Current Water Use Unsustainable

That was the headline I saw this morning. Is anyone really surprised by this type of news anymore? Especially considering the headline specifically referred to California! The article I'm referring to (here) discusses how recently released NASA satellite imagery provides even more evidence that California's current water use is quickly draining the state empty. Take into account these two facts:
1) Cali's central valley is home to 1/6th of all US irrigated crops
2) California is the US's largest grower and exporter of agriculture

What happens to that agricultural economy when the water runs out, or becomes so salty from seawater infiltration that it can no longer be used to irrigate, much less drink. While this story is by no means exclusive to California, this is a state that is stuck in a 3 year drought, is home to 37 million people, and is on the verge of a liquid (or lack thereof) catastrophe.

This also illustrates why the membrane-based market segment of the water purification industry stands to do very well in California, as well as many other drying out corners of the world. When the Southwest has to switch over to a new water source because aquifers are depleted and the Colorado River has run dry, what other source is there? Well, that big blue batch of ocean called the Pacific looms large and isn't going anywhere. It can be used today, but at tremendous expense. I can picture 37 million people are crossing their fingers that the next great evolutionary leap in desal technology happens before the state is officially out of water, or they stand to run out of money first. And, well.... hasn't that already happened?

A Few Thoughts Re: Bottled vs. Tap

It's always interesting to compare some of the "behind the scenes" numbers on things we take for granted. Here are some thoughts on the bottled vs. tap water debate. Click on the image for one researcher's take.

Summer must be over

Heat waves. Water shortages. Droughts. Signs of summer. At least in the Pacific Northwest it seems like a distant memory. We are in the middle of what feels to most like an endless supply of rainy and windy days. Yes, we are stuck right in the middle of another typical fall cycle of weather with storm system after storm system cycling in from the Pacific. We are now stuck with major flooding, power outages, heavy snowfall in the mountains (most of Vancouver is heaving a sigh of relief over this particular point), 4pm darkness and general misery all-round. How quickly we forget!

While most of BC is stuck somewhere between the memory of our record breaking summer and the upcoming Olympics, we find ourselves remembering what a heap of rain means for our water systems. Nevermind the flooding basements and streets, the reservoirs supplying the Metro Vancouver water supply are back to being susceptible to landslides and the resultant high turbidity. The Capilano reservoir has been taken out of service due to extremely high turbidity and the Seymour reservoir is currently sitting at 3.7 NTUs, well in excess of the 0.1 NTU goal. If this rain keeps up and the freezing levels creep up the mountainside in the next week as expected, the risk of even higher turbidity starts to remind us of the boil water advisory over 2 million of us went through two years ago. Could we be in for a repeat?

The downside of water conservation

So it turns out there is a potential downside to buying that low flush toilet and letting your lawns fade to brown in the summer. The CRD water supply system in Victoria, BC is undergoing a budget shortfall this year as city water users have embraced water conservation. Yes, it's true - it appears that Victoria is just saving too much water! Victoria has actually been decreasing their water usage since 1998, even in light of significant population growth. Does this mean the message is getting across and people are really starting to embrace water awareness? I, for one, can only hope so! In one of the hotter, drier summers on record the water usage was actually below average. Only in June with the city under an all-time record breaking heat wave did it exceed the average water usage by 1.7%! Only 1.7%!

Victoria has instituted a number of the steps that we generally think are the "right things to do" such as requiring low flush toilets for new construction, water restrictions in the summer, promoting other water-saving appliances and lifestyles. While on the surface this unfortunately means likely modest rate increases for water usage, I find it hard to complain on this subject. We city water users already enjoy rates that are far less than what is reflective of the true price of delivering safe, reliable water to a municipality. This will come to bear when the true extent of the infrastructure upgrades that will be required are realized - so modest increases now are only a trend in the right direction.

So go on, keep those sprinklers to a minimum and keep using those low-flow showerheads. And enjoy the signs that the message is getting out there!

Are we all a little too thirsty?

A simple post this week, via Powerpoint presentation. Check it out here: http://www.watertiger.net/about/thirst.pps (will open in Powerpoint). It holds a few facts about water use in our world. I don't know who created this presentation, but would like to give credit if anyone out there can enlighten me.

Settlement Reached in Longstanding Water Dispute

For those keeping track of the longstanding water dispute between The Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and Nestle, the case has finally been closed after reaching the Michigan Supreme Court. To quickly summarize the case: Nestle opened a bottling plant in 2002, using groundwater from the local watershed at up to 400 GPM to feed the bottling plant. The Conservation society sued Nestle, accusing them of damaging watersheds and local habitats by over-pumping as local water conditions were seen to change as a result.

