Back in the 1960s, it looked for a time that Quebec’s Separatist Movement just might succeed in winning independence from the rest of Canada. One of the cornerstones of the movement was a grandiose, and ultimately harebrained, scheme to bankroll Quebec’s independence: Build an enormous pipeline from the mostly uninhabited North and run it across the continent to the growing, and dry, American Southwest.

It never came close to reality, but much to my surprise, the idea is still alive — albeit no smarter now than it was then. Daniel Klymczyk — no separatist he — writes for a Canadian think tank called the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Mr. Klymczyk, a former exec with the Canadian arm of the Safeway grocery chain, would like to see $42 billion (Canadian dollars) of Mr. Obama’s stimulus package go to build the pipeline from Manitoba to Dallas.

The pipeline scheme/scam is just one of a litany of big dreams and big hallucinations on how to fix the world’s water problems. During the height of the Cold War, both the U.S. and the Russians pushed the idea of using low-yield nuclear weapons as “giant bulldozers” to create reservoirs and irrigation channels. President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” program actually carried out several small nuke tests before being sidetracked. Russia pursued some non-nuclear mega-engineering projects with disastrous results: Water diversion from the Aral Sea, once the world’s fourth largest freshwater lake, has caused it to nearly completely vanish.

Patrick Quilty, an Australian polar researcher, got to see a lot of ice during his visits to Antarctica. Why not, thought Professor Quilty, just bring it to the driest regions of Africa? It would be really easy. Just liberate a 1,800-foot-by-1,200-foot berg from the Antarctic coast. (It would also be about 450 feet deep in the water, but that’s only the tip of the iceberg, as they say.) Find a ship that can tow a floating mass of 32 million tons, throw a mile-long chain around the iceberg, and take off for the equator. But what about losing a lot of the ice due to melting, professor? Easy, mate: A very, very large plastic bag would wrap around the berg and limit the melting.

I’m not sure the professor ever got around to figuring how to get the fresh water inland, or found a 450-foot-deep harbor to dock an iceberg. Or where to recycle the very large plastic bag.

One of my all-time favorite books is “Cadillac Desert” by the late Marc Reisner. It’s a history of all the shady dealings around the water projects that helped build the American West. The book also inspired a four-part PBS series. Particularly striking is how the growth of Los Angeles doomed Owens Lake — America’s own Aral Sea. A fictionalized version of the intrigue of Western Water also hit the silver screen in the 1974 movie Chinatown.

Within the past year, the drought-stricken Southeastern U.S. witnessed a lame coup d’etat attempt: Georgia tried to wrestle a piece of the Tennessee River away from Tennessee. The river flows within a mile of the northwestern corner of the state of Georgia, but an apparent surveying error made in 1818 denied Georgia a chance to claim a sliver of the river, and a share of its water. The same surveyors’ error would have moved the entire southern border of Tennessee about a mile to the north, meaning a chunk of Memphis would be in Mississippi.

Georgia State Senator David Shafer, saying “it’s never too late to right a wrong,” filed a bill in the Georgia Legislature. I’m guessing that somewhere along the way, someone reminded Sen. Shafer that righting the legal wrongs of the early 1800s would also mean that the Cherokees would own the state again. The measure died a quiet death.

***
Peter Dykstra is the former executive producer of CNN’s Science, Tech and Weather Unit. He writes three columns for MNN: Media Mayhem on Mondays, Political Habitat on Wednesdays, and Green States on Fridays. (Yes, he writes a lot.)

If you’re one of those folks out there who is suffering from a bit of carbon fatigue, then a post in the NY Times’ Green Inc. blog this week could either provide additional motivation for green projects or increased fear of another jargon-laden debate. Green Inc highlighted the growing trend of striving for “water neutrality”, as highlighted at the Fifth World Water Forum in Istanbul last week.

The idea is gaining ground within a group of companies looking to understand and reduce their consumption of water, including Coca Cola, whose chairman has pledged to eventually balance out all of the water used in its products and manufacturing processes through conservation elsewhere (over 80 billion gallons worth!).

This got me to thinking: what would it take to be water-neutral in our own homes, meaning that we don’t import any net water? If we include all of the water that goes into our food and the products we consume, then it gets ugly real fast (see this post on the water content of food, for example). But what about our direct water use – showers, irrigation, toilets, etc?

Now, this would require some significant changes to a home and to local building/health/safety codes, since the only way to go water-neutral is to reuse graywater and harvest/store rainwater. Both of these options now face numerous permitting and legal obstacles around the country (including some pretty counterintuitive ones, like Utah and Colorado bans on capturing ANY rainwater at your home). Assuming we could, though, how much rain would it take to provide a family’s annual water needs?

