Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>]

Water: Will There Be Enough?
by Sandra Postel
 Published Jun 4 2010 by Yes! Magazine, Archived Jun 4 2010
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/53007
Sandra Postel’s article “Will There Be Enough” in the Summer 2010 issue of 
YES! Magazine

For at least three decades, Americans have had some inkling that we face an 
uncertain energy future, but we’ve ignored a much more worrisome 
crisis—water. Cheap and seemingly abundant, water is so common that it’s hard 
to believe we could ever run out. Ever since the Apollo astronauts 
photographed Earth from space, we’ve had the image of our home as a 
strikingly blue planet, a place of great water wealth. But of all the water 
on Earth, only about 2.5 percent is freshwater—and two-thirds of that is 
locked up in glaciers and ice caps. Less than one hundredth of one percent of 
Earth’s water is fresh and renewed each year by the solar-powered hydrologic 
cycle.

Across the United States and around the world, we’re already reaching or 
overshooting the limits of that cycle. The Colorado and Rio Grande Rivers are 
now so overtapped that they discharge little or no water to the sea for 
months at a time. [1] In the West, we’re growing food and supplying water to 
our communities by overpumping groundwater. This creates a bubble in the food 
economy far more serious than the recent housing, credit, or dot-com bubbles: 
We are meeting some of today’s food needs with tomorrow’s water. [2]

The massive Ogallala Aquifer, which spans parts of eight states from southern 
South Dakota to northwest Texas, and provides 30 percent of the groundwater 
used for irrigation in the country, is steadily being depleted. [3] As of 
2005, a volume equivalent to two-thirds of the water in Lake Erie had been 
pumped out of this water reserve. Most farmers will stop irrigating when the 
wells run dry or the water drops so far down that it’s too expensive to pump.

At the same time, climate change is rewriting the rules about how much water 
we’ll have available and when. Climate scientists warn of more extreme 
droughts and floods, and of changing precipitation patterns that will make 
weather, storms, and natural disasters more severe and less predictable. [4] 
The historical data and statistical tools used to plan billions of dollars 
worth of annual global investments in dams, flood control structures, 
diversion projects, and other big pieces of water infrastructure are no 
longer reliable. [5]

While farmers in the Midwest were recovering from the spring flood of 2008 
(in some areas the second “100-year flood” in 15 years), farmers in 
California and Texas fallowed cropland and sent cattle prematurely to 
slaughter to cope with the drought of 2009. In the Southeast, after 20 months 
of dryness, Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue stood outside the State Capitol in 
November 2007 and led a prayer for rain, beseeching the heavens to turn a 
spigot on for his parched state. Two years later, Perdue was pleading instead 
for federal aid after intense rain storms near Atlanta caused massive 
flooding that claimed eight lives. [http://geology.com/events/iowa-flooding; 
“Governor Sonny..." href="#-iowa-flood-midwest">6]

Although none of these disasters can be pinned directly on global warming, 
they are the kinds of events climate scientists warn will occur more often as 
the planet heats up. It’s through water that we’ll feel the strains of 
climate change—when we can no longer count on familiar patterns of rain, 
snow, and river flow to irrigate our farms, power our dams, and fill our city 
reservoirs.

In answer to the climate crisis, the economy will need to move away from 
fossil fuels toward solar, wind, and other non-carbon energy sources. But 
there is no transitioning away from water. Water has no substitutes. And 
unlike oil and coal, water is much more than a commodity: It is the basis of 
life. A human being can only live for five to seven days without water. 
Deprive any plant or animal of water, and it dies. Our decisions about 
water—how to use, allocate, and manage it—are deeply ethical ones; they 
determine the survival of most of the planet’s species, including our own.
Shifting Course

For most of modern history, water management has focused on bringing water 
under human control and transferring it to expanding cities, industries, and 
farms. Since 1950, the number of large dams worldwide has climbed from 5,000 
to more than 45,000—an average construction rate of two large dams per day 
for half a century. [7] Globally, 364 large water-transfer projects move 105 
trillion gallons of water annually from one river basin to another—equivalent 
to transferring the annual flow of 22 Colorado Rivers. Millions of wells 
punched into the Earth tap underground aquifers, using diesel or electric 
pumps to lift vast quantities of groundwater to the surface.