The settlement reached this week allows Nestle to continue pumping and operating the plant, albeit at a slower rate (average of 218 GPM) with reduced rates in the summer months. This settlement effectively solidifies a temporary agreement that has been in place since 2006.

This is one of those disputes that some days you just don't expect to ever end. It has been the subject of much media attention and referenced in countless books and documentaries about the state of water in our world today. I imagine the Michigan Water Conservation Society will continue to closely monitor local water conditions to see no further damage is done by the continued, though reduced, pumping.

Opening a Can of Worms?

Wow, one headline really caught my eye this week: "Canada and US to Renegotiate Great Lakes Water Treaty." Of course, like most non-alarmist news articles, this one seemed to slip under the radar of most mainstream media outlets. Even the one source I saw it in barely gave it more than a few paragraphs, and half of that was off-topic on passport and free-trade issues. And while that in itself shows how important most people see this as, the rewriting of this treaty does have the potential for some pretty significant impact on water usage in the Great Lakes Basin, not to mention set a potentially powerful precedent for cross-border water negotiations in the future. To put you in the right frame of mind, here are a few tidbits to chew on*:

1) The Great Lakes Basin Watershed is the largest freshwater system on the planet
2) It contains an estimated 6 quadrillion gallons of freshwater. Or in other terms: about 1/5th of the world's freshwater, and 90-95% of the US supply.
3) The lakes have approx. 17,549km of shoreline. This is equal to 44% of the circumference of the Earth.
4) The population within the Great Lakes Basis is approx. 35 million people.
5) It is not only a major water source for those 35 million people, but is a critical economic pathway - a major transportation and shipping link.
6) Despite its size, it is a fragile ecosystem that needs to be protected, and hence this treaty NEEDS to be re-evaluated.

The original treaty has just celebrated its centennial, and so the issues that formed its inception have obviously matured. If you live in the region or have read any of the books on water related risks, or even seen the documentaries that reference issues in the region, you may be familiar with some of the stories that have come from the region. There is the story about the bottling company that has pumped so much water out of the watershed (and shipped the water away) that nearby wells and creeks have run dry. There is the story about tankers looking to fill directly from the lakes to ship the water to Asia for bottled markets there. There are stories about proposed pipelines to expand the distribution of the lake water - that 35 million people could grow drastically if this option takes hold.

Sitting here today, I don't know which players will be at the table renegotiating this treaty, but is it critical that the watershed management, the protection of both the quality and quantity of the water, be at the forefront. Should the discussion fall into a battle of who has more rights to the water, it will spell trouble for everyone involved, on both sides of the border, and both sides of the industry/consumer coin. The only way to maintain the interests of all involved is to maintain the integrity of the watershed itself. Watershed management in ANY watershed is a tough balancing act, but with the focus on such a massive cross-border area, the complexity is sure to skyrocket. I will be following the development of this with much interest. Now if only the media would do the same.

To see the article, in all of its brevity: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/06/13/boundary-waters.html. * Some facts taken from: http://www.great-lakes.net/

Are we behind the 8 ball in North America?

I've spent this week in Penticton, BC exhibiting at two industry tradeshows conveniently held back-to-back in the same convention hall: The Canadian Hospital Engineering Society (CHES) and the School Plant Officials Association (SPOA). Though we carry a very wide range of products that could conceivably make it onto our table for these two industries, we decided to focus on a growing problem in commercial and industrial buildings across North America including, but certainly not limited to, hospitals and schools. While it is by no means a new problem, it is one that is slowly coming to light - degrading mechanical systems.

It's no surprise that water-borne contaminants can wreck havoc in all kinds of circles, but often non-health related contamintants are ignored for the more immediate bacteria concerns. While no one stands to get sick from these problems, we do stand to spend an awful lot of money on fixing them! The most common example of this is particulate matter - dirt, rust, sand, sediment, silt (call it what you want), algae, etc. all have serious implications for the performance, or more appropriately, the failure of every piece of mechanical equipment you can think of. How well do you think pump seals, mixing valves, control valves, toilet tank valves, showerheads, automatic flush valves, etc. etc. etc. hold up to large loads of dirt? Easy answer - not very well!

