4,149
edits
☔️ Water series: Future extreme dynamics of water use: Difference between revisions
☔️ Water series: Future extreme dynamics of water use (view source)
Revision as of 17:18, 3 December 2020
, 3 December 2020no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_recycling</ref> In a way, Australian farmers already experience the “future world” where anyone can go bankrupt because of water cost. Water markets typically allow them to purchase water from a phone app before to pump it from the stream next door. Its price fluctuates on the water trading market and the State distributes water rights. That is done in the scope of the Water Act 2007, that provides the legislative framework to manage the vast basin, supposedly following the “national interest”. Indeed, the market is presented by its stakeholders as a way to promote water savings and respect towards the resource by giving it a capital value. As a result, some agricultural activities like almond orchards become more profitable, considering the water input,<ref>That does not mean that almond trees call on the use of less water than other crops. In fact, their water footprint is higher that of other crops used for plant based milks. | - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_recycling</ref> In a way, Australian farmers already experience the “future world” where anyone can go bankrupt because of water cost. Water markets typically allow them to purchase water from a phone app before to pump it from the stream next door. Its price fluctuates on the water trading market and the State distributes water rights. That is done in the scope of the Water Act 2007, that provides the legislative framework to manage the vast basin, supposedly following the “national interest”. Indeed, the market is presented by its stakeholders as a way to promote water savings and respect towards the resource by giving it a capital value. As a result, some agricultural activities like almond orchards become more profitable, considering the water input,<ref>That does not mean that almond trees call on the use of less water than other crops. In fact, their water footprint is higher that of other crops used for plant based milks. | ||
source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/28/what-plant-milk-should-i-drink-almond-killing-bees-aoe | source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/28/what-plant-milk-should-i-drink-almond-killing-bees-aoe | ||
</ref> than others like animal husbandry. One could state that it is just a way to accelerate the adaptation to climate change with the means of capitalism. Thus, the dairy and beef industry, also number one resources user, should naturally be pushed out of the game — to the benefit of almond producers.<ref | </ref> than others like animal husbandry. One could state that it is just a way to accelerate the adaptation to climate change with the means of capitalism. Thus, the dairy and beef industry, also number one resources user, should naturally be pushed out of the game — to the benefit of almond producers.<ref name="lordsofwater">(FR) Jérôme Fritel, <i>Main Basse sur l’eau (Lords of Water)</i>, Arte, 2019. | ||
source: https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/082810-000-A/main-basse-sur-l-eau/</ref> | source: https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/082810-000-A/main-basse-sur-l-eau/</ref> | ||
For cattle farmers, this is not a transition, just a violent crash happening while almond orchards invades Australia (7th global producer in 2017 (FAOSTAT)) following the path of the Central Valley in California (1st global producer). Here too, the Nasdaq, California’s stock market, opened up to a water market that relies on an algorithm developed to predict water price. Its designer is Clay Landry, who participated to the launch of carbon trading markets a few years before. He is convinced that this type of mechanisms would have a positive effect on water stress worldwide, and he is supported by environmentalists and NGOs. They are interested to buy water rights as a way to “save” water for ecosystems, so that this resource stays away from humans activities. This kind of transactions is said to represent a quarter of the market’s exchanges in California. This seems like a hopeless action, but environmentalists also managed to pass the SIGMA law in 2014, that regulates groundwater use, which was not part of water trading. Thus, some localised markets are created to allow neighbours farmers to trade the groundwater that the law allocated to them. Of course, non-farmers with water rights from their lands (called “riparian” water rights) are gradually joining those market to speculate.<ref name="lordsofwater" /> | |||
Even though the market increases competition between different farming activities, they might as well end up in the same side in the long run, when cities would eventually have to buy more water in time of droughts. Megalopoles’ purchasing power will certainly be higher that of the agriculture sector, and same goes for the industrial sector.<ref name="lordsofwater" /> | |||
==Tap water and Bottled water== | ==Tap water and Bottled water== | ||
On the municipality level, when the public sector fails to answer the public demand for water, governments often take the slippery slope of water privatisation. 30 years ago the British water sector was privatised to Margaret Tatcher’s initiative. Massive water cuts followed, when people were not able to pay their bill. The situation was so catastrophic in the United Kingdom, that 10 years later this sort of cuts were forbidden by the law. Despite the regulation, London water company Thames Water was acquired by an Australian fund in 2006 and kept being criticised for its leakage issues and poor maintenance, year after year, while being notorious for “making” millionaires. After numerous trials, a fine of 20.3M £ was imposed to the company in 2017<ref>source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/22/thames-water-hit-with-record-fine-for-huge-sewage-leaks</ref> for the leakage of 1.4B litre of untreated sewage in nature.<ref | On the municipality level, when the public sector fails to answer the public demand for water, governments often take the slippery slope of water privatisation. 30 years ago the British water sector was privatised to Margaret Tatcher’s initiative. Massive water cuts followed, when people were not able to pay their bill. The situation was so catastrophic in the United Kingdom, that 10 years later this sort of cuts were forbidden by the law. Despite the regulation, London water company Thames Water was acquired by an Australian fund in 2006 and kept being criticised for its leakage issues and poor maintenance, year after year, while being notorious for “making” millionaires. After numerous trials, a fine of 20.3M £ was imposed to the company in 2017<ref>source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/22/thames-water-hit-with-record-fine-for-huge-sewage-leaks</ref> for the leakage of 1.4B litre of untreated sewage in nature.<ref name="lordsofwater" /> | ||
On the opposite side, Paris municipality in France managed to drive out the 2 French companies that were in charge of the city’s water network, namely Veolia and Suez. The municipality created a public company named “Eau de Paris”. This success allowed the city to escape from the urge of short term profit inherent to the private sector. According to Anne le Strat, former director of the public water management company, citizens’ activism to claim urban water management is on the rise and not giving up.<ref name="lordsofwater" /> | |||
On the opposite side, Paris municipality in France managed to drive out the 2 French companies that were in charge of the city’s water network, namely Veolia and Suez. The municipality created a public company named “Eau de Paris”. This success allowed the city to escape from the urge of short term profit inherent to the private sector. According to Anne le Strat, former director of the public water management company, citizens’ activism to claim urban water management is on the rise and not giving up.<ref | |||
Keeping private interests away from the tap-water network while increasing its quality worldwide is more urgent than ever, considering that 2.1B humans have no access to safe tap-water while 4B have been confronted to tap-water scarcity in 2019 (UNESCO). The most scandalous aspect of this is that rural poor populations confronted to water shortage have to rely on bottled water. Bottled water is 10 to 20 times more expensive than tap-water. Thus, they allocate even more money than rich citizens for water, while financing the unsustainable market of bottled water.<ref>source: (FR) «Atlas de l’eau», <i>Courrier International</i> hors-série, septembre-octobre 2020. | Keeping private interests away from the tap-water network while increasing its quality worldwide is more urgent than ever, considering that 2.1B humans have no access to safe tap-water while 4B have been confronted to tap-water scarcity in 2019 (UNESCO). The most scandalous aspect of this is that rural poor populations confronted to water shortage have to rely on bottled water. Bottled water is 10 to 20 times more expensive than tap-water. Thus, they allocate even more money than rich citizens for water, while financing the unsustainable market of bottled water.<ref>source: (FR) «Atlas de l’eau», <i>Courrier International</i> hors-série, septembre-octobre 2020. | ||