If the definition of insanity is making the same mistakes over and over, then many cities have taken a certifiable approach to securing their water supplies â€” and they need some radical therapy before taking the big economic, ecological and human hits that come with a permanent state of thirst.
Thatâ€™s the conclusion fromÂ a new study in the journalÂ Water Policy, whose authors compared the water supply histories of four cities â€” San Diego, Phoenix, San Antonio and Adelaide, Australia. Among the lessons learned? Urban water conservation, recycling and desalinationÂ arenâ€™tÂ silver bullets. In fact, the best solution may lie upstream with farmers â€” saving just 5-10 percent of agricultural irrigation in upstream watersheds could satisfy a cityâ€™s entire water needs.
But the time to act is now, arguesÂ Brian Richter, a senior freshwater scientist at The Nature Conservancy and the studyâ€™s lead author â€” he says a global urban water crisis is already here. Below, Richter tells us more about what cities need to do to say on the right side of dry.
Q.Â Many cities take a similar pattern of water development, according to your researchÂ â€“ going from exhausting local surface and groundwater supplies to importing water to implementing water conservation to finally recycling water or desalination. Why is this pattern unsustainable?
A.Â When we overuse a freshwater source, we set ourselves up for disaster. Each of the cities we reviewed in our study has contributed to the drying of a major river or important groundwater spring.Â That has obvious ecological impacts and social consequences â€” it affects livelihoods and human health by compromising fish production, concentrating pollution, or curtailing recreational activities.
Our research is revealing that water scarcity also causesÂ severe economic lossesÂ by limiting or disrupting agricultural, industrial, and energy production. Texas lost nearly $8 billion in agriculture last year due to water shortages; electricity generation from hydropower dams on the Colorado River in 2010 dropped by 20Â percent due to water shortages.Â Some estimates suggest that China may be losing $39 billion each year due to crop damage and lessened industrial production, and hundreds of thousands of people around the globe are being forced to move due to water shortages.
Because these impacts are so pervasive and damaging, we need to begin investing in water supply approaches that donâ€™t just minimize these adverse impacts but instead begin to reverse them.
Q.Â Are we looking at a crisis in securing urban water supplies in the near future, either for U.S. cities or globally? And how does current patterns of drought in the United States tie into these problems?
A.Â That crisis is already upon us.Â Our study revealed that half of all cities â€” both in the United States and globally â€” are located in watersheds where more than 50Â percent of the renewable supply of water to our rivers and aquifers is being consumed, at least seasonally.
Now, thatâ€™s not a problem as long as weâ€™re receiving plentiful precipitation.Â But if youâ€™re using that much water on an average, ongoing basis and you go into a severe drought, there isnâ€™t enough water to meet all needs.
We tend to view droughts as unusual and unexpected. But the impacts of droughts on our economies are largely self-inflicted because weâ€™ve allowed our dependency on stressed water sources to grow to the point of completely drying them up. We need to be much more careful with our use of water and always leave some reserves for dry times.
Q.Â Phoenix, another one of your case studies, has lowered its per capita water use by 25Â percent since 1990 through various water conservation measures â€” and yet Phoenix is water scarce. Why?Â
A.Â Water scarcity results when we heavily deplete a freshwater source, thereby reducing the volume of remaining water available for human use or to support freshwater ecosystems.Â It doesnâ€™t necessarily mean that youâ€™re experiencing regular water shortages in your home or business. But it does mean that youâ€™re at considerable risk if the water supplies continue to be increasingly depleted by other users, or you get into a drought situation.
Phoenixâ€™s water conservation efforts are admirable, but they need to do much more.Â They are heavily dependent on the Colorado River, which is so thoroughly overused that it dries up before reaching its delta in the Gulf of California.Â During a severe, prolonged drought, the reliability of that water source will be in jeopardy.
Q.Â So storm- and wastewater recycling arenâ€™t enough?
A.Â Contrary to popular belief, water conservation and recycling may not result in a net improvement in the affected water source.Â If the water thatâ€™s conserved is simply used to supply additional urban growth, then the water source is no better off.
The vast majority (80-90Â percent) of water used in cities is returned to the freshwater source after use.Â So only 10-20Â percent of the water is â€œlostâ€ or â€œdepletedâ€ â€” most of that goes to outdoor landscaping or golf courses.Â Water recycling shuts off the return of water to the freshwater source â€” instead of discharging the used water back to a river, the water is used for domestic, commercial, industrial or agricultural purposes.