It is incredible how much money is being spent on an annual basis, year after year after year, to just keep up with the failures that are seen from poor incoming water quality. And in North America, it seems to be accepted as normal practice. A common thought I hear is that "well, there's nothing we can do about the water the city gives us." Wrong! Well, sort of wrong. True, we can't change what comes in from the pipe to our building, but we can choose to deal with it before we pass that water throughout our entire distribution and plumbing network. What am I talking about? Simple filtration!

There are certain parts of the world where plumbing code strives to be more of a "best practice" rather than just the bare minimum, which seems to be the driving force in North America. For example, there exist inexpensive, easy to operate filtration systems (think of an automatic, self-cleaning strainer) that can be installed at the point-of-entry to commercial buildings that can handle flow rates up over 900 GPM to solve these problems.

Not even a month ago I was in a commercial building commissioning a system on a refridgeration loop. Turns out that from years of use, there was nearly a half bucket load of sand sitting in the pipes on the lower levels. Now this is the city of Vancouver, BC water supply - all in all an excellent water supply. However, we do tend to see high turbidity from time to time, especially during heavy rainfalls. Fortunately the filtration system we were starting up was specifically designed to remove that dirt before throwing it all right back into the distribution system in one big "slug." That system paid for itself in the first 5 minutes of operation!

I can only hope that the mindset will change in North America to one of preventative maintenance, rather than reactive. This mindset is by no means limited to mechanical maintenance, but when a simple solution exists - the arguments for not fixing the problem tend to lose their weight... Fortunately the attendees at these tradeshows know their stuff. They know the problems they deal with, and understand the concepts on how to fix them. Hopefully they'll rub off on everyone else!

Are we Neglecting our Groundwater?

I read an article today outlining the importance of stepping up our proper management of groundwater across this country. I have to say, this is an interesting and often neglected topic within water management circles. In Canada, the majority of water systems use surface water as the primary water source and so most of the attention revolves around the quality of our lakes and rivers while sometimes neglecting the importance of the water beneath us. I believe there are a few reasons for this: 1) 2/3rd of our population is served by surface water. 2) Surface water has the effect of immediacy - We see it. We feel it. We swim in it. Our dogs swim in it. We dump our refuse straight into it. We have immediate feedback on any significant changes that might be taking place to these water supplies (seen a recent picture of Lake Mead?). 3) We aren't the only users of surface water - we have to watch out for fish and wildlife stocks that depend on these surface sources for survival.

While all of these are good reasons to stand up and take notice of what is happening on the surface, it does sometimes sweep groundwater issues under the rug. We need to keep the magnifying glass pointed just as directly as groundwater. With 10 million Canadians alone (and how many more around the world?) depending on groundwater the issues are worth paying attention to. While surface water has the effect of immediacy, groundwater unfortunately has the opposite effect. It takes time, a long time, for the cause and effect cycle underground. Any large scale contamination that happens on the surface often takes years to seep down into the underlying aquifers. There have been a number of large-scale aquifer contaminations from various pollutants, agricultural chemicals, and industrial pollutants. Nitrates and rocket fuel additives being two often-cited examples all over North America. Household pharmaceuticals seem to be another growing area of concern.

Fortunately, there are efforts underway to begin mapping groundwater, both in terms of quantity and quality. In BC there is a provincially funded program to create and monitor test wells. These test wells will start accumulating data to monitor and measure how the aquifers respond to seasonal changes and year to year use. The program is only a few years old, and woefully underfunded so a proper history of groundwater is still a long way off. And here's one very unfortunate observation I've made over the last few years: while it can take a very long time for downward problems to show up, the upward problems can happen frighteningly fast. We have a number of customers that have learned first-hand how dramatically water conditions can change in a short period of time. We have clients who just a few years ago had top producing wells with excellent quality water. Within just a few years their wells are now going dry towards the end of the summer. And as you can imagine, as water quantity goes down, quality generally goes right with it. I have my own theories as to what has caused this, but it all boils down to one inescapable fact - we can and do pull it out of the ground far faster than it will naturally replenish itself. Sound like a familiar story?

I, for one, don't think we can push these groundwater initiatives forward fast enough. We just don't have enough information to arm ourselves properly for the challenges to come. With a few exceptions, we are only guessing at what is really happening underground as we just don't have enough historical information to guide us. And if you can't measure it, you can't manage it.

The article on groundwater management is at http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=1583292

Watertiger.net's all dressed up!