Big water schemes have allowed oasis cities like Phoenix and Las Vegas to 
thrive in the desert, world food production to expand along with population, 
and living standards for hundreds of millions to rise. But globally they have 
also worsened social inequities, as poor people are dislocated from their 
homes to make way for dams and canals, and as downstream communities lose the 
flows that sustained their livelihoods.

Such approaches also ignore water’s limits and the value of healthy 
ecosystems. Today, many rivers flow like plumbing works, turned on and off 
like water from a faucet. Fish, mussels, river birds, and other aquatic life 
no longer get the flows and habitats they need to survive: 40 percent of all 
fish species in North America are at risk of extinction.

As we face the pressures of climate change and growing water demands, many 
leaders and localities are calling for even bigger versions of the strategies 
of the past. By some estimates the volume of water moved through river 
transfer schemes could more than double globally by 2020. But mega-projects 
are risky in a warming world where rainfall and river flow patterns are 
changing in uncertain ways.

Such big projects also require giant quantities of increasingly expensive 
energy. Pumping, moving, treating, and distributing water takes energy at 
every stage. Transferring Colorado River water into southern California, for 
example, requires about 1.6 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per cubic 
meter (about 264 gallons) of water; the same quantity of water sent hundreds 
of kilometers from north to south through California’s State Water Project 
takes about 2.4 kWh. As a result, the energy required to provide drinking 
water to a typical southern California home can rank third behind that 
required to run the air conditioner and refrigerator. [8]

Planners and policy-makers are eyeing desalination as a silver-bullet 
solution to water shortages. But they miss—or dismiss—the perverse irony: By 
burning more fossil fuels and by making local water supplies more and more 
dependent on increasingly expensive energy, desalination creates more 
problems than it solves. [9] Producing one cubic meter of drinkable water 
from salt water requires about 2 kWh of electricity.
Water for People and Nature

As the limitations of big-infrastructure strategies have become more 
apparent, a vanguard of citizens, communities, farmers, and corporations are 
thinking about water in a new way. They’re asking, what do we really need the 
water for, and can we meet that need with less? The upshot of this shift in 
thinking is a new movement in water management that is much more about ideas, 
ingenuity, and ecological intelligence than it is about big pumps, pipelines, 
dams, and canals.

Drinking dog

These solutions tend to work with nature, rather than against it. In this 
way, they make effective use of “ecosystem services”—the benefits provided by 
healthy watersheds and wetlands. And through better technologies and more 
informed choices, they seek to raise water productivity—to make every drop 
count.

Communities are finding, for example, that protecting watersheds is the best 
way to make sure water supplies are clean and reliable. A healthy watershed 
can do the work of a water treatment plant—filtering out pollutants, and at a 
lower cost to boot. New York City, for instance, is investing some $1.5 
billion to restore and protect the Catskill-Delaware Watershed (which 
supplies 90 percent of its drinking water) in lieu of constructing a $6 
billion filtration plant that would cost an additional $300 million a year to 
operate. [10] A number of other cities across the United States—from tiny 
Auburn, Maine, to Seattle—have saved hundreds of millions of dollars in 
avoided capital and operating costs by opting for watershed protection over 
filtration plants. [11]

Communities facing increased flood damage are achieving cost-effective flood 
protection by restoring rivers. After enduring 19 flood episodes between 1961 
and 1997, Napa, Calif., opted for this approach over the conventional route 
of channelizing and building levees. In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers, the $366 million project is reconnecting the Napa River with 
its historic floodplain, moving homes and businesses out of harm’s way, 
revitalizing wetlands and marshlands, and constructing levees and bypass 
channels in strategic locations. In addition to increased flood protection 
and reduced flood insurance rates, Napa residents will benefit from parks and 
trails for recreation, higher tourism revenues, and improved habitat for fish 
and wildlife. [12]

