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.

Water

Maude Barlow: The Growing Battle for the Right to Water

By Tara Lohan, AlterNet. Posted February 14, 2008.


Maude Barlow's new book about the water crisis is a call to arms to protect a fundamental human right.
bluecovenant
Advertisement

From Chile to the Philippines to South Africa to her home country of Canada, Maude Barlow is one of a few people who truly understands the scope of the world's water woes. Her newest book, Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle for the Right to Water, details her discoveries around the globe about our diminishing water resources, the increasing privatization trend and the grassroots groups that are fighting back against corporate theft, government mismanagement and a changing climate.

If you want to know where the water is running low (including 36 U.S. states), why we haven't been able to protect it and what we can do to ensure everyone has the right to water, Barlow's book is an essential read. It is part science, part policy and part impassioned call. And the information in Blue Covenant couldn't come from a more reliable source. Barlow is the national chairperson of the Council of Canadians and co-founder of the Blue Planet Project, which is instrumental in the international community in working for the right to water for all people. She also authored Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop Corporate Theft of the World's Water with Tony Clarke. And she's the recipient of the Right Livelihood Award (known as the "Alternative Nobel") for her global water justice work.

She took a moment to talk to AlterNet in between the Canadian and U.S. legs of a book tour for Blue Covenant. (Barlow just kicked off her U.S. tour; for a list of tour stops and dates, click here).

Tara Lohan: This year in the U.S. there has been a whole lot press about the drought in Atlanta and the Southeast, and I think for a lot of people in the U.S. it is the first they are hearing about drought, but the crisis here in North America is really pretty extreme isn't it?

Maude Barlow: It really is, and it kind of surprises me when I hear people, for instance in Atlanta say, "We didn't know it was coming." I don't know how that could be possible, and I do have to say that I blame our political leaders. I don't understand how they could not have been reading what I've been reading and what anyone who is watching this has been reading.

I remember attending a conference in Boise, Idaho, three years ago and hearing a lot of scientists get up and say, "Read my lips, this isn't a drought, this is permanent drying out." We are overpumping the Ogallala, Lake Powell and Lake Meade. The back up systems are now being depleted. This is by no means a drought ...

The thing that I'm trying to establish with the first chapter, which is called "Where Has All the Water Gone," is that what we learned in grade five about the hydrologic cycle being a closed, fixed cycle that could never be interrupted and could never go anywhere, is not true. They weren't lying to us, but they weren't aware of the human capacity to destroy it, and the reality is that we've interrupted the hydrologic cycle in many parts of the world and the American Southwest is one of them.

TL: How is this happening?

MB: By farming in deserts and taking up water from aquifers or watersheds. Or by urbanizing -- massive urbanization causes the hydrologic cycle to not function correctly because rain needs to fall back on green stuff -- vegetation and grass -- so that the process can repeat itself. Or we are sending huge amounts of water from large watersheds to megacities and some of them are 10 to 20 million people, and if those cities are on the ocean, some of that water gets dumped into the ocean. It is not returned to the cycle.

We are massively polluting surface water, so that the water may be there, but we can't use it. And we are also mining groundwater faster than it can be replenished by nature, which means we are not allowing the cycle to renew itself. The Ogallala aquifer is one example of massive overpumping. There are bore wells in the Lake Michigan shore that go as deep into the ground as Chicago skyscrapers go into the ground and they are sucking groundwater that should be feeding the lake so hard that they are pulling up lake water now, and they are reversing the flow of water in Lake Michigan for the first time.

We are interrupting the natural cycle. And another thing we are doing is something called virtual water trade. That is where you send water out of the watershed in the form of products or agriculture. You've used the water to produce something and then you export it, and about 20 percent of water used in the world is exported out of watershed in this way, because so much of our economy is about export. In the U.S. you are sending about one-third of your water out of watersheds -- it is not sustainable.

This is not a cyclical drought. We are actually creating hot stains, as I and some scientists call them, around the world. These are parts of the world that are running out of water and will be, or are, in crisis. Which means that millions more people will be without water. I argue that this is one of the causes of global warming. We usually hear water being a result of climate change, and it is, particularly with the melting of the glaciers. But our abuse, mismanagement and treatment of water is actually one of the causes, and we have not placed that analysis at the center of our thinking about climate change and environmental destruction, and until we do, we are only addressing half the question.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: water crisis, water pollution, water scarcity, water privatization, blue covenant, water, maude barlow

Tara Lohan is a managing editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! 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:
Behold the future
Posted by: sanddollar on Feb 14, 2008 12:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're creating a host of future problems regarding our surroundings much faster than we're realizing them, and we're solving them much slower than we're realizing them.