• » See also: NESEA to Host BuildingEnergy09 in Boston
• » Get Sustainablog by RSS or sign up by email.

After some pretty simple calculations, it turns out that the home of a typical family of three could be water-neutral in climates receiving roughly 25″ of rainfall or more per year under the following assumptions:

• Three-person household;
• Rainwater captured, stored and reused;
• Graywater system used;
• Indoor water efficiency measures employed: low-flow showerheads, toilets, faucets and appliances;
• Outdoor water efficiency measures employed: smart irrigation control, rain shutoff, soil moisture sensors, climate-compatible landscaping.

This basically means that home water neutrality is feasible if you live in the Midwest, anywhere along the US Atlantic or Gulf Coasts, in the Northwest and in higher rainfall areas of the West and Mountain West (here’s a set of maps to review for your area). The detailed calculations are shown below. You can use our Environmental Impact Calculator to make similar calculations for your home and region.

Three Strategic Water Quality Challenges
Now to deal with the title of this presentation – the identification of three strategic
water quality challenges that decision-makers need to now about (Turton, 2008b).
As a result of the fact that we have lost our dilution capacity, we are now faced
with an increasing water quality problem. This will be addressed through the
National Water Quality Science, Technology and Policy Support Program currently
under development, in terms of which there will be three highly specific focal points.
These are all based on three strategic challenges that decision-makers in both
government and the private sector are being confronted with on a daily basis (Turton,
2008b). These are the following:
Strategic Challenge No. 1:

National Quest for Sustainability. South Africa is one
of the few countries in the world that has legislated for sustainability in their national
Constitution. We therefore need to turn these noble words into actual deeds supported
by robust science. To this end the CSIR has already invested heavily in what is known
as Sustainability Science. We need to now turn that theory (Burns et al., 2006; Burns
& Weaver, 2008) into concrete science, technology and policy. In that process our
available scientific knowledge tells us that there are two major issues that are about to
burst into the board rooms of large corporations and into the corridors of government
power in Pretoria and Cape Town. These two issues are:
Acid Mine Drainage. Our entire national energy strategy is largely based on
coal as a feedstock. That dependence is complex and will not be easily
changed (Oelofse, 2008b), so we have to focus our attention in the quest to
develop sustainable solutions to AMD, both coal and gold-based. This is a
highly complex issue and can only be overcome by leveraging all of our SET
assets in a concerted and focussed National Strategic Program with all major
players in both the energy sector (coal-based AMD) and mining sector (goldbased
AMD) as fully-fledged partners. To do this we must move away from
the current posture of being on a quest to hold corporations legally liable for
legacy issues, because that drives them into defensive positions from which
cooperation is not possible. In this regard we are already learning from the
German experience after unification where similar challenges arose. We need
to build robust partnerships, both nationally and globally, to achieve this
objective. We also need to solve technical problems that result in “new water”
that is generated in a way that is both environmentally and economically
sustainable. The SET component of this challenge will need to be robust,
probably exceeding the combined capacity of all our existing research
institutions, meaning that cooperation and partnerships are an absolute
necessity. In this regard, the principle being applied is that the level of
ingenuity needed to solve a problem, exceeds the level of ingenuity that
created the problem in the first place. This means that by definition, no one
institution will be able to solve this perplexing problem alone. Partnerships,
and only partnerships working in a highly coordinated manner, will be capable
of achieving this strategic objective. Leadership for this process will be a
major challenge, given the complexities of the issue, the degree of
transdisciplinarity needed to find viable solutions and the level of political and
commercial sensitivities involved. The decision to appoint and mandate an
appropriate person for this leadership role will thus be pivotal to the prognosis
for any future success.
Eutrophication. South Africa, already highly water constrained, is now also
faced with levels of eutrophication that are almost unprecedented globally.
Left alone this will slowly poison our waters, rendering them useless for future
economic development plans and driving up production costs for various
industries, further undermining the South African economy. This also has
major implications for a national population that already has a high level of
people with compromised immune systems (Ashton & Ramasar, 2002). The
science underpinning this was lost when the transition to the mixed funding
model occurred (see Figure 1) (Van Vuuren, 2008). We need to rebuild that
capacity as a matter of national priority and in this regard the recent decision
by the WRC to revive the fight against eutrophication is to be welcomed and
fully supported (Van Vuuren, 2008).
Strategic Challenge No. 2:

