Saturday, May 02, 2009

Asian Water Summit Ends In Dispute; Action needed














Asian Water Summit Ends In Dispute

Discussion of this summit at the link courtesy of Australian Radio.
___________


This is disappointing news. For all of my reporting here on the global water crisis about predictions of increased scarcity by 2030-2050, I always in the back of my mind believed that water disputes were actually in the end the one dispute that could and would be worked out amicably... as in MAD regarding nuclear issues where both sides have nukes therefore neither side strikes because they know it would only bring about their own demise.

Such is the situation with water. It is kind of like, MAWD... mutually assured water destruction. Countries must learn to mediate diplomatically regarding the crucial water issues such as freshwater resources now becoming scarcer in light of population growth, climate change, waste, pollution, and privitization. To do otherwise would only wind up destroying their own ecosystems and social structures. I fear however, that with so many issues given a political significance over the moral that the root causes of the global water crisis we face will be overlooked in lieu of working for political solutions that do not address the root causes but only exacerbate them.

As with the climate crisis, countries are looking for solutions that are overly technical, hard to manage, expensive for end users, and that will take longer to implement than we have time in order to avoid tipping points. Such as "clean" coal which is an oxymoron, cap and trade which is involved and open to fraud, and Co2 cuts that do not match the urgency of the threat simply because they wish to not upset the apple cart of those industries that have had close political ties with them for decades thus bringing this crisis on. All because it was made a political issue rather than a moral issue, which dictates looking to natural readily available solutions such as solar power, wind, reforestation, etc.

With the water crisis it appears that solutions are taking the same road, and we cannot afford to take that road. Expensive technologies like desalination that are actually CO2 intensive may work well in the Middle East, but in poor countries such as India and many in Africa that is simply not an option. Therefore, once again we see natural readily available options as the solutions we must be willing to provide which include education on sustainable agriculture (NO GMOs,) water conservation, population control through family planning, solar water pumps, sustainable irrigation practices, crop rotation that takes into account changing weather patterns as a result of climate change, and major reforestation to bring water up to the roots to also provide food, shelter, and a thriving ecosystem. These solutions are cheaper, easier to implement, and more timely than the costly time consuming political solutions that only deem to hold us back from achieving progress now.

We find ourselves now sitting at the abyss and looking in as we see a world shifting towards more hunger, poverty, war, and financial instability, along with the threat of global health crises like pandemics. All of these problems have been deepened in scope through political will only working to its own ends. Only through grassroots efforts and people movements seeking moral solutions to these crises can we bring about the political will to do the moral thing.

As with water disputes, there is no time for bickering out of selfish motivations. Water is the lifeline of our planet and should not be used as a bargaining chip at a political meeting. This is why I am so adamant about it being declared a global human right. This is why we need that to happen in order to open the door to lessen disputes, stop its privitization for profit (which would also go a long way in conserving it for agriculture and other needs of the people) and shifting the discourse from a strictly political focus to one that sees it as a transboundary transglobal problem with equitable solutions that maintain life for all. Like the climate crisis however, that requires a higher consciousness in seeing beyond political bickering to the future we wish to leave to future generations.

If only the leaders of this world would understand that addressing water issues first effectively would alleviate so much of the poverty, hunger, war, and financial instability the world is now experiencing, we would be on our way to the solutions for our species most pressing challenge now: Sustaining the habitability of this our only home.

Photograph credit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl/274762201/

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Life cycle assessments measure water's impact on Earth's ecosystems for first time










The damages to ecological systems from overconsumption of water are illustrated in this world map (yellow represents low impacts, navy high impacts).
Figure 3, PFISTER ET AL.



LCA's finally measure water consumption
Catherine Cooney
Environ. Sci. Technol., Article ASAP
DOI: 10.1021/es901078v
Publication Date (Web): April 22, 2009
Copyright © 2009 American Chemical Society

Despite water’s significance, modeling how freshwater consumption for drinking, industrial manufacturing, and agriculture has affected ecosystems, human health, and the depletion of nonrenewable freshwater resources has been overlooked. In a new ES&T study (DOI 10.1021/es802423e), researchers take the traditional life-cycle assessment (LCA) approach one huge step beyond current practices with a model that incorporates water consumption.LCA models were created to address problems in industrialized nations, and most of these countries don’t experience human-health risks due to water scarcity, the authors note. Recently, researchers have started to use LCA models to manage diminishing resources in developing countries. To incorporate water consumption into the LCA process, Stephan Pfister, Annette Koehler, and Stefanie Hellweg at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich’s (ETH Zurich’s) Institute of Environmental Engineering started from scratch: they created units of measure for water consumption that are compatible with the many values for energy and resource use that appear in an internationally recognized LCA method. “For water use, this hadn’t been done, ever,” says Hellweg, who is a professor of ecological systems design at ETH Zurich.

