The World Is Running Out Of Water

rugcat · Jun 17, 2015

This isn't just about climate change and drought. All over the world, the aquifers are being pumped faster than they can be replenished – and in some cases it takes thousands of years to replenish an aquifer once it's been depleted.

Quite often the crises of today have blindsided us. Who could have possibly predicted at the height of the Cold War that the Soviet Union would collapse and that worldwide Islamic terrorism would become a major issue?

Likewise, we are worried about running out of oil. We are worried about fossil fuels and global warming. But it's beginning to look like the most serious crisis of our lifetimes will be simply that there's not enough water to sustain our population.

The world’s most stressed aquifer — defined as suffering rapid depletion with little or no sign of recharging — was the Arabian Aquifer, a water source used by more than 60 million people. That was followed by the Indus Basin in India and Pakistan, then the Murzuk-Djado Basin in Libya and Niger.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...s-show-how-the-world-is-running-out-of-water/

What do you think will happen when these people have no water? And what if it turns out not to be a problem that will occur by the end of the century, but in the next 10 years or so?

California already has been using 40% of its water from a huge aquifer. With the drought, that's already risen to 60%. What happens when the aquifer is depleted and there's no more water available from it– ever?

And what if someone made a movie about this and it turned out to be a really, really bad one?

Oh, wait . . .

clintl · Jun 17, 2015

Directing a few comets our way should take care of the problem.

On a more serious note, we waste a lot of it, and we could do a lot better job recycling waste water than we do.

Brightdreamer · Jun 17, 2015

We'll correct and survive... or not.

We'll finally realize that overpopulation is not a divine right but a real, practical problem in need of real, practical solutions. Or we'll keep our lead foot on the accelerator and yell at and bludgeon each other over which God will save us from the brick wall in our path.

Either way, it's gonna get ugly. Very ugly. And most of those who pay the price will never understand just why it had to come to that...

Blinkk · Jun 17, 2015

rugcat said:
What do you think will happen when these people have no water?

If it comes to it, it would be a war over the ultimate recourse - clean drinking water. Or there would be a mass migration to places with clean drinking water. It would add more stress on the other systems, and political figures would probably start putting limitations on who gets to use the aquifers. Meanwhile, I'd imagine the science community would rush to find a way to turn unusable water into clean drinking water. If people are stressed enough they take action.

I know here in CA (especially in No Cal) we've been hearing lots more about water management. There are signs on restaurants now that say "drinking water served on request only." My grandparents who own a business in CA are following regulations to be more water efficient. I know some farmers/ranchers in CA who have reconstructed their watering systems, not because any political body forced them to, but because they wanted to do their part in the drought.

Will those things save the planet? I doubt it. Still, when people are stressed they take more initiative. A lot of people in first world countries don't feel the effects of the draining aquifers, so it's not on their minds and they don't take action. When drinking water becomes a direct stress, you bet the first world counties will step in and make changes. Will that be too late? That's always the question.

Zoombie · Jun 17, 2015

clintl said:
On a more serious note, we waste a lot of it, and we could do a lot better job recycling waste water than we do.

Basically, this.

Water is an issue of infrastructure - there's enough "water" in the world. It's just moving it to where the people are, and taking the salt out of it, and doing all of this without causing even bigger, even worse problems.

Of course, all the solutions I can think of involve government regulation, a massive New Deal style infrastructure effort, and loads of sex education and birth control.

And thus, will likely not happen.

MacAllister · Jun 17, 2015

Interestingly, T Boone Pickens has been buying up aquifers for almost a decade, now.

And the Nestle bottled water commercials? Knowing what [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8uf0n2n0dM"]Nestle has been doing[/URL] in terms of using public water to bottle and sell? Those commercials actually make me throw up in my mouth a little.

Roxxsmom · Jun 17, 2015

Then you get ~~people~~ assholes like these. Makes me think about the stories about the Greenland Norse colony, where the rich, whose lifestyles were not negotiable, were the last ones to starve (but they still starved in the end).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e39-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html?hpid=z1

Zoombie · Jun 17, 2015

“It angers me because people aren’t looking at the overall picture,” Butler said. “What are we supposed to do, just have dirt around our house on four acres?”