We can either change at a very deep level how we've been brought up to perceive the premises of our existence, or we foist the tragedy of not doing so on our descendants.

Some of my saddest moments in life are meeting very young children. I'm glad I'm 53 and not 3.

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

» No, it doesn't Posted by: sanddollar
A Globe With No Future
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 14, 2008 1:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Brought to you by the very same people and mindset that brought you Mountaintop Coal Mining, NAFTA, GATT, WTO, 'Free Trade', Right-To-Work Laws, Deregulation, Privatization and the Global War on Terror.

These people, despite their general reluctance to do so, reject the concept of the commons and desire to privatize everything and sell it to the highest bidder. BTW- Ron Paul's economic vision is basically their desired end-state. Not the Ron Paul of YouTube fame, but the Libertarian underneath the surface issues of the war, civil liberties and deficits. Like Thom Hartmann has said many times, Libertarians are largely Republicans that want to get laid and smoke dope.

Water is a basic given of the commons and should NEVER be privatized. We didn't make it, don't own it and have no right to deny it to others. Like the air we breathe, it is essential to our very existence. Anyone who advocates for the privatization of water is flirting with insanity.

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

» RE: A Globe With No Future Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: A Globe With No Future Posted by: sanddollar
» RE: A Globe With No Future Posted by: Cybershaman
» Re: Genocide doesn't work. Posted by: abbadon2007
» Thought experiment Posted by: sanddollar
This is THE issue of our times
Posted by: odcherenow on Feb 14, 2008 4:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been following this issue since 1978, when I discovered (researching issues when running for elected office) why my district had an increasing need for deeper wells to access household water. The underground aquifers (the deep water reservoirs under the continental land mass) were shrinking. I have been preaching to the deaf ever since. Brava Maude.
Once again, women stand out as guardians of the planet. (Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, the female botanist from Mexico, whose name escapes me, who blew the whistle on Monsanto's dead-after-one-season Terminator Seeds, or the women in India who chained themselves to trees about to be felled, leading to erosion of their fields.
Gaia is a living, replenishing organism. We are at the end of the food chain.
If ever any life form was vulnerable, it is humankind.

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

water
Posted by: heide on Feb 14, 2008 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
HEMP
IT CAN GROW JUST ABOUT ANYWHERE ON EARTH


GROWING HEMP FOR FOOD IN SOME OF THESE DRIER AREAS WOULD CUT DOWN ON A WHOLE LOT OF WATER USAGE
PLUS NO PESTICIDES NEEDED
WHICH MEANS YOUR NOT POLLUTING WHAT PRECIOUS WATER THERE IS LEFT

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

» RE: water Posted by: donl51
» An added bonus with hemp... Posted by: sanddollar
» RE: hemp + water Posted by: bobtr900
Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Feb 14, 2008 6:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If representative democracy can't even keep from dying of thirst, what good is it?

Government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Direct Democracy

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

» RE: Terrorist Posted by: bobtr900
another reason to choose vegan
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Feb 14, 2008 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
another reason to choose vegan .... most water in the USA is used to grow "livestock."

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

Survival of the planet
Posted by: Axiom69 on Feb 14, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You don't need to "save the planet". The earth will protect herself. The point is this: the only way for the earth to survive may be for her to eradicate us. Drought and famine may be her subtle warning to start shaping up before we really piss her off. Like spoiled children getting multiple warnings from a parent are we going to get the message before we're bent over her knee?

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

» Not IF...but WHEN Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: Survival of the planet Posted by: madmax427
» RE: Survival of the planet Posted by: LIttleLiz
ADDRESS T H E CORE PROBLEM!!!
Posted by: crazy carlos on Feb 14, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
POPULLUTION!!! 6.5 Billion people living on a Planet that can support 2 Billion and going DOWN because of all resources of the Planet being overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

Which brings us to the 800 lb Gorillas--virtually all RELIGIONS--as in go forth and multiply!! No politians have the courage to confront this obvious problem that has to be put on the table (Ms Pelosi--listening?).

We as a people either start getting a handle on living cooperatively with Mother Nature or she will simply terminate the species. She does not need us--we need her. Muy sencillo!!