National Quest for Human Health. South Africa has a
number of health-related challenges (Hunter, 2003; Offringa et al., 2007). One of the
most notable is that associated with the scourge of HIV/AIDS that has left a
substantial portion of our population with a compromised immune system (Ashton &
Ramasar, 2002). Overlaid onto this is a developmental legacy that has exposed large
portions of the human population to heavy metal and radionuclide contamination
arising from more than a century of gold mining, much of which was largely
unregulated (Adler et al., 2007a; 2007b). This has many ramifications, which in my
professional opinion, have not yet been unravelled in any concerted way. So, if we are
to get serious about the science we do, we are going to have to show leadership in this
regard (Turton, 2008b). This means focussing on the following known problem areas:
Microcystins. South Africa has a microcystin load in our water storage
impoundments that is amongst the highest in the world. The last serious
science we did on this topic was in the decade before the start of the collapse
noted in Figure 1. We need to rebuild that national capacity (Van Vuuren,
2008), specifically with respect to high confidence studies of human beings
that might have been exposed to chronic doses of microcystin. That work will
be costly, complex and politically sensitive, but we cannot allow these factors
to cause us to waiver. No high confidence studies have been done and this is
bordering on the criminally negligent if we do not address this issue as a
matter of national priority. We need to know if microcystins are causing
human health problems (Hunter, 2003; Humpage et al., 2000; Ueno et al.,
1996), specifically in communities that are immune-compromised, and then
design intervention strategies based on this new robust science.
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. South Africa also has a growing problem
with endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), driven largely by our loss of
dilution. This means that EDCs are being recycled without being removed.
This leads to concentration and bioaccumulation, so our focus needs to be on
understanding the fate and pathways in order to design appropriate
interventions, both technological and policy-related.
Partially Metabolized Medication. Given our high HIV/AIDS rate, South
Africa has a growing anti retro-viral (ARV) load, which passes like any other
medication, through the body in partly metabolized forms. This means that we
are going to be seeing higher levels of ARV in our rivers, which by
implication means that these complex chemical compounds will be entering
the human population over time, either through the drinking water stream or
via produce that has been irrigated with contaminated water. This specific
South African issue is nested in a bigger technical problem known as
Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCP’s), which is a growing
global concern, but is sufficiently unique to warrant strategic attention on its
own. We need to develop the science to understand this better, because
nowhere else in the world is there a coincidence of loss of dilution and high
levels of ARV use as in this country. This is clearly a national priority that has
major political implications. This science might even be a world first, but it is
certainly a national strategic priority in which we will have to take the lead.
Radionuclide and Heavy Metal Contamination. As a result of more than a
century of largely unregulated gold mining, we now have a legacy of heavy
metal and radionuclide contamination in rivers flowing out of most gold
mining areas. We also have a high population density living in close daily
contact with dust and sediment arising from mine tailings dams (large portions
of SOWETO and the East and West Rand residential complexes are located on
land that in most developed countries would be considered to be
contaminated). South Africa has never done a high confidence study of offmine
populations to determine what the impact has been from chronic
exposure to heavy metals and radionuclides (CSIR, 2008). This will be
complex and costly, but we need such a study as a matter of national urgency.
Strategic Challenge No. 3:

National Quest for Climate Change Adaptation. Given
that our water resources have already been fully allocated, and in many cases overallocated,
we have no more buffer capacity. This means that global climate change
has very specific implications for us as a ‘nation’ to which we have not yet developed
an adequate response (Hunter, 2003). Therefore we need to start by focussing on the
following key areas of strategic importance:
Cyanobacteria. While Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” tells us to
be afraid of sea level and temperature rise in the future, our own science is
showing us that we are being threatened by toxic microcystins produced by
cyanobacteria at present (Harding & Paxton, 2001; Oberholster & Ashton,
2008) to which we have no known solution. The future is already here and
Al Gore’s movie is merely causing us to take our eye off the ball, because
there is tentative evidence that cyanobacteria population dynamics are
influenced, at least in part, by changing ambient temperatures in our water
bodies (Hunter, 2003). We therefore need to revive the National
Eutrophication Program that collapsed at the end of the 1980’s (Van Vuuren,
2008) (see Figure 1) in order to understand the exact linkages between climate
change and cyanobacteria. Current indicators are that there is a link, but we
need to drill down in greater detail to truly understand this with a higher
degree of certainty.
Dilution Capacity. Given that South Africa has lost its dilution capacity, we
need to understand exactly what climate change will do to our national water
resource that is so vital to our economic and social survival (Turton, 2008b).
More specifically will future coal combustion, in the face of reduced
precipitation, mean an increase in acid rain? What will this do to our
agricultural production capacity? How will this change soil chemistry? What
will the impact be on rivers and wetlands already under stress? Will this cause
an increased mobilization of radionuclides and heavy metals? How will this
impact on EDCs? Will this trigger additional eutrophication as iron and
phosphate is mobilized from sediments? These are all complex questions that
need a focussed and concerted scientific effort to answer reliably.
Ecosystem Thresholds. Given that so much of our current effluent streams
enter aquatic ecosystems often through terrestrial ecosystems, we need to
understand their dynamics better, specifically with regard to their assimilative
capacity as environmental sinks for heavy metals, radionuclides, EDCs, ARVs
and the myriad of chemical pollutants we discharge daily. More specifically,
we need to know if climate change will nudge any of these aquatic ecosystems
across thresholds, pushing them into catastrophic collapse, such as that already
in existence in the Hartebeespoort and Roodeplaat Dam systems.

