The fossil fuel industry and their political lackeys are desperately trying to pretend they don't exist.

Then we have the Russian's bright idea: floating nuclear power plants that convert salt water to fresh water. Those Russkies - gotta love them for their craziness. Thank God they're on the other side of the planet, however, what with their Chernobyl record.

"Within fractions of a second, the power level and temperature rose many times over. The reactor went out of control. There was a violent explosion. The 1000-tonne sealing cap on the reactor building was blown off. At temperatures of over 2000°C, the fuel rods melted. The graphite covering of the reactor then ignited. In the ensuing inferno, the radioactive fission products released during the core meltdown were sucked up into the atmosphere."

They've fixed that problem, however, so don't worry. Sing and be happy!

If worse comes to worse, be sure you know how to distill drinking water from your own urine:

"During evening hours, a large plastic sheet or tarp should be placed over the excavated site. The corners of the sheet can be secured with large rocks, The sheet itself should not touch the sides of the hole, but remain suspended several inches above it. The area of the sheet directly over the receptacle should be held down with a rock or can to form a focal point for condensation and distillation. Some water should condense overnight and be drawn into the receptacle.

During the heat of the day, solar rays should begin distilling urine from the ground and the water vapor will collect on the plastic sheet. Because the solid minerals and other contaminants usually found in urine are too heavy to evaporate, the trapped water vapor should eventually condense on the plastic sheet and drip into the receptacle as potable water. Distilling urine may not be a person's first choice for creating drinking water, but it can be done with minimal supplies if survival is truly at stake."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do you remember when?
Posted by: Sojourner on Oct 11, 2007 1:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When people celebrated the revolving of the seasons because things had a way of working themselves out? I hear that folks in the far away Orient even made that the basis of their religion--pay attention to the way nature works and try to immitate it.

Rather than nature as a model, we in the West turned it into an enemy that needed to be subdued. So we broke it down into its elements and then thought we could take only what we wanted, leaving the rest for...?

"The rest" is now called "unanticipated consequences," such as pollution and global warming. Farmers know they are washing the topsoil down the waterways, along with the fertilizers killing the ocean. The chemical industry knows it is killing off other species with its products concocted in their Frankenstein labs. We know that disposal systems only move the poisons around, not in my backyard, out of sight out of mind.

Show me a political and economic system that preserves the planet, and I will show you something more than capitalism or socialism. We do have the example of the tiny populations of traditional people, such as the Amish and the pueblo Indians. So far as I know, they offer a form of religious communism. Peculiar people, right?

Our religion is what we do to the Earth. All the righteous talk from tv preachers that calls itself religious is salesmanship. I have nothing against honest salesmanship; it can be a form of teaching. But nothing that blinds us to goodwill and survival deserves to be taught. For the sake of profit, we are kept ignorant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Desalinator
Posted by: Desalinator on Oct 11, 2007 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author of the article clearly knows nothing about desalination. Her statement "Desalinization makes sea water available, but takes huge quantities of energy and leaves vast amounts of brine." may have been true15 or 20 years ago, but no more.

I'm fairly knowledgeable about desalination because for more than a decade I have worked for a company which has greatly reduced the amount of energy needed for desalination, by recycling energy and using renewable energy sources. My company is not alone.

The California Energy Commission reports that in the last decade the cost to desalinate 1000 gallons of water has dropped from $6 to $1.50 and that in areas where water is scarce the price of desalinated water is competitive with other water sources.

As far as brine is concerned, there are a number of ways to dilute it so it is returned to the ocean with a salinity which is the same as the ambient water. For example, mixing brine discharges with discharges from a power plant or a sewage treatment plant. Combining the brine with power plant cooling water discharges is probably the form of ocean discharge that has the least damaging impact because the brine is diluted.

As someone deeply concerned with our global water supply, I believe that we need to conserve and recycle water, stop drinking bottled water and desalinate. Desalination is the only solution for combating droughts.