YES. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.

Seriously, it's shit like this that makes me feel positively revolutionary.

Roxxsmom · Jun 17, 2015

A nice rockery, or a patio, or xeriscape will also work just fine too, if the bare dirt or dead grass isn't their thing. Heck, how about a tennis court? Those don't take any water, and nothing screams richness like a tennis court.

MacAllister · Jun 17, 2015

Rock gardens. Patios. Sculpture gardens. There's all kinds of options.

Once! · Jun 17, 2015

Or ... don't have four acres in the first place? Isn't that a wonderful way of arguing your special needs, whilst simultaneously (a) boasting and (b) proving that you don't really get it?

blacbird · Jun 18, 2015

The problem isn't simply the quantity of fresh water (there being an abundance of essentially unusable salt water on the planet); it's the distribution of it. Water is heavy, and therefore expensive to transport great distances. The California canals taking water from the distant Colorado River are horrors of inefficiency. Most of that water actually evaporates before it reaches the massive consuming public in LA and San Francisco and elsewhere. And the stupidly rich population of Palm Springs, in the Mojave Desert, still wants lush green lawns and golf course (don't get me started on golf courses).

You want to live in the desert? Become part of the desert ecology.

caw

MrCasperTom · Jun 18, 2015

Fun Fact: It is estimated that, by 2050, the UK will have a structural deficit of water (daily) in the realm of 10,000 ML (that's mega litres not millilitres). Today the current domestic consumption of Wales is 1000 ML.

Don · Jun 18, 2015

Well, blacbird has pointed out the foolishness of watering deserts in general, so that's been covered. It's also worth noting that legal requirements for the maintenance of those green lawns and other water-heavy landscaping have long been the norm across the country including settled deserts. Although most of that's now been superseded by proclamation, at least in California, it still takes a while to break people of idiotic habits that have been ingrained for decades. And you have to include guilt-tripping the people who use 20% of the water supply while subsidizing the people who are using 80% of the water supply to grow almonds and strawberries in the desert.

Agriculture, which represents only two percent of the economic activity in California, consumes 80% of the water supply. Fifty billion dollars is a tiny drop in a two-trillion dollar bucket, but that drop is soaking up the water wealth of the whole state. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. It's no coincidence that California has an extremely powerful agricultural lobby.

Once again, economics is putting some serious parameters on people's utopias.

Here's some detail about California's water problems.

Myrealana · Jun 18, 2015

“It angers me because people aren’t looking at the overall picture,” Butler said. “What are we supposed to do, just have dirt around our house on four acres?”

It's called xeriscape (not "zero-scape), and it can be as beautiful, sculpted and manicured as any Kentucky bluegrass lawn, at a fraction of the water.

I've been trying to get our HOA to embrace xeriscape yards. They're voting on it again this year with news of the drought in California on everyone's mind.

I'd love to stop spending the $100 or so every month on watering the non-native grass I'm required to have in my yard.

Don · Jun 18, 2015

Myrealana said:
It's called xeriscape (not "zero-scape), and it can be as beautiful, sculpted and manicured as any Kentucky bluegrass lawn, at a fraction of the water.

I've been trying to get our HOA to embrace xeriscape yards. They're voting on it again this year with news of the drought in California on everyone's mind.

I'd love to stop spending the $100 or so every month on watering the non-native grass I'm required to have in my yard.

I thought I was going to have to fight the same battle here in south-central Florida, but the HOA caved easily. There are Florida state regs that supercede the HOA's rules and allow me to xeriscape, and the HOA has no desire to spend money on lawyers to resist. Check your state regs and you may find a similar situation.

Amadan · Jun 18, 2015

Don said:
Agriculture, which represents only two percent of the economic activity in California, consumes 80% of the water supply. Fifty billion dollars is a tiny drop in a two-trillion dollar bucket, but that drop is soaking up the water wealth of the whole state. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. It's no coincidence that California has an extremely powerful agricultural lobby.