See the “Water Quality in South Africa”  tab above on this page. Eutrophication and Acid Mine Drainage are the major strategic challenges facing South Africa today leading Anthony Turton to point out that “It is not hard to conclude that we are heading for a significant crisis in the water sector” The above video helps to explain the process of eutrophication.

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

A study of 1,279 freshwater species across southern Africa found that 94 of them, or seven percent, are at risk of extinction, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) said at the World Water Forum in Istanbul.

“This figure will skyrocket unless species conservation is considered in development planning,” the IUCN warned.

It said the study amounted to an alarm bell in a region where millions depend on rivers, lakes and wetlands for their food and on drinking water purified by aquatic organisms.

“The report is really about a battle for survival, between nature and economics,” IUCN’s director general, Julia Marton-Lefevre, said at a press conference.

Of the 94 threatened species, 78 are found in South Africa.

The study is one of six assessments of biodiversity in Africa that are being compiled by the IUCN.

Its goal is to identify areas of richness and species that are under threat, thus helping policymakers to answer questions about where human settlement, farming and water extraction should be allowed.

“We are in a unique position in Africa to avoid an extinction disaster,” said Marton-Lefevre.

“Most developers have not taken freshwater species into consideration because they simply don’t have the information they need… Africa’s water resources can be developed without causing thousands of extinctions.”

Loss of wetlands for agricultural use, introduced species and over-extraction of water are the main triggers for present species loss, while dam construction and the impacts of global warming loom as the major threats of the future.

William Darwall, manager of IUCN’s freshwater biodiversity unit, said many people were unaware of the hidden value of freshwater fish, plants, shellfish and insects.

“Globally it’s been valued in the trillions” of dollars, he said. “In Africa, 21 percent of the protein in people’s diets is estimated to come from fisheries, so it’s extremely important.”

The report identifies three “hotspots” of species diversity that should be especially shielded.

These are: the area where the upper Zambezi meets the Kwando and Chobe rivers above Victoria Falls; the Komati and Crocodile river tributaries of the Incomati system in Mpumalanga, South Africa; and the Mbuluzi river basin in South Africa and Swaziland.

DENVER — Every raincloud that passes over her eastern Colorado ranch tempts state Rep. Marsha Looper to break the law.

A long, hard drought has settled across the land, and on those rare occasions when the sky opens, Ms. Looper longs to set out some rain barrels to collect the bounty for future use. She’d like to use the rain to grow hothouse tomatoes. But she refrains.

“I don’t want to get thrown in jail,” she explains.

It is, in fact, illegal in Colorado to collect rainwater. State law is vague about the penalties, except to say that violators can be taken to court and ordered to pay damages. The state lacks the resources for vigorous enforcement and fines are extremely rare, officials say. Still, the law is the law — and so Ms. Looper has set out to change it. This might just be her year.

Colorado, like most Western states, lives by a rigid and byzantine knot of water laws. Vast quantities of river water are made available, free of charge, to a variety of public and private interests, including oil companies, ski resorts, fire districts and breweries. The international food conglomerate Nestlé has applied for a permit to draw water from a Colorado aquifer and sell it in plastic bottles under its Arrowhead brand.

Those appropriations are made under a seniority system based on first-come first-serve claims staked out as far back as the 1850s. Colorado law explicitly states that every drop of moisture suspended in the atmosphere must be divvied up according to those claims. That means each drop must be allowed to hit the ground and seep through the watershed into distant rivers, where it can be doled out to claimants ranging from alfalfa farmers to ExxonMobil.