So water recycling will â€œsaveâ€ water â€” and reduce water scarcity in the freshwater source â€” only if it reduces the fraction of water that was previously being lost from the freshwater system.Â The same is true for investments in irrigation efficiency.
Q.Â What about desalination if youâ€™re a city on the coast? Itâ€™s expensive â€” but Adelaideâ€™s desal plant is supposed to provide more than 25Â percent of that cityâ€™s water supply by 2013.
A.Â Desalination could be a wonderful solution to our water challenges â€” more than one in every two people on Earth lives near a coast.Â But removing salts from ocean water requires a tremendous amount of energy, and the expense of that energy makes desalination the most costly way by far to supply fresh water to cities.
And thereâ€™s a wicked climate change feedback loop for desalination: using it to create fresh water produces carbon emissions that change our climate, which in turn affects the precipitation that supplies fresh water.Â Without a radical breakthrough in energy production, desalination will continue to supply only a tiny fraction of the worldâ€™s freshwater needs. (Note that Adelaide is using 100Â percentÂ renewable energy to power its desalination plant.)
Q.Â Â You cite San Antonio as a leader in integrating water conservation into its planning. Whatâ€™s San Antonio getting right that other cities arenâ€™t?
A.Â Few cities in the world have pushed urban water conservation as far as San Antonio.Â TheirÂ community outreach programÂ is outstanding.
City residents are well-aware of the water conservation efforts ofÂ the San Antonio Water SystemÂ (the water utility).Â SAWS provides incentives, free consultation, and rebates to ensure maximum effort in urban water conservation, and they have a well-tested drought management plan that works.
But San Antonio is also investing in agricultural water conservation to reduce overall use ofÂ the Edwards Aquifer, the cityâ€™s primary water source.Â Thatâ€™s the way of the future:Â cities leading efforts to help everyone that uses the same water source to do so in the most conservative and sustainable manner possible.
Q.Â You argue that cities should help upstream farmers implement irrigation conservation that will leave more water for urbanites downstream. It sounds good in theory â€” but since agriculture accounts for 90Â percent of all freshwater depletions, why should cities foot the bill?
A.Â Because most farmers wonâ€™t implement water-saving measures unless it saves them money â€” or at the very least, until it doesnâ€™t cost them anything.Â Many farmers are already implementing water conservation measures because they reduce electricity costs. But sometimes the cost savings arenâ€™t sufficient to motivate a farmer to go through the time, trouble, and change in farming practices.
Thatâ€™s why cities need to step in to help.Â As we point out in our paper, saving just 5-10Â percent of the water being consumed in irrigated agriculture can usually free up enough water to meet a cityâ€™s needs.Â It can also free up water to restore river health.
Q.Â So how do we do this? Do these partnerships exist already?
A.Â One great way is to createÂ a water market, such as exists in the Murray-Darling basin in Australia or in the Edwards Aquifer of Texas, where farmers can sell any â€œsavedâ€ water to other farmers, cities or environmental interests as long as it does not harm other water users or the environment.Â There are few better things that governments could do to improve water management.
Another urban-rural water partnership that can work is a bilateral agreement between a farmer, or an entire irrigation district, and a city.Â The deal between San Diego and the Imperial Irrigation District in southern California is a great example.Â That arrangement will provide 37Â percent of San Diegoâ€™s water supply by the year 2020, itâ€™s very cost-effective, and it provides a new source of income and security for the farmers.
Our analysis suggests that one in every two medium- to large-sized cities could â€” or should â€” pursue partnerships of this nature.Â Those cities are located in water-scarce basins and agriculture is consuming the lionâ€™s share of the water. Physical, legal and cultural hurdles may exist, but we canâ€™t say this often enough:Â saving only 5-10Â percent of agricultural water consumption can satisfy most citiesâ€™ needs.Â Itâ€™s worth the trouble!
Q.Â What should urbanites do to prepare for the coming urban water crisis â€” pressure their lawmakers? Take personal water conservation measures? Other steps?
A.Â InÂ my Water Sustainability course at the University of Virginia, I teach that everyone needs to take responsibility.Â Figure outÂ how much water you use, and what impacts you might be causing. Almost everything you do requires water â€” not just the water you use directly in the kitchen, bathroom or laundry room, but also the water required to produce your electricity, food, clothing, gasoline, and other consumer goods. Regardless of your political party, be conservative in water use.
And to the point of our study:Â Ask your city manager or water supplier why they arenâ€™t working with local farmers to help them save water and restore health to our rivers, lakes, and aquifers.