Four Water Resolutions for a New Year

Yes, it’s that time again – time to reflect on the year that has passed, and anticipate what could come of the year ahead.

My head has been unusually full of water lately, to the point of distraction.  Over the holidays I worked through two chapters of a new water book and set the course for a few more.  Water has been at the front of my mind almost constantly in recent weeks.  My attentions have been flitting from place to place in search of new ways to tell old water stories, with the hope of happier endings.

Like the family dog working the untended hors d’oeuvres of our holiday party guests, I too became a nuisance in my own house, a most boring cocktail conversationalist.  I, for one, am happy to be done with holiday distractions.  Time to start anew!

Brian Richter party on the river

The author in a rather celebratory mood.

 

Obsessing Over Water Scarcity

I’ve become rather morbidly allured to stories of people that are running out of water.  I’ve traveled the world from Texas to the Tana River of Kenya to study the consequences of water scarcity firsthand.  I want to know how people get trapped by water shortage, and how they might fight their way out.

I’d like to share a few New Year’s thoughts about the water challenges that many communities and countries will be facing in coming years, and what we will need to do to secure our water future.

First, a bit of context.  At the global scale, we are in no danger of running out of water.  We are presently using only about 4% of the water flowing through and into the rivers, lakes and aquifers of the planet.  However, not all of that water is readily available to us, and from the perspective of any individual community, only a small portion is affordably within reach.

That means that when thinking about water shortages, we need to view them as very localized in nature – not a global water crisis but a “multi-local” crisis.

Water shortages emerge when the users of a particular water source – a local river, lake, or aquifer – are consuming water at a rate faster than the source is being replenished.

That explains the physical cause of water scarcity.  Trying to explain why we don’t control our depletion of our water sources is much, much more complicated.

The Promise of Water Democracy

In most regions of the world, governments have asserted the authority to regulate water use, and local communities have acquiesced.  But most governments are failing miserably in their water duties.

Water agencies at state and national levels have proven incapable or unwilling to expend the time, resources, and care required to effectively manage a resource that is inherently highly localized in its distribution and virtually impossible to regulate from any distance.

Governments are absentee water owners.

As a result, the water supermarkets of the world – our watersheds and aquifers – are being operated without any cashiers or stocking clerks.  The store shelves are being emptied faster than they can be restocked.

I am not yet giving up on the possibility that governments will someday provide adequate water governance.  But that governance needs to be fundamentally restructured.  We need to move from state-run technocracies to local community-based water democracies.

Some really interesting experiments in water democracy are already underway.  The national water act passed in South Africa in 1998 called for the formation of local “catchment management agencies.”  Kenya’s recent water reforms have given local communities a bigger role in water decision-making through “water resource user associations.”  In Texas, state legislation passed in 1997 called for the creation of sixteen “regional water planning groups” that conduct assessments of their water situation on a five-year planning cycle.

None of these experiments in local water democracy is working perfectly.  Which is exactly how democracy is supposed to work.  It is supposed to be inclusive, experimental, adaptive.  That means messy, slow, and often quite inefficient.

But here’s the magic of local water governance: people are talking to each other about water, people are watching how water is being used and who is using it, and everybody cares a great deal.  Participants in local water forums realize that their water future is now in their hands.

Only in this manner can our water sources be managed with the caring and sharing necessary to avoid, or resolve, scarcity.

Building Water Literacy

These community-based water democracy experiments are exciting and fresh. But it has already become quite clear that too many participants suffer from a basic water illiteracy.

Just as with managing family bank accounts, local citizens need to understand the water budgets of their local water sources: the rate at which their water sources are being replenished, how much is being removed and not returned after use, who is responsible for the greatest depletions, and what measures will likely be most effective in reducing consumption or increasing supply.

Many of us can make important contributions to advancing water literacy in our local communities.  In that spirit, I am hopeful that my forthcoming book will help explain the basic arithmetic of water budgets, and illustrate how that water math can point communities toward management approaches that will be most effective.

But many of you can help foster water literacy as well.  Here I’ll offer four ideas for your consideration, posed as suggested resolutions for the New Year.

Resolutions for Our Water Future

Resolution #1: If you are a teacher, please commit or redouble your efforts to advance learning about water cycles, watersheds and aquifers in your educational curriculum.

There are many excellent teaching resources now available.  It’s never too early or too late to teach water, and we have a lot of catching up to do.  A recent poll by The Nature Conservancy found that more than three-quarters of Americans cannot identify the natural source of the water that they use in their homes. More than half of those that thought they knew were wrong.  We cannot even begin to help solve water problems if we don’t even know which water source(s) we rely upon!

Resolution #2: If you are a media reporter, learn the difference between “water use” and “water consumption.”

Trust me, it matters a great deal when discussing water shortages, and if you keep getting it wrong then you are perpetuating water illiteracy in our society.  Water shortages are not caused simply by using (i.e., withdrawing) water from a river, lake or aquifer. Water shortages result from the fact that some portion of the water that is withdrawn and used is not returned to the original water source after use (i.e., water is consumed from the local water source, thereby depleting it).