For example, the team interpreted a well-known value established by the World Health Organization in LCA models and applied it to water use. The disability-adjusted life year is a value that expresses the number of years a person's life will be shortened as a result of disease or premature death. The team also adapted an indicator applied to address ecosystem impacts and known as PDF (potentially disappeared fraction of species) to express how water impacts species.LCAs routinely rely on aggregated data to represent large areas. But the ecological impacts of water use depend on regional factors, such as freshwater availability, water infrastructure, rainfall, and consumption patterns at a specific location. The team used a geographic information system to gather regional data and divided large rivers, such as the Nile and the Mississippi, into subcatchments. “The watershed level is more appropriate for the assessment, because hydrological processes are connected within watersheds,” Pfister says.

In the paper, Pfister and colleagues demonstrate their model with a case study of a process that is water-intensive worldwide: cotton production. They began with data from the “virtual water” database developed by researchers in The Netherlands. A relatively new idea, virtual water describes the amount of water that evaporates during agricultural use. Specifically, the database is an inventory of the water consumed for agricultural use for many crops in most countries.The team found that the impacts from water consumption in the cotton industry vary according to country: Egypt’s water supply experiences the highest level of damage (77%) from cotton production, whereas Brazil experiences the lowest level of damage (0%), followed by the U.S. (4%).

The model’s focus on the resulting damage to ecosystems and human health is somewhat controversial among LCA practitioners in general, some modelers told ES&T. Many U.S. researchers tend to stick to LCAs that create resource-use inventories but that don’t measure ecological or human-health impacts, notes Christopher Weber of Carnegie Mellon University. Referring to the new ES&T study, Weber says: “There is a great deal of uncertainty in their inventory, and there is still disagreement over many of the definitions they use.” Modelers in the U.S. also shy away from incorporating water into LCAs because there is a shortage of water data in this country, explains Chris Hendrickson, also of Carnegie Mellon. More data are available for the EU, and for areas with water scarcity, such as in Israel, Hendrickson says.

Nonetheless, the study demonstrates a huge range of work, Weber says. “I absolutely think that [the] method they are using is a good one,” he says. “It’s good to take the next step and to turn water use into something that can be used to compare it to something else, such as toxic releases or CO2.”Pfister says that within the LCA community, work has been done to clearly define the terms related to water use. “Our method directly uses those definitions,” he adds.

Despite the uncertainties inherent in all LCAs, the researchers are confident that this approach, as well as the assumptions they make in this study, will compare favorably with other LCA methods. The group members say that they hope their work will be used by businesses and governments that are searching for ways to protect diminishing water resources. Some nonbinding declarations in the EU suggest that consumer goods show LCA information on product labels, and many companies are beginning to conduct LCAs, Pfister says.Determining water use “has really become popular in the last year,” Hellweg says. “But companies are not really looking at what happens afterwards, and they are all looking at water use in an aggrandized area,” she adds. “I really hope that businesses take this one more step and incorporate the differences of water use in Egypt compared with water use in a wet country such as Switzerland,” Hellweg says.
_______________
It is good to finally see life cycle assessments being done for water use. The impact of water use on our ecosystems should be of chief concern in every area of the world as water is the one resource we cannot live without.

More water is wasted(and polluted) in industry, yet they are not accountable for the water they use. And even though these assessments are not ironclad based on changing factors over time, they at least give a good idea of what is being used, wasted, and how best to conserve water in different regions of the world experiencing different effects regarding that usage due to population, population growth, deforestation, agriculture, and now chiefly, climate change which is precipitating drought and melting glaciers more rapidly which absolutely effects the life cycle of water and all that depend on it.

It is time to take our use of water much more seriously. It is the lynchpin of our survival on this plaent and if we are to have any success at all in preserving our planet for ourselves and those to come, how we manage water is essential to that success and preservation.

Another World Water Day Gone

We see another World Water Day pass us by. The theme, Water For All, signifies that though some progress has been made we are woefully behin...