Ms. Looper, a Republican, thinks that’s nuts. “They own every raindrop that falls out of the sky? Just ridiculous,” she says.

With drought widespread across the West, many cities outside Colorado are encouraging rain harvesting through tax credits, rain-barrel subsidies, even building codes that require rain-catching cisterns in new developments. The membership of the American Rainwater Catchment Systems Association — a trade group that represents any company or individual interested in the practice — has jumped from less than 100 to nearly 600 in just two years.

But in Colorado and Utah, the only other state with a blanket ban on rain harvest, powerful forces are determined to continue limiting access to precipitation.

Setting a barrel on the lawn to recycle rain “sounds nice and efficient, but in my opinion, under Colorado law, that is theft,” says Glenn Porzak, a lawyer who specializes in water-rights claims. “That rainwater is spoken for.”

True, most people who store rain water will eventually dump it on lawns and gardens — exactly where it would have fallen in the first place. But they are likely to do that during dry seasons when thirsty plants suck up most of the water, and very little is left to work its way through the water basin and into rivers.

A hydrology study commissioned in 2007 by several Colorado water districts found that just 3% of the rain falling on undeveloped land makes it back into the stream system in a dry year, compared with 15% in a wet year. (In developed areas, those percentages are typically much higher, because the rain washes into storm drains, which often dump into streams.)

A ban on rainwater harvesting “makes no sense to people, because rain seems ubiquitous,” says Mo McBroom, policy director of the Washington Environmental Council. “They’re like, ‘Do I have to have an air right to breathe?’ ” Ms. McBroom responds that one rain barrel won’t hurt anyone — but hundreds of thousands of 5,000-gallon cisterns could threaten the livelihoods of all who depend on the West’s mighty rivers.

Farmers rely on rain-fed river water to grow food; utilities need it to produce electricity; industries need it to run factories — and cities need it to provide drinking water to residents. Fish need healthy rivers, too, of course. Some environmentalists fear that diverting downpours to cisterns would threaten aquatic habitats.

Washington allows rainwater harvesting only in a few areas, including Seattle and the San Juan Islands, where some residents have spent $50,000 or more on 10,000-gallon rain storage tanks and filtration systems. Efforts to expand the practice statewide have failed several years in a row because the varied interests can’t agree on how much precipitation individuals should be allowed to store. A bid to lift the ban in Utah died in the legislature this month. In Colorado, however, Ms. Looper and a fellow rain rebel, Democratic state Sen. Chris Romer, have crafted bills so modest in scope that they have gained widespread support.

One bill would let rural residents not served by a municipal water system store rain for fire protection, livestock feed and household uses. A second bill authorizes several new developments to capture and reuse rain, so long as the builders track how much water they divert from the state’s natural waterways.

Ms. Looper acknowledges that her bills still keep rain harvesting off limits to the majority of Colorado residents. But she says it’s the best she can hope for in a state that adheres faithfully to the old adage of Western life: “Whiskey is for drinking. Water is for fighting.”

BULAWAYO, Mar 25 (IPS) – Scientists at Bulawayo’s National University of Science and Technology (NUST) have embarked on research to develop simple and affordable water purification methods, as more than a billion people live without safe drinking water in developing countries.

Water and sanitation experts are currently investigating if a powder made from the seeds of the Moringa Oleifera, commonly known as the drumstick or horseradish tree, can be used as a filter to purify water.


In Sub-Saharan Africa, only a third of the population has access to clean drinking water, according to United Nations Children’s Fund, UNICEF. Water-borne diseases kill an estimated five million people a year, many of them children.

The situation is particularly dire in Zimbabwe, where the economic meltdown has led to a breakdown in water service provision and infrastructure. Resulting water contamination and poor water treatment have caused major health issues.

A cholera outbreak, first reported in mid-2008, has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 people to date, with more than 80,000 reported cholera cases countrywide, according to World Health Organisation (WHO).

Without access to safe drinking water, WHO says Zimbabwe is highly unlikely to meet the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 1 of halving the number of people suffering from poverty and hunger by 2015, due to a combination of factors linked to poor infrastructure, poor sanitation and lack of investment in water treatment systems.

Poor water quality and sanitation will also make it difficult for the country to reach MDG3, reducing child mortality, and MDG4, increasing maternal health.

A combination of chemical and bacteriological pollution of water resources presents a particular problem in Zimbabwe, explained Theresa Mkandawire, researcher at the University of Malawi and regional water expert. “Deep wells and boreholes are often subjected to chemical contamination, whilst in shallow wells bacteriological and physical contamination dominates,” she told IPS.