A power plant might use a lot of water, but 95-98% of the water is typically returned to the local source after it is used to cool the plant.  Similarly, virtually all of the water used in our homes might go back to the original source after it runs down our drains.  In contrast, less than 50% of the water used in irrigated agriculture and everything we spray on our lawns fails to make it back to the original source.

Water use is not the cause of water scarcity, but water consumption is!

Why does this matter?  Because you cannot effectively resolve water shortages unless you focus on the biggest sources of water consumption.  As a reporter, you can help citizens understand where the greatest volumes of water are being consumed.  For example, power plants account for 41% of all water used in the U.S., but they are responsible for less than 5% of all water consumption.  In contrast, irrigated agriculture accounts for 37% of all water use but 85% of all water consumed!

Resolution #3:  If you are a government official, stop authorizing funding for large water storage reservoirs unless proven to be the optimum solution after comprehensive and objective analysis.

We have been taught that building reservoirs is the answer to water shortages.  This is like being taught that the answer to bankruptcy in your checking account is to open up another account.  Reservoirs don’t create more water – they simply help spend it.

Reservoirs can be helpful in temporarily storing water to facilitate its use in irrigation, or as urban water supply.  But they should never be assumed as panaceas, and they should always be evaluated objectively against all other options, especially conservation measures.

Reducing water consumption associated with irrigation – both on farms and in urban landscape areas – is by far and away the most cost-effective means of alleviating water shortages.  The potential for water conservation in cities and farms is so huge that it will take most communities decades to exhaust the potential.  Only in rare cases will it be economically – not to mention environmentally – justifiable to continue building large water storage reservoirs.  The smart money will go toward helping farmers and cities reduce the amount of water consumed in irrigation.

Resolution #4:  If you own or work for a water-using corporation, commit to having a net positive water impact on the water sources you profit from.

To become effective water managers, most communities will require considerable help in their efforts to reduce overall water consumption and set a course toward long-term water sustainability.

If your company is operating in (or sourcing materials from) a water-short area, one of the most important ways to “give back” to your local community is to invest in local water education efforts, and to commit your company to a goal of being a “net positive” user of water.  By net positive I mean that you use as little water as practical, and then look for ways to invest in other water-saving efforts in the community that offset your company’s water use.  For examples of corporate commitments to water, check out the goals that both Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have adopted.

Happy New Year!

Comments

  1. Nicole Rosenleaf Ritter
    Montana
    January 7, 5:38 pm

    Thanks for a great article and some very succinct suggestions. I wanted to add to your first one that even those who aren’t teachers can help people learn about water. For example, parents can use the resources that we at the Project WET Foundation create, including the free online web experience DiscoverWater.org (http://www.discoverwater.org), with their children. While we do focus on helping educators teach about water, we also encourage personal responsibility in learning about all aspects of water. Thanks again for highlighting this important issue!

  2. zenrainman
    Bangalore,India
    January 6, 6:08 am

    A very nice article and a very important one too. Did a similar article for the city I come from http://rainwaterharvesting.wordpress.com/ and was struck by the similarity of the ideas.

  3. Aaron Aduna
    Bolgatanga- Ghana
    January 5, 12:34 pm

    Brian, this an excellent piece to start 2013 with. It is thought provoking and I look forward to reading the book.
    I agree that any water that is not returned to the original source is considered as being ‘Consumed’. What about water returned to the original source but in a different form (Compromised quality)

    • Brian Richter
      January 5, 3:42 pm

      Aaron, thanks for raising that question. It’s really important to always consider water quantity and quality in an integrated and holistic perspective. Any time that water is used and then returned in lesser quality, it can create problems. It might necessitate additional treatment before the water can be used again. Unfortunately, when polluted water is used for drinking, it can cause very serious health problems. But polluted water should not be considered as “lost” or “consumed” unless it truly is not possible to use it again.

  4. Tracy Farrell
    Cambodia
    January 4, 5:41 am

    Great stuff Brian, I cannot wait to read the masterpiece! I like the structure in this blog piece too–link the actor to the positive action. Perhaps for the “if you are a development or a conservation organization” actor, I might suggest that we better recognize water as the deliverer of benefits we need to survive and thrive.

  5. Lee
    Cascadia
    January 3, 3:13 pm

    Between use and consumption, thermal power plants also generate waste heat which stresses the watersheds upon which they depend. High temperatures can affect fish and also increase evaporation.

