Robyn Dixon of the Los Angeles Times reports that April 21 is known as "Day Zero" in Cape Town: it's the day the city expects to run dry.
In this city of 4 million, people will have to line up in the streets at just 200 water stations. The police and army will enforce a limit of 6.6 gallons per person and adopt measures to control crowds ... but a number of details of the crisis plan remain unclear. How would one person carry 26 gallons of water for a family of four? How would the elderly and disabled cope? What about the fact that officials expect there will be insufficient water to flush toilets?How can a city about the size of Los Angeles, in a relatively developed country, face such a crisis? Apparently it is a combination of rapid population growth, climate change, poor planning and political bickering between local and national governments. Cape Town's metropolitan area population has doubled since the turn of the millennium. And the area where it is located is becoming drier:
The problem boils down to sharp population growth and a failure to plan alternative water sources to augment the reservoirs behind six dams, some of which are rapidly dwindling to arid sandy stretches. The dams have fallen to 15.2 percent capacity of usable water, compared with 77 percent in September 2015.Water already is being rationed, and residents are doing their best to adapt their lifestyles - or, to be more accurate, their lives - to these circumstances of scarcity:
"Everyone has got buckets, and we're using buckets because we have to recycle all the water we can," said [Cape Town resident Brigetti] Lim Banda. "We have buckets in the shower, buckets in the kitchen, buckets in the laundry.
"I forgo my shower for three days until the fourth day, when I need to wash my hair, so that I can save my water for laundry and so forth."For a person like me, perched on the shore of the largest fresh water supply in the world, this is difficult to imagine - and if I hadn't taken a little extra time today to leaf through the news section of the newspaper, I would have missed this story, even though it strikes me as significantly more important than the fodder that filled our nightly newscast. And it was left off the front page of today's Chicago Tribune in favor of a story about a local ski club that may or may not send some ski jumpers to the Olympics.
One person who most likely wouldn't be surprised by this development is Pope Francis. His 2015 encyclical on reverence for God's creation and our care of the environment, Laudato Si', has a section on "The Issue of Water" (Nos. 27-31). No. 28 is eerily prophetic of Cape Town's situation:
28. Fresh drinking water is an issue of primary importance, since it is indispensable for human life and for supporting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Sources of fresh water are necessary for health care, agriculture and industry. Water supplies used to be relatively constant, but now in many places demand exceeds the sustainable supply, with dramatic consequences in the short and long term. Large cities dependent on significant supplies of water have experienced periods of shortage, and at critical moments these have not always been administered with sufficient oversight and impartiality. Water poverty especially affects Africa where large sectors of the population have no access to safe drinking water or experience droughts which impede agricultural production. Some countries have areas rich in water while others endure drastic scarcity.Francis notes regarding climate change, which surely is one of the contributing causes of Cape Town's crisis, that "climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods" (no. 25). It seems that the Cape Town water crisis will force its people and its government to deal with every single one of those dimensions.
We have had plenty of experience with "water wars," especially in the West. My state of Florida has been engaged in a three-decade long "discussion" with Georgia (and Alabama, which has a dog in the fight) over water from the romantically named Chattahootchie and Apalachicola Rivers. Well do I recall when a neophyte Gov. Jeb Bush flew up to Atlanta to discuss matters with the governor of Georgia, Republican to Republican, and settle it agreeably. There was silence, followed by the reconvening of the teams from the three states, who had been meeting since the Bob Graham administration of the '80s.
ReplyDeleteOn Jan. 8 the Supreme Court heard arguments in Florida v Georgia. The court's decision is expected in the spring, A definitive resolution of the water issue itself is not expected. More likely, the states will be given some rules of engagement and told to go back to the conference room.
The problem is fairly simple. Lovely winding rivers that met the water needs of sparsely-settled farming communities were not up to the job of meeting the needs of Georgia and especially booming Atlanta when population began, um, booming. Georgia built dams so toilets would flush in Atlanta, and this had a bad fresh-water effect upon, among other things, the oyster harvest in Apalachicola Bay. (Florida didn't help its own case when it built a vanity bridge over the Bay for an outgoing Speaker of the [Fl.] House and his developer friends, but you have to expect that sort of thing.) There are other , better connected, interests up there too.
What we should have learned by now is that "free" commons goods like water cannot be stretched infinitely. You mention that resisting local government are part of the problem in South Africa. The three governors in our water wars face the same thing. Each represents a constituency that will accept any settlement except on that affects its "right" to use all the water it needs. Even a gentlemanly talk among Republicans can't get over that hurdle. It might help if consistencies could be taught to settle occasionally for a tie.