Crazy Carlos

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

» agree 100% Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» Well, okay, address it! Posted by: Beck
Start at Home and Make Waves
Posted by: Southern Gal on Feb 14, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The county where I live is in a drought and my state is in a drought. Our governor asks for voluntary restrictions and hasn't made mandatory restrictions. He's leaving it up to the local governments. Our County Commissioners and our Mayor have not made mandatory restrictions. When asked about how he plans to deal with this drought, the mayor said that we get water from a major river and it's not a problem. The town put restrictions on adding new businesses or residential developments to the existing water system, but when challenged by the local millionaires development, caved in. We need to start a local movement in my county of concerned citizens to educate and to advocate for water conservation and more restrictive policies on development. Of course with the recession, the county is doing everything it can to encourage businesses and new residents to locate here. It seems like such an uphill battle.

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

jfernst
Posted by: jfernst on Feb 14, 2008 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a company in Los Angeles that put together a plan to build thousands of water purifying machines on an 8' x 20' skid that could be trucked around the world and provide drinking water for everybody in the world. The United Nations promised funding through the World Bank (controlled by the private owners of the Federal Reserve Bank in the U.S.), but the funding was canceled -- they don't want to solve the world's health and water problems -- they want chaos and death in all the countries around the world so they can exploit all the natural resources. Don't believe me -- study it yourself! Good luck, and enjoy your Big Mac and Coke!

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

Cannibals
Posted by: willymack on Feb 14, 2008 8:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How else can the greedy bastards who take away everything essential to a decent, healthy life and resell it at a premium, and if you can't afford it, tough, be described? How else can you describe their ENABLERS in government and elsewhere? Simply put, they're loathsome monsters who eat their own kind. We live on a planet that's 70% covered by a deep ocean of water. True, the ocean is salt water and unpotable, and much of the rest is locked up in ice, but that STILL leaves a lot of water for everyone, except for the cannibals, who'd withhold it and charge a price for it. These moral degenerates would probably do the same thing with the air we breathe if they could find a way. So, what do we do about it? 1. Begin to recognize evil where we see it, and NOT allow evildoers to steal our lives. 2. Conserve fresh, potable water. 3. Stop wasting it. Can you think of anything more absurdly wasteful than artificial lakes and huge fountains in Las Vegas, Nv. and Scottsdale, Az, or the grassy lawns there?4. Promulgate birth control information, worldwide,while better seeing to the needs of the poor. 5.Water used in industrial processes can be recycled and used again, IF the industrialists can be MADE TO DO IT. 6. Quit polluting ALL water. This may be a monumental task, but I think our survival as a species is a good incentive. Back to the cannibals. If they can't be identified, isolated, (they don't belong on the same world as decent human beings), and STOPPED, I fear all may be lost.

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

» RE: Cannibals Posted by: sanddollar
» RE: Cannibals Posted by: babs
What's a permanent drought called? Climate change...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Feb 14, 2008 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is an issue only for some regions - like the entire western United States, and large portions of Africa, China, India, Europe and South America...

Water woes, Harvey Leifert, Feb 2008, Nature

"In the western US, where water is perhaps the most precious natural resource, anthropogenic global warming is responsible for more than half of the well-documented changes to the hydrological cycle from 1950 to 1999, researchers report. Over the last half of the twentieth century, the region's mountains received less winter snow and more rain, with snow melting earlier, causing rivers to flow more strongly in the spring and more weakly in the summer."

This is already here - continental interiors are expected to continue to dry out, deserts are predicted to expand towards the poles, and flooding in coastal regions is going to continue. What we are seeing are permanent, long-term changes in a climate that has been stable ever since the end of the last Ice Age... and we're still going full speed ahead.

Corporations see new profit opportunities in water as it becomes scarce, and are currently fighting over access to the newly ice-free regions of the Arctic - for oil exploration. Short-term profit wins out over long-term destruction of the planet's ecosystems?

Sooner or later, the mainstream economists are going to have to take ecology and physical reality into consideration.

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

The Author makes no mention of population
Posted by: Libsrule on Feb 14, 2008 11:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to wonder about that. The usual nutjobs immediately go on about "What are we going to do? Kill people?". Which is pure nonsense. What does need to be done is a high profile and non stop education about what having so many kids is going to do to their very future.

Everytime I see some program where everyone is rejoicing over some idiotic family announcing the birth of their 14th child and how everyone smiles and thinks how cute that is, I just want to throw up.

People who have that many children in today's world should be shamed. Yes they will need help but ZERO POPULATION GROWTH is what we need to strive for at the most and one child should be the ultimate goal.

Not to mention no more privatization of water.

BUT by refusing to address the problems created by overpopulation we are simply putting off the inevitible, which is world wide death through famine, death etc caused by no water.

A Pentagon report released a few years ago and then immediately withdrawen by TPTB stated water riots were going to happen within the next twenty years due to the various reason noted, Overpopulation, Poor water management, Global Climate Change and pure unadulterated greed.