I hope this information sheds a little light on desalination.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just look at this country....
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Oct 11, 2007 1:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Between 44 & 46% of the available fresh water is totally untreatable to make it safe for human consumption. The underground aquafers have fallen to the lowest levels since records have been kept. Why is this happening?
Because we forgot just how interconnected everything is.
While we were busy destroting the Buffalo herds,to destabilize Indian Life, we ignored the fact that 'buffalo wallows' created small ponds on the prairie. Ponds that fed the Mississippian aquafer. An aquafer that covered alomst all the plains states.
Because we forgot that not everything washes to the sea,we gave ourselves rivers that set themselves on fire. Yes.
that water set itself on fire. Many rivers that are'nt flamable are not fit to treat. As a result most major cities drink recycled human waste.Just like the astronauts, you're drinking your own piss. Yet we continue to do the very things that poison the waters.
When you spend time in areas that have little human impact,the water you drink refreshes you. Invigorates you. Gives you the strength to move onward. If you're comming form these far more healthy areas to more polluted ones you notice something altogether different. You can drink a gallon of tap water and still be thristy. Bottled water isn't much better. SOme of it's as good as the 'purity of the waters',some of it's as good as city tap water. Depending on
where you live it will be pure enough to let you have a long life or a short one. How much industry is near you. What's upstream from you? What's downstream? You share responsibility for what goes into the water. Also for what goes into the skies. The water that falls as rain is very different from the rain a few decades ago. Todays rain does'nt soak in. It evaporates rapidly. There 'extra' chemicals in the rain that were never meant to be there making the water poor for crops. Poor for drinking. Poor for doing it's job....giving life to the Earth.
By comparison we are a small country here on Earth. The folks came to America because they poisoned theirm part of the Planet. In 500+ years we managed to do almost the same here. We've got time to turn it around. We just can't elect anyone that's running as a republican or a democrat.
Jeffrey7

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bottle of water anyone?
Posted by: panama420 on Oct 11, 2007 1:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever notice when a water bottling company decides it wants to set up shop in a town therre is a contamination problem w/the towns water supply?
It happened in N.H not too long ago; the towns people were protesting the plant then all of the sudden their water supply was contaminated. In my opinion someone wanting the plants approval had something to do w/the contamination and if the contamination had been investigated more the truth might have come out and the towns people might have won.
Bottled water is hazardous to ones health any way. If water is left in a bottle long enough things grow, when anything plastic is used for water ever notice the bottle eventually gets "foggy"? that is something "growing"--some kind of germ. The bottles are made from oil and they pollute.
We used to be able to go to a natural spring near our town now the town has capped it--sad. Water companies that want control of the water supplies need to be investigated more and boycotted by the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HAARP part of the problem?
Posted by: makeadifference on Oct 11, 2007 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm living in NC which is experiencing the worst drought in recorded history. Maybe 110 days left of drinking water was reported in Raleigh's News & Observer. I think we need to focus on HAARP the weather control government program stationed in Alaska. Also, those darn Chemtrails in our skies.... they are not condensation (Con) trails!! PBS broadcast a NOVA special titled "Dimming of the Sun" ... it is a real eye-opener as to what those jet trails are causing!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The CIA predicts that water could replace oil as the major war-causing resource
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 11, 2007 2:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Desalinator
Posted by: Desalinator on Oct 11, 2007 4:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I attempted to respond by providing information to update readers about desalination. Your response reflects a negative attitude about desalination which doesn't appear to be based on any factual data.

So desalination will be good for the piping business. So what. Worldwide, many desalination systems will use existing water pipelines. Other systems may be connected to pipelines built to provide water to areas without water.

What concerns me is the United Nations report that over 1.1 billion people are currently without safe drinking water. (I'm acutely aware of this as I have family in a part of India that suffers from a perpetual state of drought.) Many millions of people will have no safe water if desalination does not spread rapidly.