That should be "resisting local governments are part of the problem. The governments are resisting, not being resisted.
ReplyDeleteLike Chicago, NYC has a plentiful supply of water, not from a lake but from a vast reservoir system that extends 150 miles north and west from the city drawing largely on the Delaware Water Shed, governed by a tri-state water commission (NY, NJ, PA) that sets the rules. NY is at the top of the chain and releases from the reservoirs are often a source of contention, especially in dry summers. But as for NYC, great water thanks to the foresight of people more than 100 years ago. Philly has to keep sea water from coming up with the tide, so they're very often the place that contends over NY policies.
ReplyDeleteCapetown may be in the headlines right now. But there are contentious claims between Israel and Jordan to say nothing of the Palestinians areas of the West Bank. Further north and east control of the Euphrates is a sore point between Turkey and Iraq (perhaps at the moment, the least of their quarrels).
In honor of the fact that I can take a luxurious hot shower every morning, and refugees in camps cannot, I skip sometimes, I make it short (no soap) sometimes, and I save the water for the houseplants...but still it is more than most have.But some day even New Yorkers (and maybe Chicagoans will face rationing rules far more strenuous than those of dry summers.
Sounds like a great Lent project, Margaret! In summer we "shower with a bucket" for the garden. Michigan is surrounded by the Great Lakes, but dangers to water quality a numerous, and selling water to other states always looks like a good idea to the dunderheads in the legi$i$lature.
DeleteI guess I would note that the cases of Turkey/Iraq, and Israel/Jordan/West Bank, and even FL/GA/AL and NY/Philly, seem to be primarily cases of political contention: how do two or more peer political entities share a common resource? I suppose it's possible that climate change exacerbates that contentiousness. I certainly don't underestimate the difficulty of those negotiations. But it would seem that successful negotiating is the key to resolving those disagreements.
ReplyDeleteBut it seems to me the Cape Town situation is different, in that there is simply not enough water for a very large population. Politics (political dysfunction) seems to have made their situation worse, but the root cause would seem to be that the population is climbing while the water supply is dwindling because of climate change, and there just isn't enough to go around.
Unless something dramatic happens, I'd expect that many of the Cape Town metropolitan area residents will become refugees, and probably sooner rather than later; how long would any of us stay in a place with no water if we didn't have to? I'd presume they would move to other parts of South Africa.
"Turkey/Iraq, and Israel/Jordan/West Bank, and evenFL/GA/AL and NY/Philly, seem to be primarily cases of political contention: how do two or more peer political entities share a common resource?"
DeleteIt is true that problems could be resolved by serious negotiation, except in all of these cases control of the "head waters," plays an important role. The sovereign state that is at the top can build dams, reservoirs, canals, and other diversionary mechanism has the upper hand over what once may have been a free-flowing river or river system. Once the diversions begin, the down river entities have to claim their share. There are often, as Tom notes, water authorities assigned the parceling task. This past year it was New Jersey that was contending. Not sure about what, but it's a task that will grow more onerous if or when drought sets in.
Capetown..isn't it on the ocean? Desalination plants?
Peggy - yes, the LA Times article to which I linked noted that desalination plants have been proposed for Cape Town, but apparently the government body that would be responsible for it has dithered (maybe they are from Illinois), and now there isn't sufficient time to build such a plant and bring it online before Day Zero.
DeleteThis article from the Sacramento Bee (I love that newspaper name) suggests that desalination isn't problem-free, either.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article2590873.html
Yes, Peggy, control of headwaters for sure. I traced the Colorado River on Google Maps. Interesting how the river peters out shortly after entering Mexico. The Mexican agricultural area probably soaks up the remainder. I expect wrestling for water rights will be worst in the Southeast, which will most likely get the worst of climate change drought.
ReplyDeleteWe actually don't have a water shortage. We just have a shortage of fresh, potable water. Here are some interesting statistics. 97% of the water on the planet's surface is saltwater. Only 1% is fresh water. To quote the Ancient Mariner, "Water, water, everywhere; nor any drop to drink." Even though there are problems with desalination, it remains our best hope to generate more usable water. It is not surprising that some countries which are among the driest in the world are pioneers in the field of desalination. Here is an interesting article on Israel's efforts and breakthroughs. And Saudi Arabia has proved that it is very serious about the future of desalination. And this is a promising breakthrough on dealing with the main problem of desalination; what to do with the resultant brine without creating an environmental disaster.