The next day after it had disappeared from all the newswires the WH stated the report was just a what if sort of thing and should be ignored.

I cannot help but wonder if those in charge figure they will be immune due to their wealth and control of the military.

Are they that stupid?

I hope and pray for the day when we see CEO's and politicians of all stripes being herded through the streets in carts on their way to the chopping block...well maybe just prison for life as I am opposed to the Death penalty under any circumstances but you get my gist. And they are stripped of all the lands, wealth and power.

Then turned out into the deserts they helped to create comnpletely naked.

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

John Galt
Posted by: Johh Galt on Feb 14, 2008 12:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The sky is falling, global warming is going to cook us, and too many people are going to start eating each other... Get a clue... We have to manage the situation just like you would manage anything else of importance... Just because you don't understand how to turn sea water into fresh water or know that sewage can be converted to irrigation, does not mean we are doomed... Man has invented computers, broad band networks, and radio... Yee of little faith in the abilities of man... Keep the faith, many are working on great solutions at this moment... However, because they are not running for public office, they are fairly quiet about the progress... Our children have a bright future full of hope... How about you?

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

» RE: John Galt Posted by: Sparks56
Desalianation via Thorium Nuclear Power is a Solution not a Problem
Posted by: opmoc on Feb 14, 2008 1:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whilst environmentalists reject nuclear power on religious grounds and basically want a massive reduction in population, there are solutions to all the world's problems that need to be considered.

Overpopulation is indeed the major problem, but it can be resolved in time via education and cultural change.

In the meantime we either career headlong into a massive human disaster of monumental proportions or we find solutions.

It is possible that current population levels can be sustained until they decline gracefully as is already happening in most developed societies.

There is no realistic chance whatsoever, that wind and solar power could maintain anything like current population levels.

If we simply shutdwon conventional power stations then Billions will die across the planet in a most horrendous way.

Thorium is far more abandunt than Uranium, and reactors could be built that not only would be totally safe - but could effectively be used to reduce the enormous stockpiles of plutonium.

By building Thorium reactors primarily for converting sea water into fresh water - several different problems could be solved concurrently including the safe disposal of nuclear weapons.

Of course there needs to be the will to do it, which is by far the largest problem - but India seems to be getting on with the job.

http://www.indembassyathens.gr/India-nuclear%20energy/
India_nuclear%20energy_thorium.htm

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

RWS
Posted by: rws on Feb 14, 2008 3:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Population density is a problem .
80% of the population lives in cities near the oceans.
There is a lot of WIDE OPEN SPACE ON EARTH .
Dine on spirulina, hemp, seed, fruit and vegetable vegitarian diet burn salt water .
N. Tesla , O. Warburg , Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
Tesla Society T.E.B.A.
youtube -burn salt water- Kanzius
The Science and Art of Being
10 billion people + policy change = no problem
6 billion people + same policy = a bloody mess

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

Privatization: A Spreading Cancer Living Off A Dying Public Sector
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 14, 2008 5:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At one time, it was fairly obvious why you had discreet private and public sectors. Electrical power, water, sewage, and even the public schools all were seen as not readily amenable to market forces. This is because they are composed of a need for them that is constant and growing, in other words, the demand curve is not elastic. The same thing is true of health and medical care. However, in America, the relentless need to make a profit joined forces with an unending barrage of attacks on "big government," and it was decided that "privatization" would be better for the taxpayer. Alas, the poor taxpayer has ever since had to take it twice or three times as hard. Why? Take Iraq, war use to be fought with soldiers only, even for transportation and laundry functions. Today, much of this is "contracted out." The net result, companies like Halliburton drive empty trucks around Iraq as they are "payed by the shipment." Water, that use to be cheap and plentiful, is now increasingly made into a scarcity. In California, all that talk of how electricity was going to be "super cheap" due to "competition," faded away into something nobody talks about anymore as Enron and its charade collapsed. And those who are suppose to be monitoring all this, civic or government leaders, have no choice but to cater to the demands of companies that own the public infrastructure, and can turn this infrastructure (ie, water, electricity) on and off at will. Bottom line, due to "privatization," more people then ever are on the government payroll. More money than ever is spent by the government. And, the lobbyists are bigger and more powerful than ever. Water is only a scarcity because privatization proponents are making it into one, to drive up the price. Simple as that.

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

We have all the water and all the money we need
Posted by: PaulK on Feb 14, 2008 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A shortage of money is ended simply by realizing that we gave it all to the very rich. This happens during every great depression. Then we simply ask for some of the money back, the very rich cry in their bourbon, and the economy runs wonderfully again.

