Are You Helping Shape Opinions and Policy Decisions When It Comes to Clean Water? |
July 08, 2006 |
|
Posted by Don Dunnington at July 8, 2006 05:21 PM |
|
Today's Wall Street Journal has an interview (may require an account to view), by Kimberley A. Strassel with Bjorn Lomborg the leader of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist".
Lomborg's group has brought together leading economists and political leaders to come to consensus on setting priorities for solving the world's most pressing problems. The key to setting a proper public works agenda, according to the Copenhagen group, is to start with the projects that offer the greatest human and economic benefit in return for the investment required to get the job done.
Dirty Water
Interestingly, both the economists and the politicians rated dirty water among the top issues that are both the most urgent to solve and offer the most immediate return on resources invested. Both groups put global warming at the bottom of the list.
Certainly there is evidence at hand that water is a serious issue. In "Dirty Water:Estimated Deaths from Water-Related Diseases 2000-2020" (PDF), a research report dated August 15, 2002, Peter H. Gleick of the Pacific Institute Research provides estimates of annual deaths from dirty water that rage from over 2 million (diarrheal diseases only) to 12 million (includes all water-related diseases). A March 2004 UNICEF news release says that dirty water kills 5,000 children a day.
"Our history shows that we solve more problems than we create," Lomborg told Strassel. But we have to get focused on the right (rational) priorities, Lomborg holds, rather than letting emotional issues distract us from making the right choices. In the Wall Street Journal interview, Lomborg contrasts how $1.00 spent on HIV/AIDS prevention would result in $40 of benefit, while a $1.00 spent on global warming might yield two cents to 25 cents of benefit.
Michael Kanellos, editor at large at CNET News.com, wrote on the Future Tech Blog, "What's the biggest hazard for the future? Global warming? Oil shortages? A small, but growing number of people think that a looming shortage of drinking water constitutes a much larger crisis." In this and other articles, Kanellos describes how new technologies, such as nanotech filters may soon offer inexpensive ways to remove both chemicals and viruses from water.
So if dirty water stands way above global warming when political leaders make the tough choices, and if known (and future) solutions are at hand, why isn't there more public outcry for clean water? Why is it that there appears to be so little public awareness that clean water supply is a big issue for much of the underdeveloped world?
Well, how many civil engineers do you know who are speaking out about the problem and its solutions? What about the those of you in this business--academics, equipment and chemical makers, and facility managers? You probably know the answers and are able to offer the solutions. And maybe you talk about clean water issues all the time among yourselves. But have you made the effort to lead a public discussion (or even raise public awareness) about clean water?
So here you have it: consumers in the developed world spend untold fortunes on bottled water because they've concluded it must be better than the stuff coming out of their taps. Meanwhile, folks in the less developed world really should be drinking (and cooking with) bottled water, if they could afford it. As for the tap water that our enlightened consumers sometimes disdain, it could save countless lives were it available in the rest of the world.
This Blog is Your Voice
My purpose as moderator of this blog is to help each of you to develop your own public voice. This blog is a medium where you can exercise your knowledge and lend your voice to the ideas and issues that are important to the water and wastewater industry. Becoming an author on this blog is free, and you'll find it's surprisingly easy to post an article.
To open your free blog account and add your voice to the dialog, write to don@waterandwastewater.com. In the subject line please write "sign me up for the w/w blog."
Don Dunnington
Blog moderator
Comments
Positive - focus on urgent short and medium term problems, which can be solved.
Negative - give huge long term problems low priority (leave it to future generations), neglects the fact that costs tend to increase substantially while problems grow with time.
In relation to the Third World more money should be spend before human catastrophs break out, best invested in helping the people to solve their own problems (also regarding drinking water).
Kind regards,
T. Sobisch
Posted by: T. Sobisch at July 9, 2006 04:22 AM
The underdeveloped world is in serious need of safe drinking water. Simple low cost chlorinators are being installed that greatly improve the health and welfare of the consumers. But the effort takes time. It is happening town by town but as is always the case, more money and technical resources are needed to effect change.
Do good work.
B. Kramer
Posted by: B. Kramer at July 26, 2006 04:30 PM
Interesting story about preventing sewer spills.
http://www.readingeagle.com/blog/editorials/archives/2006/08/aging_sewer_pip.html
August 21, 2006 - From Reading Eagle Newspaper Blog
Aging sewer pipes must be replaced
The Issue: Oil giant BP begins repairs on corroded parts of the Alaska Pipeline.
Our Opinion: There is justifiable concern about the corroded oil pipes, but little attention is being paid to the decaying sewage pipes across the country.
Corroded oil pipes, such as the one owned by BP in Alaska, understandably get a lot of attention for a number of reasons, such as the danger they pose to the environment and the higher oil prices they cause when they have to be shut down for any length of time.
But as worrisome as corroded oil pipes are, there is another kind of decaying pipe that poses an even greater danger but seldom makes international headlines.
They are the pipes that carry sewage.
This lack of attention to a growing problem that is literally right under our feet has Thomas Rooney, the head of Insituform Technologies, Chesterfield, Mo., concerned and rightly so.
Insituform Technologies repairs all types of pipes all over the world, and from his experience, Rooney said that as bad as oil pipes can be, they are in far better shape that the average sewer pipe found in an average commu-nity, such as Reading.
For years, Reading residents have been told that the city?s sewer pipes are decaying. But there has been no comprehensive effort to tackle the problem other than dealing with breaks as they occur.
The repair of the city's outdated treatment plant, which has been fined several time for discharging raw sewage into the Schuylkill River, is a high priority, but the estimated cost of $150 million is financially daunting.
Although the world's attention may be captured more easily by scenes of oil spills that saturate pristine flora and fauna, Rooney said ruptured sewer pipes cause more damage and illness and are more costly to repair.
One sewer spill that did get international attention occurred earlier this year in Hawaii.
After more than 40 days of rain, Honolulu's aging sewer system no longer could handle the load. The system sprang a leak, and 48 million gallons of raw sewage spilled into a large drainage canal and eventually found its way onto Waikiki Beach.
Officials predicted that repairing the system would cost $48 million - $1 for each gallon of sewage spilled.
Of course, the spill got the attention it did because of Hawaii?s status as a tourist Mecca. Rooney pointed out that for the most part sewage spills get far less scrutiny than oil spills.
Perhaps its because unlike oil, sewage is filthy and disgusting. Not something people want to read about while their are eating breakfast.
Whatever the reason, Rooney said more attention needs to be paid to decaying sewage systems.
While the damage done by oil spills shouldn?t be minimized, Rooney had a point when he said sewage spills pose a far greater danger to people, wildlife and the environment.
For one thing, there are a million miles of sewer lines in this country made up mainly of pipes that are 60 years old or older. Most were meant to last only 50 years.
The result is not surprising. Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency reported 73,000 sewage spills, said Rooney.
In the past several months, more than a dozen places, including Honolulu, have had the worst spills they have had in decades, if not their history, he said.
The cleanups, repairs and health-care costs have amounted to billions of dollars.
Rooney noted that a few months from now, BP will have replaced the corroded pipes, the oil will be flowing again and the problem, for the most part, will have been forgotten.
But across the country, sewer pipes will continue to be on the verge of collapse with little being done to head off the catastrophe that could ensue.
Nancy Fay
LaTiDa1@aol.com
Posted by: Nancy Fay at August 22, 2006 12:06 PM