ReplyDeleteJust a passing thought: Aren't we trying to bury nuclear waste in old salt mines? Dig a hold for the brine and voila! A nuclear waste site.
DeleteInteresting that the earth is around seventh in the solar system in water mass. Saturn moon Titan is estimated to have 10 times what we have. Enceladus, twice.
ReplyDeleteHere is an interesting idea: briefly, turning mothballed ships into mobile desalination plants, already being done by the navy on a limited scale. It solves two problems; having a mobile supplier of water, and what to do with mothballed ships that doesn't involve destroying them.
ReplyDeleteFrom the article:
"The future of an environmentally friendly freshwater supply from the oceans is intriguing. Developing desalination vessels could help forestall resource crises and prepare countries for meaningful responses to sudden disasters. A fleet of peaceships sailing on the world’s oceans and delivering freshwater could raise the image of industrialized nations in the eyes of the rest of the world, reduce the potential for conflict, and support traditional humanitarian values."
Imagine that, supporting traditional humanitarian values. Not sure how this would fit in with the present administration's "America First" and screw everybody else philosophy.
Why not get it from melting glaciers? If you believe, like me, that humans do not have the will to confront global warming and that's a done deal anyway, at least harvesting glacial melt and shipping it to low water areas would make some small contribution to stabilizing salt levels in the seas. Or what about harvesting icebergs?
ReplyDelete"humans do not have the will to confront global warming and that's a done deal anyway"
DeleteI've believed the "done deal" part for quite a while now - cf. Cape Town. I see it more as a question of, "How much worse will we let it get?"
Regarding not having the will: I fear you're right. I've been pretty cynical about the possibility of human beings getting themselves aligned to do anything significant to address the problem. I've thought for some time that the ability of humans to adapt to climate change is our best/only hope, but the Cape Town story has several examples of governmental bodies failing their people as a big part of the explanation of how have come to this crisis point. If "human adaptability" means "government response and leadership", I'm not very hopeful about our chances.
Further on this theme, I also think the Paris Agreement is a sham and not worth the paper it is printed on. I see our withdrawal as a very minor event: on the one hand, solidarity with other nations is nice. On the other hand, solidarity in support of an ineffective and probably fundamentally dishonest agreement may not be a virtue. Not that the Trump Administration's reasons for withdrawing are admirable; those are many times worse than the spirit of the fake agreement being withdrawn from.
But regarding cynicism and despair: Francis has called this out as something we must guard against. I don't know that it is positively a sin, but it probably could have sinful tendencies if we allow it to fester. Welcome to one of the countless dimensions of my spiritual struggles :-).
Jean, if anybody can do it, Nestle can. They're already skilled at stealing our water, putting it in bottles and selling it back to us. I can see it now. Nestle's Glacia Pure with a smiling parka'd Inuit decorating the bottle.
DeleteI think the iceberg idea was considered some time ago by the Saudis. Don't know what became of it.
Stanley, yes, Nestle is pumping water from the big aquifer near where I went to college. Instead of DRI king it out of the tap free, students can now buy it for $2 a bottle and contribute to the plastic waste problem! Yay, progress!
DeleteHere you go. This "Iceberg Water" does Nestle one better. It's "...served in elegantly designed 750ml frosted and transparent glass bottles."
DeleteJean, I hadn't thought about glacial and iceberg melt changing the salt level in seas. I suppose it would dilute the sea water. So maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing to return the brine to the sea after the desalination process, if it was done carefully.
DeleteJim, a problem with society now, as I see it, is the utter lack of outrage over things that matter. Things were crummy during the Nixon administration, but people were out raising hell about it. Now everyone is working two jobs to make a living wage, and they're too exhausted to raise a stink. It's hard to care about people in Capetown when you can't juggle your own problems.
DeleteAs the Larry Nassar trial winds up here in Michigan, outrage seems to be reserved for sex crimes against the pretty and the privileged. I knowmthat sounds callous.
Not saying Nassar didn't get what he had coming to him, or that the gymnasts didn't deserve justice.
But poor black children in Detroit are going to school in uninhabitable buildings, and nobody seems to care. People in Flint are still trying to cope with brain damaged children from the water fiasco.
These citizens will never get to shame their perps in an open court.
Jean, I was rather thinking about contacting Elon Musk and seeing if there was some way we could go halfies with him to get a water monopoly on Titan. We have to cut Stanley in as the finder.
ReplyDeleteSomeone somewhere must have written a science fiction short story by now about a future time in which earthlings import their drinking water from Titan, but it turns out that H20 from a moon of Saturn has strange effects on humans - we all go sterile, or develop rings around our heads, or something.