“The level of pollution that goes unmonitored is quite high and people living downstream [of rivers] are particularly affected,” agreed executive director of the Harare-based Institute of Water and Sanitation Development (IWSD), Noma Neseni. “Pollution within the [SADC] region and in Zimbabwe is caused by industry, domestic users, agriculture, and at the moment fines for pollution are quite low in Zimbabwe.” 
 Neseni further noted that, in Zimbabwe, the national rural water supplies and sanitation programme has not effectively promoted household water treatment, although researchers found this could be an important entry point to increase water quality.

“Although there have been fears that water is contaminated through transportation and storage, we have failed to invest into developing appropriate technologies for water treatment at household level until now,” she said.

Preventing water pollution is a cornerstone in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) regional water policy of 2005, which aims to address weak regulatory and legal frameworks, inadequate institutional capacity of national water authorities, poor water resource management as well as lack of participation and infrastructure.

To make clean water more accessible and affordable to Zimbabweans in urban as well as in rural areas, the National University of Science and Technology (NUST) in Bulawayo has embarked on a research project to develop low-cost water treatment methods, such as the use of Moringa seed powder.

“Water quality is a problem in Zimbabwe, and this is not only confined to urban areas but happens in rural areas too,” explained NUST civil engineer Ellen Mangore.

She told IPS the research project is modelled on water treatment practices in Sudan, where the seed is used pounded or whole to purify water. Moringa Oleifera is a small tree whose leaves are popularly used to make salad, while its elongated fruit is eaten as a vegetable.

Researchers place their hopes in the Moringa tree seed for water purification, as the tree is widely found in Zimbabwe. In addition, it is drought tolerant and grows in locations with as little as 500 millimetres of annual rainfall.

In addition, NUST investigates other simple water treatment methods, such as purification with household bleach and sand filtration columns.


So far, the treatment of water with Moringa seed powder has proven to be an effective method of reducing water-borne diseases and correct pH, said Mangore, as have the other tested methods.

“Our test results also showed that household bleach is a very strong disinfectant and raised the levels of free and total chlorine in the water, while the simple filtration columns resulted in almost 85 percent reduction in total suspended solids,” she explained.


Mangore said the research project is ongoing, as different purification scenarios still need to be investigated, for example dosages and contact times. She explained the results of the study are still under wraps pending verification of the potential toxicity of the Moringa powder and household bleach.

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent

WASHINGTON, March 22 (Reuters) – If water is the new oil, is blue the new green?

Translation: if water is now the kind of precious commodity that oil became in the 20th century, should delivery of clean water be the same sort of powerful political force as the environmental movement in an age of climate change?

And, in another sense of green, is there money to be made in a time of water scarcity?

The answer to both questions, according to environmental activists watching a global forum on water, is yes.

The week-long meeting in Istanbul ends Sunday, which is International World Water Day, an annual United Nations event that began in 1993 to focus attention on sustainable management of fresh water resources.

The yearly observance recognizes water as an absolute human need: people can live as much as 30 days without food but only seven without water. How long can a person live without oil?

More than a billion people lack access to clean water, and 2.5 billion are without water for sanitation, with 80 percent of all disease borne by dirty water.

This may seem ironic, since Earth is literally a blue planet when seen from space — most of it is covered in water. But what humans need is water that is fresh and clean, and most of Earth’s water is salty or dirty.

What was clear at this year’s World Water Forum in Turkey was the notion that clean, fresh water supplies are waning due to a warming world.

“As climate change accelerates and we see a changing hydrological cycle, diminishing access to resources, there are direct human impacts that are water-related,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, a professor at the University of California-Los Angeles who advised the Obama transition team on civic engagement and national service.

If sea levels rise as scientists predict, coastal regions may see increased salination of aquifers — natural underground reservoirs — which will affect access to fresh water in those areas, Greenblatt said.

BLUE AGENDA

In some areas, such as central China, desertification is occurring directly outside Beijing, with desert-like conditions coming to areas that were once fertile, he said.

“In the same way that climate change has become part of the conversation … the agenda of legislators and policymakers, I think blue needs to be part of the agenda,” Greenblatt said, using “blue” as shorthand for water.

There is a high return on investment in clean water projects, the World Health Organization reported: every $1 spent on water and sanitation can bring economic benefits averaging between $7 and $12.

Healthcare agencies could save $7 billion a year, employers could gain 320 million productive days a year for workers in the 15-to-59 age range, there could be an extra 272 million school attendance days annually and an added 1.5 billion healthy days for children under the age of 5, WHO said.