Don is actually right this time. It chaps my hide that all the PR is focused on getting consumers to reduce residential water use when it's a small fraction of what is wasted by agriculture. And it's not like we couldn't grow crops without reducing the amount of water agriculture uses - we'd just have to grow different (and sometimes less profitable) crops.

Two books on the subject:

The Big Thirst: The Secret Life and Turbulent Future of Water

When the Rivers Run Dry: Water--The Defining Crisis of the Twenty-first Century

The upshot of both books is the semi-hopeful yet depressing message that we do have the technology to address global water needs - but for economic and political reasons, the odds of it being done before entire regions collapse in drought and/or water wars is about nil.

Kaiser-Kun · Jun 18, 2015

blacbird said:
And the stupidly rich population of Palm Springs, in the Mojave Desert, still wants lush green lawns and golf course (don't get me started on golf courses).

Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

nighttimer · Jun 18, 2015

Locally, we've been dealing with elevated nitrate levels in our city water and probably will for some time to come.

One day last August, residents in Toledo, Ohio, received a stark warning from city officials: Don't drink your tap water, don't wash the dishes in it, and don't bathe your kids in it. This year, it's the people of Columbus, 150 miles to the south, who received a jolt of bad news: In a large swath of the city and its suburbs, pregnant women and babies younger than six months of age have been advised to avoid the tap. In a warning well designed to titillate headline writers, another group landed on the don't-drink-the-water list: Viagra users.

The advisory "will remain in effect until further notice," the City of Columbus website states. The Columbus Dispatch reported that it could "last weeks."
What gives? Toledo and Columbus are surrounded by industrial-scale corn, soybean, and hog farms, and in both cases, runoff from these operations fouled the water supply. In Toledo, the culprit was phosphorus finding its way from farm fields into Lake Erie, from which the city draws its water. Excessively high phosphorus levels fed a massive algae bloom, from which toxins seeped into the municipal water supply.

In Columbus, the problem is nitrate, from nitrogen fertilizer that leaches out of farm fields and into streams and rivers. Nitrates also concentrate in hog manure, which is also applied to farm fields and is prone to leaching. Nitrates in the water emerging from one of the city's main water-treatment facilities, called Dublin Road, have exceeded the federal limit of 10 parts per million.

That's bad, because nitrates are linked to a range of health problems at low exposure levels: They impede the blood's ability to carry oxygen—a characteristic that's particularly threatening to infants. They've also been linked to elevated rates of birth defects as well as cancers of the ovaries and thyroid. As for Viagra users, they should avoid the water because the drug interacts with nitrates in a way that can cause a dangerous drop in blood pressure.

On its website, the City of Columbus bluntly states the cause of the nitrate spike: "Elevated nitrate levels are primarily a result of fertilizer and agricultural runoff within the 1,000 square mile Scioto River watershed—80% of which is agricultural."

The water-treatment plant in question currently lacks the ability to filter out nitrates. The city is spending $35 million on an ion-exchange treatment facility that, "when completed in 2017, will allow the plant to more effectively treat nitrate events such as this one," its website states. Nitrate advisories like the current one have been common over the years, reports the Dispatch.

As you can imagine, there's been a run on bottled water and filtration systems.

Kylabelle · Jun 18, 2015

And of course poor people can't afford bottled water and filtration systems, and those in the poorest nations simply drink filthy water these days, or go thirsty.

It is a very deeply broken situation.

ETA: On a moderately brighter note, there have been recently a number of inventions of cheap, personal water filters, but even that, there are big problems with, one being delivery and another being the water use involved in manufacture, among its other problems.

Amadan · Jun 18, 2015

Kylabelle said:
And of course poor people can't afford bottled water and filtration systems, and those in the poorest nations simply drink filthy water these days, or go thirsty.

It is a very deeply broken situation.

ETA: On a moderately brighter note, there have been recently a number of inventions of cheap, personal water filters, but even that, there are big problems with, one being delivery and another being the water use involved in manufacture, among its other problems.