  6. Tracy
    United States
    January 3, 1:26 pm

    Great article. I was quite happy to see your mention of the WUAs in Kenya, as working with one of the first WUAs was my PhD project. And nope, things weren’t easy nor did they go as all had envisioned (as you point out … it’s a democracy and things won’t always go well); however, it was an amazing start and the work with WUAs has continued and improved. Kenya has made many strides in the area of protecting water resources, yet it seems to go largely unnoticed in favor of reporting on negatives.
    I would also advocate for seeing mire of a distinction between water resources and water supply in our collective water literacy, as they aren’t the same. Water resources also includes ecosystems that support and are supported by water. I often find that people use the words interchangeably but they are, for the most part, only really focused on water supplies rather than the bigger and long-term picture of a holistic ecosystem health to support water. It is a subtle yet important distinction that ought to be stressed more often.
    Anyhow, great article to share with my family and friends who aren’t scientists because it is quite approachable and covers many important points!

  7. Michele Kingrey
    January 3, 12:22 pm

    I agree understanding water “use” and “consumption” are important to water budgeting and management options. To that I will add another factor as important nowdays: climate change and urbanization.

  8. Bill Strang
    Atlanta GA
    January 3, 12:14 pm

    Brian, great article, also an interesting aspect of water usage is the the embedded energy content in a gallon of water. part of our work in making TOTO bathroom products is developing an understanding of the complete Life Cycle impacts of our products. The interesting part is that within every gallon of water there is an embedded energy content, that is the energy to withdraw, treat, transport, (you use it), remove it (sewer), transport it, treat it and return it to the Aquifer. Now this is the interesting part, the amount of energy is .0037 kwh per gallon of water, thus by reducing usage, we reduce energy consumption AND by reducing energy consumption the power plant uses less water. Of course the .0037 kwh/g is national average, the energy is a great deal higher in California and a bit lower in Chicago, but by reducing we save carbon footprint.

    • Brian Richter
      January 3, 12:23 pm

      Bill, thanks so much for making that really important point! As you point out, virtually any form of urban water conservation has big benefits in terms of energy conservation. That means that even in places where use of in-home water-efficient fixtures may not do a lot to reduce water shortages in your local river (due to the fact that the water you use in your home goes down your drain ends up back in the river again), you are saving a lot of energy nonetheless. I certainly don’t mean to discourage water conservation efforts in any way — instead, I just want to emphasize that if you’re in a community or farming area that is experiencing water shortages, you need to be smart about which water-saving actions will be most useful in alleviating water scarcity.

  9. Upmanu Lall
    United States
    January 3, 3:13 am

    Brian – very nice and succinct analysis.
    I like the supermarket analogy — we have in many places inventory clerks who monitor the system, but in the absence of managers and cashiers the data they collect is often locked away. We push for disclosure on food and product labels, but lack basic information on water supply and especially consumption. It is remarkable that water is so valuable that it is unpriced and information as to its use and availability is so guarded in so many places.

    The water use and consumption story is interesting too — ideally one would like the two numbers to converge to reflect efficient use or consumption. The challenge to the environment is clearly from high rates of diversion relative to actual consumption and return flows that are of lower quality rendering harm to the resource.
    Your resolutions take us a long way to moving forward towards responsible use, but fall short of pushing for pricing, incentives and regulation as instruments for accelerating movement towards more sustainable use. Globally we use a small % of the flowing water, but at every point of diversion we create potential conflict between users and between users and the environment. We have to put this high on the list of things to address.
    Excellent blog by the way

  10. Greg Koch
    Atlanta
    January 2, 5:51 pm

    I like your analogy of our water “supermarkets” being depleted without any stocking clerks or cashiers. Stocking clerks would be a good start, like the examples from Kenya to Texas that you highlight. But, cashiers would be useless in most places as the water is free. Water pricing is not the answer for every watershed but it can be a start. Like your New year’s resolutions, starting is the most important step — we can’t wait to get everything perfect before we start managing, consuming and using water more respectfully.

  11. Sandra Postel
    New Mexico
    January 2, 5:17 pm

    Distinguishing between “use” and “consumption” is crucial to understanding water budgets and management options. Let’s not forget, though, that a lot of water “use” is in fact depleting rivers because the water never makes its way back to the source. For example, many big cities depend on water transferred in from other river basins. Denver’s water “use” depletes the Colorado basin because water from the basin is transferred across the continental divide to Denver and other front range cities, never to return again. Likewise, LA’s water “use” depletes the Colorado River because Colorado water is shipped there by canal. The water New Yorkers use never makes it back to the upstate Catskills and Delaware watershed, where it originates. And Boston’s water does not return to the Swift River/Quabbin watershed in western Massachusestts; indeed it’s treated at Deer Island and released into Massachusetts Bay. These are just a few examples. Before we dismiss water “use” as a significant cause of river and stream depletion, we need to get a better handle on how much water actually returns (or doesn’t) to its source basin after it is used.

    • Brian Richter
      January 2, 6:21 pm

      Thanks, Sandra, for that very important clarification. Any water that is not returned to its original source can be considered as being “consumed” with respect to the water source. And this is almost always the case with groundwater – only in exceptionally rare cases is groundwater returned to an aquifer after being used.