More than three in four Americans are concerned about the state of U.S. water infrastructure, and 61 percent are willing to pay more to fix it, according to a nationwide poll of more than 1,000 American voters age 18 and older.
The 2012 Xylem Value of Water Index assessed what Americans think should be done about the country’s water crisis and who should pay for it. It found that most Americans hold all levels of government responsible for investing in fixing and maintaining our water infrastructure.
However, few Americans are aware of the factors impacting water costs, recognize their water footprint, or understand the extent to which water infrastructure problems would impact them personally. For instance, most people believe they use 50 gallons or less daily -- when it is really closer to 100 gallons. The share of Americans believing water infrastructure problems would affect them “a great deal” has fallen significantly since 2010, to 29 percent in 2012 from 41 percent.
The inaugural Value of Water Survey was issued in 2010. The 2012 Value of Water Index builds on the 2010 results, providing new insights into public perception of the U.S. water crisis. Click on the infographic below to open it up in a new window (which enables the reader to zoom in).
Photograph of water droplet provided by somchaij via Shutterstock.
The disconnect between water
The disconnect between water usage and water availability is not restricted to the US of course, though it is likely that significant social debate will occur between those who want access for their swimming pools, and those trying to make a living on the farm (of just two major stakeholders).
In the end, society will be forced to answer the question 'what is the best use of the water we have? In my 2003 paper I raised the concept of 'Fit for Purpose' approaches to water. Incidentally most flood waters (particularly in more developed nations) have the lowest fit for purpose use due to the contaminants flood waters carry. Here's a link to the paper for those interested http://www.lookingupfeelinggood.com/uploads/A_Drop_in_the_Ocean_web.pdf
In water stressed developed nations like Australia, the idea of '155' litres per person per day has been pushed to great success. To put that in perspective, the info graphic suggests that avg use by a US citizen is closer to 380 litres per day. Unless a change in lifestyle is embraced, sooner or later nothing will come out of those taps.
Those of us involved in the
Those of us involved in the water business take our understanding of this infrastructure for granted, perhaps similar to those immersed in transportation, medicine, nuclear physics or agriculture.
Most of us have little understanding of the plumbing in our own house let alone an understanding of capital shortages for infrastructure replacement, local projections in water demand vs supply, energy optimization in transmission, treatment and distribution of water, aquifer depletion and replenishment, water quality regulations, water pricing and ownership, licensing, legal disputes over use priorities etc etc.
Like everything else, the speed, quantity and quality of knowledge and understanding depends on exposure, interest and aptitude.
The message that there’s lots of incredibly expensive civil, mechanical, environment, electrical and communications engineering that happens before the water comes out of the tap has to sink in. Infrastructure hasn’t ever come cheap and isn’t getting any cheaper. We need to have water to live, thus we may all have to re-evaluate our spending priorities.
If the message is incorrectly delivered, however, recipients can be overwhelmed and disempowered by the flood of technical information outside of their personal area of expertise. Disempowerment can lead to disavowal of any personal responsibility for, or ability to affect the situation.
Slow and steady is the key.
Every year we see flooding as
Every year we see flooding as a major factor in destroying homes, property, farming, roads,bridges and infestructure. I am all for the green initiatives that reduce wasting water in our daily lives. I however think that we should also address the water that destroys our lives. To that end I suggest we think about controling flood water through redistribution. If the government wants to create new jobs and we want to reduce the annual destructions caused by flood waters we can pull together and build pipe lines that redirect waters from flood zones to drought areas by using exsiting or abanded railroad right of ways. If we used FEMA funds along with state funds and even insurance company investments we could turn flood water problems into job buiding and irrigation success. We could open up new framing that was not possible prior producing food that is already becoming a shortage issue. We could extend the live of homes and infestructure and reduce the destruction waste going into our landfills which is another goal of the green initiatives. We built an oil pipe line through some of the toughest conditions ever and I know we could do the same with a water pipeline redistribution system.
We must think more critically
We must think more critically about the options here. Infrastructure obviously is essential to everyone’s interests. Government may or may not have the resources to address the problems in a general way. If we close the door to alternative solutions and Government cannot either fix the problems or address them in time we have all failed. If the idea is to rally support for government I am not a supporter. If the idea is to find ways to solve water infrastructure challenges, then I am a supported.
By the way the needs are compete with energy infrastructure, food, security, and shelter. Many of the best solutions are the intersections of water with these other challenges. Solutions efforts in isolation are likely less effective by definition and likely less sustainable.
The solutions will come from innovation of money, management, marketing, operations, integration, technology, politics and more. The point - solutions that make sense and are sustainable will be multi-disciplinary. Government is only one component of the solutions.
Also becoming aware of how we
Also becoming aware of how we talk about water -- as if there is a stash of un-touched resources -- and how our language shapes how we understand the crisis, educate others, allocate recourses and so on. I showed a short video that a local waste-water plant produced to my class the other week and we were all taken aback with how influential our own actions are to the maintenance and access to clean water. Hopefully, improving the conversation about our water crisis will bring more sensitivity to our use (and misuse) of it, whether that means thinking twice before putting something on our lawn, putting something down our sink, how we make thinks, or building structures that demand less water use. Thanks for the post.