The World Water Week that will take place in Stockholm from the 26th to the 31st of August will discuss, amongst other topics, the nexus between water, energy, and food.
Water and energy are closely intertwined throughout the food chain. Irrigation implies increasing energy bills and energy is also intensely used to make water of acceptable quality for agriculture. Energy production is associated with significant water consumption, for example in the case of biofuels that can consume 20-30 tonnes of water per litre bio-fuel produces. In addition, water can be used for hydropower generation in many countries of the world.
The interconnections between water, food, and energy also concern costs. Energy is a key input to agriculture, thus higher energy prices hinder agricultural production, irrigation possibility, and consequently food prices thus hindering food security. Increasing energy prices also provide an incentive for substituting food crops with growing crops for fuel. The volatility of energy prices is hence transferred to the price of food contributing to increased food security risks.
With the growing world population, particularly in urban areas, the water, energy, and food resources will be facing growing challenges. By 2030, water supply could face a 40% shortfall, with the world's food needs growing by as much as 50%. By 2050, energy demand will be three times greater than it was a mere decade ago. Urban development, infrastructure quality, investments in water and energy, demand and supply management solutions could all have an impact on water resources, food and energy production.
What do you consider the most effective approach to address these issues?
we find 6 causes for the water crisis:-
the official conservation policy based on profit motivation
plutocratic regiem and its negative implications
mechanical remedies for a dynamic issue
abuse of rivers, mangroves and estuaries
statistical centralised planning with futile big projects
anti natural developmental policies
Generally speaking, any actions taken to reduce the demand by improving efficiency should be favoured.
More particularly, agriculture is the single largest consumer of water resources. Bringing efficiency into this low-tech but critical field will yield the largest benefits.
Efficiency being understood not only from a water consumption but from an energy yield standpoint. It is not a matter of using better irrigation techniques but also of choosing the right crops for the right territories. Following the rules of the free market to choose crops is not necessarily environmentally efficient.
Water is the star in this nexus. Insufficient water would have detrimental effects on food and energy provision therefore, sustainable water management and viewing water as an economic good would efficiently and effectively address the nexus.
Increased use biodegrable materials and other raw materials for energy production other than hydropower will greatly ensure sustained water supply for domestic and industrial activities. Hence highly recommended to eliminate possibility of water scarcity globally.
The most effective approach is site specific (weather catchment, national, regional) and would consist of combinations of the above. There is no correct answer to this poll.
I agree with you Harold. Site specific solutions are required and a combination of the measures listed in the poll could be applied. Clearly, no one measure is adequate and the effectiveness of any of them will depend on the specific local situation.
Environmental Impact of Virtual Water Trade
As flow of virtual water among the countries and continents and within the nation is largely due to the trade of agricultural commodity, the country which export maximum of their agricultural product has definitely been reducing their ground level water. Trade is a source of foreign exchange and therefore, every nation wants to increase its per capita income by exporting maximum of their commodity in the international market. This is one of the impacts of WTO free trade policy like NAFTA. .this has totally changed the overall production pattern of the country as land resources are scarce and it needs greater inputs like chemical fertilisers, pesticides, etc. so the soil profile is being deteriorated day by day. The intensive use of pesticides is not only affecting the soil but also on human health like mental retardation, brain haemorrhage.
Government policy and subsidy has also greater impact on agricultural production by pushing more MSP as a security. According to Kampman (2007), the states like Haryana and Punjab are always with overproduction of their agricultural products, thereby reducing their ground water level. Hence this affects their blue and green water balance. On the other hand, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha import virtual water from northern states even though they have surplus ground water. This creates greater imbalance between states.
On my visual observation at village of Haryana, the farmers are unable to grow crops round the year. They can only able to grow the crop in the rainy season because water table has gone down deep and it’s very difficult to pump out the ground water for irrigation purpose and even for drinking. This situation has created only the impact of maximum exploitation of ground water for growing water intensive crops and competes with agriculture market.
Did you think that a cup of coffee we drink every morning contain 150 litres of precious fresh water either blue or green water of the earth? Or similar to that when we wear a cotton T-shirt we wrap around us 2,000 litres of water.
First of all in 1993, Professor John Anthony Allan, introduced the concept of “virtual water”, which measures how water is embedded in the production and trade of food and consumer products. Virtual water is nothing but it is the amount of water needed in production of any items. For example, producing 1 kilogram of wheat requires roughly 1000 litres of water, giving it virtual water content of 1000 litres (according to World Water Council). When international trade of food crops or other commodities takes place, there is a virtual flow of water from producing and exporting countries to the countries that consume and import those commodities. Based on the calculation, India exports about 80 million cubic metres of virtual water by exporting 4 million kg of coffee alone (World Water Council). It is also estimated that the direction of virtual water trade takes place just opposite to proposed physical movement of the water. Where as physical water movement takes place from water surplus region to water deficit region.
Currently it has been found that the biggest net exporter of virtual water are the US, Canada, Thailand, Argentina, India, Vietnam, France and Brazil where as the big net importers of virtual water include Srilanka ,Japan, Netherland ,South Koria,china,Germany and Italy.
Since an average uses of water less than half the amount of water consumed by an average American, but still India is the world largest exporter of virtual water by using more domestic water resources for export products than any other country.Indis’s per capita water consumption is 1,089000 litres per year, while the average US consumer uses 2,842,000 litres, but trade due to trade India’s net virtual water export is 95,000 million cubic meters (as per new analysis of water use patterns).
Agriculture is a backbone of Indian economy, still today agricultural trade contribute more than 16% in country’s GDP. All agricultural products are water intensive such as farm produces i.e. everything from food crops to cash crops. The analysis of global water use also indicates that 90 % of India’s gross virtual water exports related to food products.
Diets and their evolution do have a great impact on water resources; If every human being adopted a western style, meat based diets then 75 % more water would be needed .This explain food production uses 70 % of the fresh water resources.
Glad to be the part of The Water Network. I personally feel that being among finest experts may fall short to comment. But, yes, I would like to have some addressing from panel to sort the problems from our area, Mumbai. Few ideas from events presented in your TWN may help us.
I sure feel in good company on The Water Network, though I feel a bit inadequate when I examine your TAC.
Just one extended comment on the survey:
It seems that the best bet is to increase irrigation efficiency and curb distribution system losses. But for me, the reasons I voted for that may be different from the rest of the panel's. The reason I feel so strongly about that is that development of additional supplies by importation infrastructure, or desal, or reclaimed would be pretty stupid if irrigation systems were not extremely efficient first. Then, the saved water becomes another source of found water, and that is additional in its own right.
In Arizona, an illustrious blue ribbon panel appointed by our err, Governor, recommended the State of AZ move first and foremost towards more treated waste water reuse, with barely any real action planned for highest-practicable irrigation efficiency. I believe I understand the politics of that position, and it shames us. All the large engineering firms and the general contractors, with no regard for the fundamental role of agriculture in every major metropolis, forgoing our excellent food production and water resource strengths, are not interested in the year 2080.
Some legislators propose a Bill (S1507):The state of Arizona and all political subdivisions of this state shall not adopt or implement the creed, doctrine, principles or any tenet of the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in June, 1992 or any other international law that contravenes the United States Constitution or the Constitution of Arizona.
Others want to secede from the Union. Others say they pray for the more rapid decline of civilization, as it is written.
Please come and help the 28% of Arizonan's who are not kooks. I have a few triple bottom line concepts based upon 30 years in advanced ag-irrigation.