Rich Nations Face Same Looming Water Crises Now Hitting Poor Neighbors

[hatrack]

GENEVA — Rich countries have to make drastic changes to policies if they are to avoid the water crisis that is facing poorer nations, the WWF environmental organisation said on Wednesday. In a survey of the situation across the industrialised world, it said many cities were already losing the battle to maintain water supplies as governments talked about conservation but failed to implement their pledges.

"Supporting large-scale industry and growing populations using water at high rates has come close to exhausting the water supplies of some First World cities and is a looming threat for many, if not most, others," the report warned. It suggested that agriculture in the richer countries should have to pay more for water and be held responsible more actively for its efficient use and for managing wastes, like salt, especially in intensive livestock farming.

From Seville in Spain to Sacramento in California and Sydney in Australia, the report said, water had become a key political issue at local, regional and national levels as climate change and loss of wetlands dramatically reduce supplies.

"At the rhetoric level, it is now generally accepted in the developed world that water must be used more efficiently and that water must be made available again to the environment in sufficient quantity for natural systems to function. "Many countries also recognise that extensive -- and very expensive -- repairs are required to reduce some of the damage inflicted on water systems and catchments in the past," it said.


EDIT

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11073

[phantom power]

1. Like NNadir says, people who think it can't happen here...

should think harder.

[rodeodance]

2. I am sure that our WH will be right on this crisis!

[annabanana]

3. yup. .

selling off access to water to some division of Halliburton..

[CGrantt57]

4. You guys need to do some research.

Specifically, on "aquifer, united states, gallons."

The US sits on something like 17 trillion, yes, trillion gallons of fresh water.

This isn't about "preserving fresh water" for the masses.

It's about making water a sought-after commodity.

The bastards are trying to privatize the water supply.

After all, water is cheap and relatively inexpensive.

Can't have that, can we?

[patrice]

5. Thanks for the heads-up. n/t

[unpossibles]

6. I agree they are trying to sell it, but we also need to consider usage

how many millions of gallons of fresh water does the US use every day for livestock, manufacturing, and personal needs? Will that 17 trillion gallons last forever?

I've heard a variety of figures from a variety of sources, but all pretty startling.

[Nihil]

7. It's also about location.

The places that need it now haven't got it.

The places that have got it now will need it in the future.

Whichever way you cut it, there is still a shortfall between
supply & demand and *that* is where the greedy sharks come in.

[phantom power]

8. Consider this research:

The united states daily groundwater withdrawal is 76 billion gallons per day. Division shows that the impressive sounding 17 trillion gallons would last 223 days, or about 8 months.

So, clearly the size of the aquifers is not nearly as important as their rate of replacent. To wit: are we taking water out of them faster than it's being put in? Sadly, the answer to that question is a big "Yes." And since the Rock mountain snow-pack is basically disappearing before our eyes, the rate of replacement is dropping precipitously, thus the problem is not just getting worse with time, but it's getting worse faster with time.