In dollars and cents, an investment of $11.3 billion a year could yield a payback of $83 billion a year in increased productivity and health, the Natural Resources Defense Council said in its blog written from the forum, here

“As many have pointed out in this week’s debates, this payback makes a very strong argument in favor of promoting safe water and sanitation in these difficult financial times,” the council’s Melanie Nakagawa wrote.

The water forum does not go far enough in making this a top agenda item, the conservation group WWF International said.

“…(I)t is the well-managed or restored river systems that cope best with climate change impacts we are seeing now and those that are yet to come,” James Leape, the group’s director general, said in a statement. “This is clearly an issue of water management, but the ministerial declaration flowing from the World Water Forum is more a collection of platitudes than a plan for action.”

So does the world really need a water day?

Maybe not, said Susan Keane, a public health expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“I don’t know why anyone should need to be reminded of this, because it’s so obviously important and so obviously solvable,” Keane said by telephone. “The answer really is people are blind to the obvious. It’s not sexy.”

by Tammie Stark, Faculty, Lane Community College, Consultant, Eugene Rainwater and Doug Pushard

As published in OnTap Magazine, Fall 2008

Rainwater catchment or rainwater harvesting (RWH) are catch-all terms for collecting, storing, and later using precipitation from rock out-crops, roofs, and other surfaces. Across the globe, rainwater is used for many purposes, including drinking water, irrigation, aquaculture, air conditioning, groundwater recharge, and fire fighting. It has been utilized for many centuries.

Harvesting rainwater offers many advantages: it conserves municipal and well water; it is free; gravity fed systems conserve energy; it is low in salts and good for plants; and it can reduce flooding and erosion. Rainwater provides an excellent primary, supplementary, or alternative source of water. In terms of quality, it generally falls between groundwater and surface water. Rainwater can be used at multiple scales from residential to commercial and at the neighborhood or community level.

Rainwater Harvesting Policies Vary

Public policy includes rules, regulations, laws, and codes, as well as tools to maintain, create or change behavior. Backed by judicial authority to prevent injurious actions against the public or those that are contrary to the public good, the ultimate goal of many guidelines is to ensure public safety, to spur economic activity or both. Alternate goals may include wise use of public funds, resource conservation, or to problem solving. Water quality fit for human use and recreation is an instance of both protecting public health and valuing ecosystem integrity. The Clean Water Act was an attempt to solve the problem of national water degradation.

The best rainwater harvesting policies protect water as human right, safeguard public health as well as promote rainwater use, resource conservation, and sustainability. Effective policy types include: 1) government standards and enforcement, 2) incentive-based, and 3) outcome-based. Although featuring some combination of all three types may be the most useful to promote broad participation, it is uncommon to see multiple policy strategies combined.

Ineffective policy trends emerge, too. Prescriptive and restrictive policies may create barriers to implementation. In one example, code specified a specific type of “roof washer” creating financial and technical barriers. Restrictive policies such as this add expense and technical knowledge and skills to meet code requirements. Another common restrictive code example is the requirement for an engineer’s approval. Some cases do require added expertise and expense, but these are rare. Many financial and technical barriers may be reasonably avoided while maintaining safe use of rainwater.

All states have multiple codes such as those related to building, electric, plumbing, zoning, and stormwater. Unfortunately, multiple overlapping codes may discourage rainwater-harvesting activities. Some areas require permits and reviews by all the listed code officials (except zoning). Of course the intent is to protect public health and safety. However, the result is sometimes a disconnected, confusing, technically challenging and expensive environment that puts the burden of proof on the homeowner with little education. Indeed, this may be opposite their intent. This is an example of unintended consequences. Other challenges include decision-makers’ uncertainty in a changing world, the deep level of complexity that policy has attained, the dearth of information and the lack of intra-governmental communication.

Number of Rainwater Harvesting Systems Growing

Thousands of RWH systems are in the continental U.S. A 1979 study found that 67,000 cisterns existed in the state of Ohio alone. Islands, including Hawaii, Guam, the Caroline Islands, Marshall Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Florida Keys, all support rainwater activities. Mainland states using rainwater domestically include Arizona, California, Florida, Kentucky, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

Some codes explicitly or implicitly support the use of rainwater. States that require a “self-sustaining water supply system for new development or expansion,” or similar code are U.S. Virgin Islands, Bermuda and other Caribbean islands. In the U.S. Virgin Islands, “every new building is required by law to incorporate a cistern to store roof runoff.” Tucson, Arizona, and Santa Fe County, New Mexico, both require the use of rainwater. And although not “required,” in the mountains above Honolulu, hundreds of households are dependent almost exclusively on rainwater for all domestic purposes including drinking.

