
Do we need it? The era of cheap water is nearly over says a report by the Pacific Institute in California. A swelling global population, changing diets and mankind’s expanding “water footprint” have led ecologists to forecast “peak ecological water” — the point where, like the concept of “peak oil”, the world has to confront a natural limit on something once considered virtually infinite.
Off-gridders have to look at their water supply, and ask “is it really secure?”
The world is in danger of running out of “sustainably managed water”, according to Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute president and a leading authority on global freshwater resources.
A key element to tackling the crisis, say experts, is to increase the public understanding of the individual water content of everyday items.
Water footprint
A glass of orange juice, for example, needs 850 litres of fresh water to produce, according to the Pacific Institute and the Water Footprint Network, while the manufacture of a kilogram of microchips — requiring constant cleaning to remove chemicals — needs about 16,000 litres. A hamburger comes in at 2,400 litres of fresh water, depending on the origin and type of meat used.
The water will be returned in various forms to the system, although not necessarily in a location or at a quality that can be effectively reused.
Water Wars
There are concerns that water will increasingly be the cause of violence or war. Disagreements between neighboring areas in the US also result. “When we had the last drought in Northern California and rigidly conserved water, the people in Los Angeles, who live in a desert, objected to stop watering their nice green lawns,” said Gunther Steinberg of Portola Valley in California.
“It will always be the other guy who needs to save water.”
Dan Smith, the Secretary-General of the British-based peacebuilding organisation International Alert, said: “Water is a basic condition for life. Its availability and quality is fundamental for all societies, especially in relation to agriculture and health. There are places — West Africa today, the Ganges-Brahmaputra river system in Nepal, Bangladesh and India, and Peru within ten years — where major changes in the rivers generate a significant risk of violent conflict. Good water management is part of peacebuilding.”
David Zhang, a geographer at the University of Hong Kong, produced a study published in the US National Academy of Sciences journal that analysed 8,000 wars over 500 years and concluded that water shortage had played a far greater role as a catalyst than previously supposed.
“We are on alert, because this gives us the indication that resource shortage is the main cause of war,” he told The London Times. “Human beings will definitely have conflicts over this.”
Although in theory renewable sources of water were returned to the ecosystem and their use could continue indefinitely, Dr Gleick said, changes in the way water was exploited and how its quality degraded meant that methods of processing it would become more expensive.
“Once we begin appropriating more than ‘peak ecological water’ then ecological disruptions exceed the human benefit obtained,” Dr Gleick said. Defined this way, many regions of the world had passed that peak and were using more water than the system could sustain.
A significant part of the problem is the huge, and often deeply inefficient, use of water by industry and agriculture. UN calculations suggest that more than one third of the world’s population is suffering from water shortages: by 2020 water use is expected to increase by 40 per cent from current levels, and by 2025, according to another UN estimate, two out of three people could be living under conditions of “water stress”.
The World’s Water report sounds a particularly strong note of alarm over the state of water usage and pollution in China, where rampant economic expansion has overtaxed freshwater resources and could even begin to threaten stability.
“When water resources are limited or contaminated, or where economic activity is unconstrained and inadequately regulated, serious social problems can arise,” wrote Dr Gleick, “and in China, these factors have come together in a way that is leading to more severe and complex water challenges than in almost any other place on the planet.”
Drop by drop
— Water footprint calculations are still only rough. They differ around the world and depend on climate, soil types, irrigation methods and crop genetics. The water footprint of different meats depends on what the animals are fed and the relative “thirst” of the crops used to feed them
— The amount of water required to produce a single litre of soft drink may be only three or four litres, but vast quantities are used to produce the sugar and corn syrup feedstocks. For example, one kilogram of paper requires 125 litres of water to process, but that excludes the water needed to grow the tree












Off-grid Olympians
Fox buys John Twelve Hawks
Take a walk on the wild side….
Robin hood tax pressure grows
Fight to stop the new Super-Grid
Up in the Air
Soccer’s swampy bugs out
Living for free
Johnson & Johnson zillionairess dies, ignored by family
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
It makes me mad that there isn’t a requirement for new builds (private and business) to incorporate rain collection systems. In the UK it is so daft not to harvest water at source. It’s very easy to set up too.
An excellent article. Yet solar energy could very well be the solution to the problem. Desalinisation of oceanwater by means of photovoltaic induced energy, could turn a desert into a blooming paradise….
Not that I disagree with many of the points made in this article about our need to be more careful and resourceful with our fresh water supply, but in my opinion, the “eminent disaster” tone it carries is grossly over stated. Certainly there are many areas of the world where water supply is at a critical state, and many of those areas are heavily populated. Nonetheless, there are also many areas where water supply is not an issue and many many more areas where abundant supplies lay untouched.
To compare the naturally self replenishing cycle of water on earth to “peak oil” estimates is (in my opinion) more than a stretch because we are comparing renewable and non-renewable resources.
With proper motivation, the water problems can be easily managed, the problem has been that the abundance and low cost of this resource has held adequate motivation in check.
Often times the areas where the current needs are greatest are also areas with the least funds available to motivate toward effective solutions.
The portion that quotes estimated conditions in 2020 & 2025 seems to imply that we would be doing nothing at all different between now and then which, to me, is not realistic. Our history up through the present clearly demonstrates a serious lack of concern fopr the environment and utilization of resources. It is just as obvious that we daily become more sensitive to these issues and faster at responding to them than we did in days gone by.
Water is too easily reused to be preaching such a doomsday message. If you overstate something too much, you may loose your audience completely and the accurate portion of your message may be “thrown out with the bath water”.