DeleteJim, spaceberg transport has shown up here and there in scifi. They're finding water all over the solar system. The main usage may be for making fuel to establish an infrastructure throughout the solar system. Asteroids would be mined, not to bring metal to earth, but to build giant solar arrays in high earth orbit or at Lagrange points and microwave the energy to earth. This would require much less energy than getting stuff down to earth.
DeleteHas Elon Musk ever gotten anything off the ground that didn't crash?
DeleteI have to give Elon Musk credit for his efforts in Puerto Rico to help after the hurricane.
DeleteJean, Elon Musk is the first and only guy to land and reuse a rocket. And my son swears by his Tesla. Compared to the great accomplishments some real estate developers I won't mention have to their supposed credit, he's Edison.
DeleteI know, Tom. His company landed rockets on their tail like a 1950's science fiction movie. Your comparison to the TV huckster phoney is apt.
DeleteI stand corrected. All's I know is that Elon Musk wants to send rich people into space on their exclusive little jaunts, a goal I support. Whether he can bring them back again is of no interest to me. I just like the idea of experimenting with space travel using the wealthy instead of moneys and dogs.
DeleteJean, It is because the rich and famous -- like Jane Wyman -- stood on movable steps -- waving goodbye to Ronnie as they flew off on War Bond tours and he stayed home -- that you can now take your comfort pet aboard a commercial airliner configured for people of less importance than movie stars and billionaires. So it will go with space travel. By the time people like us get there, it will be three people in every space for two. But they will get there because of pioneers with more money than brains. Alleluia.
DeleteMy wife, whom I suspect of peeking at this blog from time to time, sent me this update from the BBC: Capetonians, stop flushing.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-42836560
Yes, in NYC when there's been little snow, come July/August, we have been told: "Don't Flush for everything."
DeleteAbout 100 years ago (1970) a well known environmentalist told me it was stupid to flush a gallon of water out of a toilet for less than a pint of urine. You mean you don't flush, I asked. Not for just urine, he said. I don't know to this day if he was pulling my leg, but, my goodness, he seemed sincere.
DeleteI have to flush twice because I excrete chemotherapy meds. Raber does not flush for urine to make up for it. Yes, too much info ...
DeleteTom, sorry, I just can't go there. Maybe literally. I spent so much time nagging the kids to "Flush, dangit!" I would rather go back to outhouses if we couldn't flush. At least the "product" wouldn't be sitting in the house we live in.
DeleteAnyone who has lived on a farm or where they didn't have a municipal sewer system has a few septic tank stories to tell. Rule #1: they always back up on a holiday weekend when there is a houseful of company.
BTW, did anyone read the "Dune" books? I'm remembering the stillsuits they wore to conserve water. Gaaack!!
One solution for "frequent flushers" would be to route grey water from the shower and washing machine into a a special receptacle that would fill the toilet tank.
DeleteWe used to have a rain barrel for garden water. Astounding how much rain it would catch after even a moderate shower.
Seems to me that between roof run off and grey water from household appliances, you could keep a pretty large private reservoir filled with water suitable for flushing the toilet and watering the garden.
I have my own well and septic system. My well pump quit twice, both times in the dead if winter. The pump is at the bottom of a plastic hose. When you start pulling them out, you have to keep going, otherwise they go all the way down again. Not too big a deal with my well which only goes down 75'. My friend Lou's pump died (in a January, of course, when he had a houseful of guests) ten years ago. I helped him pull 280 feet, almost a football field. I guess I passed the coronary stress test because I didn't die. Not sure about now.
ReplyDeleteI just checked "Climate of Hope", by Michael Bloomberg and Carl Pope, out of the library. It is subtitled, " How cities, businesses, and citizens can save the planet." An ambitious goal, for sure. I may do a post on it after I read it. That is if it doesn't turn out to be a "book to be hurled with great force." I've encountered some of those, too.
ReplyDeleteApropos of headwaters and dams: Ethiopia, Sudan, and Egypt.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/01/egypt-ethiopia-deliberations-fail-renaissance-dam.html?utm_campaign=20180129&utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Daily%20Newsletter
Map: https://hornaffairs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ethiopia-egypt-nile-river-map.jpg
I like the headline: "It's one Renaissance Dam thing after another" :-)
DeleteDifficult to understand why Egypt is dithering on this - they are downstream, right? (I have to stop and remind myself that, even though Egypt is "higher" than Ethiopia on the map, the Nile flows from south to north.) One would think they'd be anxious to keep their water supply flowing.