Financial incentives are less frequent, but growing. Currently, Texas is leading the way, offering multiple incentives at the local and state levels. Austin, for example, provides a 30 percent subsidy for the cost of cisterns up to $500 and sells rain barrels below cost. The rebate application also includes assistance with tank sizing as well as information about area suppliers and contractors. Under Austin’s Commercial Incentive Program, “commercial entities may be eligible for as much as a $40,000 rebate against the cost of installing new equipment and processes to save water and the state provides property and sales tax exemptions for commercial installations.”

Hays County, Texas, provides a $100 rebate on the application fee and a property tax exemption. In San Antonio, a 50 percent rebate is available for new water-saving equipment at the commercial scale. Texas supports rainwater harvesting activities at state and higher education facilities through a task force and code. Finally, the Lone Star State promotes RWH with code allowing performance contracting, which allows recuperation of initial investments through savings earned on utility bills. In other words, the water- and energy-conserving measures pay for themselves within the contracted period.

During the 1970s California encouraged water conservation with the California Water Conservation Tax Law. This law provided tax credits up to $3,000 for implementation of rainwater, greywater, or combined storage cisterns or other water conservation devices. However, in 1982 the law was repealed. Code language can be found in the states of Texas, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington, and in the cities of Portland and Eugene (Oregon), and Seattle, while Kentucky, Hawaii, Arizona, New Mexico, Washington, West Virginia, Texas, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have guidelines.

In San Juan County, Washington, the Department of Health and Community Services provides a checklist of what a rainwater harvesting system must include. The State of Washington provides guidelines from the State Building Codes Council. Delaware provides a unique policy example that not only encourages rainwater use, but also water availability in times of drought and in a sustainable way. “Water utilities, both public and private, should have adequate supplies of water available, even in times of drought, to meet the present and future needs of this state on a continuing and sustainable basis

Key Characteristics of Good Policy

When creating public policy, we believe it’s time to ask: What behavior or action do we want to encourage? With respect to rainwater policies this could include safe use of water, conservation of both water and energy, as well as other resources, and the promotion of green building and sustainability. In formulating new policy in this growing sector, we have a unique opportunity to enhance quality of life and support green business opportunities simultaneously. When creating new policy, ask yourself does/is the policy:

• Make sense from an economic, social and environmental perspectives?
• Focus on end results (outcome based)?
• Easy for the public to understand (written in lay terms; short as possible)?
• Simple for the public to implement (user friendly)?
• Achievable and measurable?
• Been reviewed by actual rainwater harvesting practitioners?
• Meet the common sense test?
• Include a way to educate the public, staff and elected officials?
• Have standardized and/or streamlined application processes?

Other recommendations include providing for rainwater harvesting in state, county, and city codes, financial incentives, and ample education and technical support, including technical training workshops. Formalized code sends the message that rainwater harvesting activities are okay and can in themselves be educational tools. Education is crucial, but an area often ignored in practice. Technical support and training sessions also guide the public rather than letting them flounder. And, financial incentives may be particularly beneficial for rural poor in water stressed areas. Financial support such as grants, subsidies, tax exemptions, revolving funds and income-producing activities should not be underestimated.

A more sophisticated approach will combine the above suggestions and use multiple strategies in concert that change over time to meet specific contexts. And finally, definitions are crucial. Avoid classifying rainwater as stormwater, runoff, greywater or wastewater. It is not. If rainwater is classified incorrectly, additional rules may be invoked, which are not appropriate. The creation of common sense policies—through a coordinated effort between educational institutions, private industry, government, and the public—will encourage rather than discourage rainwater harvesting.

To review a detailed list of rainwater harvesting codes, visit Harvesth20.com. Delaware’s code related to rainwater and sustainable water may be found at www.delcode.state.de.us under § 1401. Title 26. Chapter 14. Self-Sufficient Water Supply.

About the Authors

Tammie Stark works and teaches in the rainwater harvesting, water conservation, and sustainability sectors. She developed and led the Rainwater Catchment Pilot Project for the Eugene Water and Electric Board, created the nation’s first two-year degree in water conservation and promotes sustainability in education.

Doug Pushard founder of HarvestH2o.com as a personal expression of his interest in the subject of water conservation and rainwater harvesting. He is a software executive by day and a designer and consultant to many in the area of rainwater catchment. His writing and systems have appeared in numerous publications including the New York Times, Home Power, Back Home, Smart Homeowner and the Sun Monthly.