Yeah, one of the issues is that water problems are very much local. Nothing California does will help people in Texas*, and we could solve all our problems here in the US, but it wouldn't help people in the Middle East or Australia.

* Not entirely true, since both states are now eying the Great Lakes as water sources.

nighttimer · Jun 18, 2015

I feel guilty about watering my plants every few days until I pass a golf course watering the greens every day and then I don't feel guilty anymore.

ap123 · Jun 18, 2015

Blinkk said:
If it comes to it, it would be a war over the ultimate recourse - clean drinking water. Or there would be a mass migration to places with clean drinking water. It would add more stress on the other systems, and political figures would probably start putting limitations on who gets to use the aquifers. Meanwhile, I'd imagine the science community would rush to find a way to turn unusable water into clean drinking water. If people are stressed enough they take action.

I know here in CA (especially in No Cal) we've been hearing lots more about water management. There are signs on restaurants now that say "drinking water served on request only." My grandparents who own a business in CA are following regulations to be more water efficient. I know some farmers/ranchers in CA who have reconstructed their watering systems, not because any political body forced them to, but because they wanted to do their part in the drought.

Will those things save the planet? I doubt it. Still, when people are stressed they take more initiative. A lot of people in first world countries don't feel the effects of the draining aquifers, so it's not on their minds and they don't take action. When drinking water becomes a direct stress, you bet the first world counties will step in and make changes. Will that be too late? That's always the question.

Maybe I'm being too hopeful, but I'm hoping if enough individuals are taking initiative and making changes, the next step will be increased pressure to make changes on a larger scale.

nighttimer said:
Locally, we've been dealing with elevated nitrate levels in our city water and probably will for some time to come.

As you can imagine, there's been a run on bottled water and filtration systems.

Just as an FYI, Bulk Reef Supply sells relatively inexpensive filtration systems easily attached to kitchen and/or bathroom faucets. Not inexpensive enough for too many, but cost effective for the working class. I use the waste water for my plants and container garden, and know many who have the tubing for the waste water connected to their washing machines, and use it that way. (I don't own a washing machine, or I would do the same.)

Dennis E. Taylor · Jun 18, 2015

Someone mentioned it earlier, but it's worth pointing out again that the Earth is 70% covered with water. The amount of water on the planet hasn't really changed in the last three billion or so years. The problem is fresh water.

There are many technologies available right now for converting salt water to fresh. A new one pops up on physorg.com about once a month. The problem with them is that A) they're energy-intensive, and/or B) they're slow, AND C) there's not a lot of incentive to pursue the technology right now. But like fracking, as the economics change, the motivation will change.

Don · Jun 18, 2015

ap123 said:
Just as an FYI, Bulk Reef Supply sells relatively inexpensive filtration systems easily attached to kitchen and/or bathroom faucets. Not inexpensive enough for too many, but cost effective for the working class. I use the waste water for my plants and container garden, and know many who have the tubing for the waste water connected to their washing machines, and use it that way. (I don't own a washing machine, or I would do the same.)

A lot of areas no longer allow grey water (sink, tub, shower, washing machine) to be used for watering. In our area, the law changed a few years back, and new rural homes must size the septic system to take both black and grey water. When our grey water system broke, we were supposed to upgrade to a full-septic system, but as a homeowner I was allowed to make repairs instead. If I'd brought in a plumber to do the work, though, he would have had to perform the "upgrade" or risk losing his license. There sure are some strange laws on the books.

The important point to remember with grey water systems is that only specific biodegradable soaps and cleaners should be used. I think people failing to heed those recommendations is what has led to the unpopularity of grey water systems these days.

The World Is Running Out Of Water

Lost in the Fog

Represent.

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist

Searching for dragons

Dragon of the Multiverse

'Twas but a dream of thee

Beastly Fido

Dragon of the Multiverse

Beastly Fido

'Twas but a dream of thee

Still confused by shoelaces

All Living is Local

I aim to misbehave

All Living is Local

!

No Gods No Masters

unaccounted for

No Gods No Masters

Twitching

Get it off! It burns!

All Living is Local