A shortage of water is ended simply by realizing that we gave it all to the very rich. This happens during every environmental crisis. Then we simply ask for some of the water back, the very rich cry in their bourbon, and the ecology runs wonderfully again.

If we planned ahead and used Lake Mead exclusively for people instead of for subsidizing Gallo wine, we wouldn't have a water shortage. Most of the usage of the Oglalla Aquifer and of California's Central Valley is for rich absentee farm investors to make money.

If farmers were on a water budget, they would switch either to water-saving irrigation or to crops which, while they didn't bring in as much profit as the old crops, they don't use as much water.

Around the world it's much the same. Water is only scarce because someone took it away (or polluted it) for profit-making reasons.

Notice how farmers get to pay one tenth as much for their water. Also notice how, when the water runs out, farmers get first dibs on the last remaining drops.

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

o
Posted by: otto on Feb 14, 2008 5:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maude is my hero up here in Canada.

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

o
Posted by: otto on Feb 14, 2008 5:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maude is my hero up here in Canada.

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

Atlanta's Drying Lesson
Posted by: stfrequency on Feb 14, 2008 6:16 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The water crisis in Atlanta is likely to be a terminal one, as the city's leaders are tragically inept when it comes to managing (and understanding) this resource. I published an article recently that explores Atlanta's circumstance in depth:

Read it here

-st

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

Thank You!
Posted by: Ghoulman on Feb 14, 2008 7:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... for the Maude Barlow interview. Especially about this issue.

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

And we usesd to live in a garden
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 15, 2008 9:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
500 years back you used to be able to go to 96% of the rivers,streams,and lakes and get yourself a refreshing drink of water. Pure clean water. Now-a-days 47% of our water you can't treat enough to make it safe to drink or even water your lawn.
Most of our major cities drink greater that 50% recycled water,in other words,you and your neighbors sewage is cleaned and fed back to you out of your taps.
Does anyone remember Love Canal? Industry polluted all their drinking water and never told them. When the government got involved they bought everyone's house for pennies on the dollar and called that 'taking action'.
Yes we have a World crisis with the water supply. We need to change some of our land/water use ideas. Like severely limiting beef cattle farms, they use enough water to supply a town of a thousand people for a year in a month. We need to stop watering lawns in areas that don't really support lawns. We need to restrict the development of golf courses. Water isn't the only thing they use up,they also pollute more than most farms. We need to limit the number of 'factory farms and Mega Farms,both use too much water and pollute far more than the family farm does.
We can get out of this mess we just need to utilize that least used function of our brains,wisdom,reason and common sense.
Draft Jeffrey7 for Prez '08

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

Do Humans Deserve to Survive?
Posted by: macdon1 on Feb 16, 2008 7:34 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we are discussing what should be a basic human right...clean water. Instead it is privatized, commodified and monopolized. Does a species who does such things even deserve to survive? I doubt it.

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

This problem has been identified, and a solution has as well
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 20, 2008 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clean water. It's not a big deal, unless you don't have any. But lets face it, the earth is mostly covered in water. All ya have to do, is remove the salt.

And that isn't hard. There are 20 companys out there that are just dying for the opportunity to open desalinization plants, to convert ocean water to clean water.

But environmentalists, have successfully blocked the opening most of these, on the premise that a small amount of local wildlife (the fish in the area) would be adversely affected.

Perhaps we can start worrying about humans, before it becomes an unstabilizing force?

On a side note: Carbon emission free nuclear power plants that operate near oceans, produce as a byproduct, clean, salt-free, non-irradiated water. (Saltwater is used to cool water that is used to cool reactor water, it is twice removed from reactivity). This water is turned to steam (but not the type for power purposes) which is subsequently cooled back to salt-free water.

On land, most plants simply dump this clean water back into the ocean. It's a waste. On board nuclear powered navy ships, this is how the drinking water is provided, and there is nothing wrong with it.

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

Caution !!!
Posted by: alleybear on Feb 21, 2008 11:01 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This one segment from this article...

"She took a moment to talk to AlterNet in between the Canadian and U.S. legs of a book tour for Blue Covenant. (Barlow just kicked off her U.S. tour; for a list of tour stops and dates, click here)."

makes me skeptical of anything that follows.

Let's say it indicates a commercial connection between AlterNet and this author.

...OR...

To be charitable, let's say the author is being generous, to share some of her precious time between book promotions with us peons...

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

» RE: Caution !!! Posted by: alleybear
» RE: Caution !!! Posted by: alleybear
» Judge these pieces on their merit Posted by: sanddollar
» It helps to note... Posted by: sanddollar
» Thanks... Posted by: sanddollar