Similarly, communities facing increased damage from heavy stormwater runoff 
can turn roofs, streets, and parking lots into water catchments. Portland, 
Ore., is investing in “green roofs” and “green streets” to prevent sewer 
overflows into the Willamette River. [13] Chicago now boasts more than 200 
green roofs—including atop City Hall—that collectively cover 2.5 million 
square feet, more than any other U.S. city. The vegetated roofs are providing 
space for urban gardens and helping to catch stormwater and cool the urban 
environment. [14]

Many communities are revitalizing their rivers by tearing down dams that are 
no longer safe or serving a justifiable purpose. Over the last decade more 
than 500 dams have been removed from U.S. rivers, opening up habitat for 
fisheries, restoring healthier water flows, improving water quality, and 
returning aquatic life to rivers. [15] In the 10 years since the Edwards Dam 
was removed from the Kennebec River near Augusta, Maine, populations of 
alewives and striped bass have returned in astounding numbers, reviving a 
recreational fishery that adds $65 million annually to the local economy. [16]

Conservation remains the least expensive and most environmentally sound way 
of balancing water budgets. Many cities and towns have reduced their water 
use through relatively simple measures like repairing leaks in distribution 
systems, retrofitting homes and businesses with water-efficient fixtures and 
appliances, and promoting more sensible and efficient outdoor water use. 
Motivated by a cap on groundwater pumping from the Edwards Aquifer in 
south-central Texas, San Antonio has cut its per capita water use by more 
than 40 percent, to one of the lowest levels of any Western U.S. city. 
[www.edwardsaquifer.org; water use from 2008 Annual Report, San Antonio Water 
System; the 130 gallon..." href="#edwards-aquifer-authority-website">17] Even 
more impressive, a highly successful conservation program started in 1987 in 
Boston cut total water demand 43 percent by 2009, bringing water use to a 
50-year low and eliminating the need for a costly diversion project from the 
Connecticut River. [18]

But the potential for conservation has barely been tapped. It is especially 
crucial in agriculture. Irrigation accounts for 70 percent of water use 
worldwide and even more in the western U.S., so getting more crop per drop is 
central to meeting future food needs sustainably. In California, more famers 
are turning to drip irrigation, which delivers water at low volumes directly 
to the roots of crops. Between 2003 and 2008, California’s drip and 
micro-sprinkler area expanded by 630,000 acres, bringing its total to more 
than 2.3 million acres—62 percent of the nation’s total area under drip 
irrigation. [19]

As individuals, we’ll also need to make more conscious choices about what and 
how much we consume. Some products and foods—especially meat—have a high 
water cost. It can take five times more water to supply 10 grams of protein 
from beef than from rice. So eating less meat can lighten our dietary water 
footprint (while also improving our health). If all U.S. residents reduced 
their consumption of animal products by half, the nation’s total dietary 
water requirement in 2025 would drop by 261 billion cubic meters per year, a 
savings equal to the annual flow of 14 Colorado Rivers. [20]

We’ll need to change how we use water in and around our homes and 
neighborhoods. Turf grass covers some 40.5 million acres in the United 
States—an area three times larger than any irrigated farm crop in the 
country. [21] Particularly in the western United States, where outdoor 
watering typically accounts for 50 percent or more of household water use, 
converting thirsty green lawns into native drought-tolerant landscaping can 
save a great deal of water. Las Vegas now pays residents up to $1.50 for each 
square foot of grass they rip out, which has helped shrink the city’s turf 
area by 125 million square feet and lower its annual water use by 7 billion 
gallons. [22, 23] Albuquerque, New Mexico, has reduced its total water use by 
21 percent since 1995, largely through education and rebates to encourage 
water-thrifty landscapes. [24]