You ask if I want us all to be like Calcutta or Bejing. I have no idea what caused you to think that I am for population growth. For the record, I have been opposed to population growth for about 40 years, since the late-60's when I heard about Paul Erlich and Zero Population Growth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Desalinator Posted by: Constitutionalist75
What is so frustrating. . .
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 11, 2007 5:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . .is that many of us, along with The Club of Rome, Paul Erlich, et. al., were talking about this and other results of over population THIRTY YEARS AGO, and in all that time, very little has been done. We are now rapidly approaching a point-of-no-return where nothing can be done, and STILL we delude ourselves that too little too late will solve the problem.

We are operating just like other animal species that do not have the intelligence nor the means to modify their environment to preserve themselves; but we are far worse because we have the intelligence but choose not to use it, and instead, modify our environment to destroy ourselves for the sake of the almighty dollar.

If we choose stupidity and ignore the problem, or insist on half-measures to preserve our artificial concept of wealth, then nature will do to us what it has done so many other times to species that have grown out of balance with their environment: choose us out – eliminate us and start over.

We, with our mightier-than-Nature arrogance and supposedly God-given right to plunder Earth, do not believe that we can be vanquished, but we can. Seen any dinosaurs lately? They were the most successful large land species in Earth's history, lasting nearly 250 million years, and they are gone.

And so shall we be, in less than 4 million, unless we can convince ourselves to be smarter – and less greedy – than the average Tyrannosaurus.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What is so frustrating. . . Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» constitutionalist75 Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» oops typo Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: oops typo Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Desalinator
Posted by: Desalinator on Oct 11, 2007 8:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find your response to be offensive in the extreme.

For over a decade now, I have worked with a small group of visionaries on new desalination technologies that will bring safe drinking water to people in underdeveloped and drought stricken areas of the world using energy saving clean, renewable energy sources. During most of this time, I have not made enough money to pay my bills. I have gone into debt because, believing in what I was doing, I passed up other job opportunities.

We hope our desalination technology spreads to areas where water is lacking or undrinkable. As I explained, I have been opposed to population growth for almost 40 years. If you knew anything about global water conditions, you would know that if world population growth stopped this minute, there would still be plenty of business for all companies, large and small, involved in desalination. (The market for desalination plants between now and the end of 2015 is estimated to be $56.4 billion.)

Would you prefer that desalination company employees work for nothing and that the companies renounce making profits?

In conclusion, to paraphrase your rant, as a business person, I most assuredly want my desalinization technology to spread wherever the growing population needs more water. If the population stops growing our profits will not stagnate and, I won't be laid off.

FYI To give you an idea of where I'm coming from, I'm a liberal, dare I say, left wing Democrat; a disabled Vietnam vet who has actively opposed the war in Iraq since before it started. I would like to see Al Gore as our next president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Desalinator Posted by: Missing Piece
» RE: Desalinator Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Desalinator Posted by: Desalinator
» RE: Desalinator Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Peak oil will help stop bottled water and wasteful practices
Posted by: Missing Piece on Oct 11, 2007 8:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know water is a big deal but I still say that water falls from the sky, but oil does not. What is going to happen when energy becomes so expensive that running a pivot to irrigate costs more than the crop is worth? We could be five years away from that reality. However, corporations should never own water rites, only the community.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jo Gurley
Posted by: jogurley on Oct 12, 2007 3:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all of the fresh water supply pouring from the melting glaciers, it would seem that scientists would formulate a method, in alliance with investors to somehow catch and contain the fresh water pouring out in such large measure. The world is in need of much water, and there it is....I am not a scientist, nor do I have the means to initiate this type of endeavor, but why oh why does someone with the means and the knowledge not look at the opportunity presented before the glaciers are gone leaving a thirsty planet in need? Instead, wars are being fought for oil, and the most precious commodity to man, and what the human body is comprised primarily of....that of water....is merely melting and rushing into the seas to meet with salt water and render it undrinkable. There must be a way to catch and transport the fresh water, certainly there must be in this age of advanced technology. Pipelines have been run across continents to transport oil, why do the individuals with the know-how and the investment means not wake up and realize that each day millions of gallons of wonderful fresh water, more precious than gold or oil, are running....no gushing forth into the seas when it could be gushing into a water-needy world?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: jogurley
» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Jo Gurley Posted by: jogurley