Energy and water are tightly entwined, and all too often public policies to 
“solve” one problem simply make the other one worse. For example, the 2007 
congressional mandate [25] to produce 15 billion gallons of corn ethanol a 
year by 2015 would require an estimated 1.6 trillion gallons of additional 
irrigation water annually (and even more direct rainfall)—a volume exceeding 
the annual water withdrawals of the entire state of Iowa. [26] Even solar 
power creates a demand for water, especially some of the big solar-thermal 
power plants slated for the sunny Southwest. [27]

It’s still possible to have a future in which all basic food and water needs 
are met, healthy ecosystems are sustained, and communities remain secure and 
resilient, even in the face of climate disruptions. Just as the economic 
crash is forcing Americans to reassess what they value financially, the water 
crisis requires us to pay attention to how we value and use water. Across the 
country, communities will need to learn to take care of the ecosystems that 
supply and cleanse water, to live within their water means, and to share 
water equitably.

Sarah Postel MugSandra Postel adapted this article for Water Solutions, the 
Summer 2010 issue of YES! Magazine. Sandra is director of the Global Water 
Policy Project, a fellow of the Post Carbon Institute and the first 
freshwater fellow of the National Geographic Society. She is the author of 
numerous books and articles, including the award-winning Last Oasis: Facing 
Water Scarcity, which became the basis of a PBS documentary.

This article is an adaptation of a longer essay from The Post Carbon Reader: 
Managing the 21st Century’s Sustainability Crises, forthcoming in Fall 2010 
from Watershed Media.

Sources:

   1.

      Where Have All the Rivers Gone?, Sandra Postel, World Watch 8, May/June 
1995; When the Rivers Run Dry, Fred Pearce, Boston, Beacon Press, 2006.
   2.

      Pillar of Sand: Can the Irrigation Miracle Last? Sandra Postel, New 
York, W.W Norton & Co., 1999.
   3.

      Ground Water Depletion in the High Plains Aquifer, Predevelopment to 
2005, V.L. Mcguire, U.S. Geological Survey, USGS Fact Sheet 2007-3029, 2007. 
http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/; 30 percent figure from “High Plains Regional Ground 
Water (HPGW) Study,” USGS, http://co.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/hpgw/HPGW_home.html
   4.

      Climate Change 2007 - The Physical Science Basis, Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); and Climate Change 2007 - Impacts, Adaptation 
and Vulnerability, “Summaries for Policymakers,” IPCC, Cambridge, U.K., 
Cambridge University Press, 2007.
   5.

      “Stationarity is Dead: Whither Water Management?,” P.C.D. Milly et al., 
Science, February 1, 2008.
   6.

      “Iowa Flood, Midwest Flooding: Videos, Maps, News and Background,” 
Geology.com, http://geology.com/events/iowa-flooding; “Governor Sonny Perdue 
Prays for Rain in Georgia, WDEF.com, November 14, 2007; “Rain Stops, but 8 
are Dead in Southeast Floods,” Robbie Brown and Liz Robbins, The New York 
Times, September 22, 2009
   7.

      Number of large dams (those at least 15 meters high) from Dams and 
Development, World Commission on Dams, London, Earthscan Publications, 2000; 
“Interbasin Water Transfers and Water Scarcity in a Changing World—A Solution 
or a Pipedream?,” Jamie Pittock et al., Frankfurt, World Wildlife Fund 
Germany, August 2009.
   8.

      Methodology for Analysis of the Energy Intensity of California’s Water 
Systems, and an Assessment of Multiple Potential Benefits Through Integrated 
Water-Energy Efficiency Measures, Robert Wilkinson, Environmental Studies 
Program, University of California, Santa Barbara 2000; Electricity Efficiency 
Through Water Efficiency, Report for the Southern California Edison Company, 
QEI, Inc., Springfield, NJ, 1992.
   9.

      Debbie Cook, former Mayor of Huntington Beach, Calif., has said "The 
next worst idea to turning tar sands into synthetic crude is turning ocean 
water into municipal drinking water.", quoted in "Desalination - Energy Down 
the Drain," The Oil Drum, March 2, 2009. www.theoildrum.com/node/5155.
  10.

      Liquid Assets: The Critical Need to Safeguard Freshwater Ecosystems, 
Sandra Postel, Worldwatch Paper 170, Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, 
2005.
  11.

      “Watershed Protection: Capturing the Benefits of Nature’s Water Supply 
Services,” Sandra Postel and Barton H. Thompson, Jr., Natural Resources Forum 
 29, no.2, May 2005.
  12.

      Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental 
Decision-Making, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., The National 
Academy Press, 2005; $366 million figure from “Sacramento District Project 
Wins Public Works Project of the Year,” David G. Killam,  website of the U.S. 
Army, February 12, 2009. www.army.mil
  13.

      Natural Security: How Sustainable Water Strategies are Preparing 
Communities for a Changing Climate, Will Hewes and Kristen Pitts,  
Washington, DC: American Rivers, 2009.
  14.

      “Chicago Green Roof Program,” Emily Pilloton, Inhabitat, August 1, 2006 
www.inhabitat.com
  15.

      Figure from Serena McClain at American Rivers, April 26, 2010.
  16.

      $65 million figure from Natural Security, Hewes and Pitts; for more on 
dams and rivers, see Rivers for Life: Managing Water for People and Nature, 
Sandra Postel and Brian Richter, Washington, D.C., Island Press, 2003.
  17.

      Edwards Aquifer Authority website, at www.edwardsaquifer.org; water use 
from 2008 Annual Report, San Antonio Water System; the 130 gallon figure is 
an approximate average of recent years since per capita water use varied 
considerably between rainy and dry years; see the informative website of the 
San Antonio Water System at www.saws.org.
  18.

      For conservation methods and examples, see Handbook of Water Use and 
Conservation: Homes, Landscapes, Businesses, Industries, Farms, Amy Vickers, 
Amherst, MA, WaterPlow Press, 2001; Boston example from Liquid Assets, Sandra 
Postel and “Lessons from the Field–Boston Conservation,” Sandra Postel, 
National Geographic, March 2010 
environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/lessons-boston-conservation
  19.

      USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2007 Census of 
Agriculture: Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey, 2008, Volume 3, Special 
Studies, Part I, November 2009; updated February 2010.
  20.

      Dietary water requirement from “Nutritional Water Productivity and 
Diets,” D. Renault and W.W. Wallender, Agricultural Water Management 45, 
2000; calculation assumes average annual dietary water requirement drops from 
1,971 cubic meters per person to 1,242; U.S. 2025 population of 358.7 million 
is the medium variant estimate of the Population Division of the Department 
of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations, World Population 
Prospects: The 2008 Revision. esa.un.org/unpp
  21.

      “Mapping and Modeling the Biogeochemical Cycling of Turf Grasses in the 
United States,” Cristina Milesi et al., Environmental Management 36, 
September, 2005; “Our Love Affair With Our  Lawns is Hurling the U.S. Toward 
Water Crisis,” Dara Colwell, AlterNet, October 2, 2009. www.alternet.org.
  22.

      Southern Nevada Water Authority, accessed on April 20, 2010. 
www.snwa.com/html/cons_wsl.html.
  23.

      Personal communication with Kristen Howe, Public Information 
Coordinator, SNWA
  24.

      Personal email communication with Katherine M. Yuhas, Water 
Conservation Officer, Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Authority, 
Albuquerque, NM, October 12 -13, 2009.
  25.

       Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, U.S. Congress, 110th 
Cong., 1st session, 2007.
  26.

      “The Water Footprint of Biofuels: A Drink or Drive Issue?” R. 
Dominguez-Faus et al., Environmental Science & Technology, May 1, 2009.“
  27.

      Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a Need for Water,” Todd Woody, 
The New York Times, September 30, 2009.