This week, a short one! Instead of a normal commentary, I'd like to introduce Watertiger's new webpage. Our website has always shown a large cross section of the products that we sell and install, but has never properly represented the array of services we offer in addition to product sales. The new section of our website at www.watertiger.net now demonstrates some of the extra services we offer in the commercial, industrial, and small municipal spaces. Check out the website to see the latest incarnation! If you have any questions on who we are or what we do, feel free to contact us. We always love to hear from our clients, past, present and future!

Fast-tracking Toronto's Green Reputation

Ok, this entry doesn't revolve around water per se, but I couldn't resist writing on this when I saw the headline. And when you see what it's about, I hope you'll excuse my minor diversion. A Toronto city committee has proposed a new bylaw that would have T.O. as the first city in North America REQUIRING green roofs on all new construction of buildings over a certain size. First of all, let me get my feelings on this out in the open - I love the idea! Green roofs are altogether much too rare in North America. If I think about it, I can't remember having seen any in Vancouver except for a brand new one...

When the new Vancouver convention center finally opened its doors in the last couple of weeks with the largest living roof in Canada, and the largest non-industrial one in North America (at 6 acres!), it hopefully helps to set a precedent for new construction throughout North American architectural design. Now, with Toronto hoping to take a giant leap forward and cement a foothold on "Canada's Greenest City" - it's time for all major metropolitan centers to step up the plate.

The fact is, new and sustainable building practices have been around for a long enough time that more of them should be standard. There are far too many important, sustainability-oriented city bylaws and constructions codes that are voluntary. Take low-flush toilets. The technology behind these toilets has evolved enough that the "low flush" toilet is ready to drop the nickname of "two flush" toilet. You can now get the same flushing performance and the water saving features of the old thirsty models which begs the question - why aren't they mandatory? Toilets account for 30-50% of the domestic water used in the average household. Think about that. If every household in North America suddenly switched to a low-flow toilet, we could potentially lower our domestic water use by up to 25% (1/2 of 50%)! That would mean for some pretty significant infrastructure savings for water treatment and distribution.

I applaud Toronto city council for looking at bold ways to move forward into what we all know is the right direction. Sustainable building practices have been moving along at a snail's pace, and I hope these game-changing steps will be undertaken more often, and on as large a scale as possible. While I recognize there will be some hiccups along the way, we'll adjust and move forward. But the current pace of change in this space is just too slow. Though the global economic slowdown has taken over as the lead news maker, climate change hasn't stopped. Though infrastructure spending is picking up because of the slowdown, habits such as water consumption haven't changed. And here's the problem: throwing "quick money" at infrastructure projects will only prolong the issue. The goal is to spend the money as quickly as possible and therefore create jobs NOW, encourage spending NOW. The problem is, if we spend money NOW we do it with YESTERDAY'S thinking. We need to push the thinking of tomorrow into today, to really satisfy a long-term benefit from the dollars we plan to spend, and not just spend money to fix our problems in the next couple of quarters.

If you're interested in learning more about Toronto's green roof proposal, see: http://www.househunting.ca/eco/story.html?id=ed4f8022-1f8d-4ec5-a9b1-c6ed97441a62.

Controversy in a Bottle

Today I'm going to throw in my two cents on the already hotly debated topic of bottled water. If you read the news in any capacity, you'll have seen this issue come up time and time again, with no end in sight. Recently, another institution announced the ban on sales of bottled water - this time a school. The University of Winnipeg has just become the first educational institution in Canada to ban the sale of bottled water at university facilities. This adds U of W to a quickly growing list of municipalities, offices, and homes taking action to reduce the overwhelming waste that comes from using bottled water.

Here are some of my personal concerns with using bottled water as a primary source of drinking water:
1) Waste from empty bottles. If everyone recycled this wouldn't be such a problem. Unfortunately, the reality is that the vast majority of the empty bottles go to garbage and waste sites (not to mention our rivers, lakes and oceans).
2) Safety-quality. More and more tests are being released showing the quality of some bottled waters are perhaps overstated. This isn't a broad brush - there are certainly some top notch brands that provide an excellent quality product in a bottle. There are, however, a number of companies that do not take appropriate steps to ensure the safety of what they are selling to the consumer. And here's the problem: there's no way for the consumer to know the difference. As the labeling requirements are very loosely regulated, the marketing gurus are free to conjure up any image they want to make sales. It's up the consumer to trust one brand over another based solely on the design of the packaging.
3) Efficiency of the process of getting the water from the source to the shelf. Moving water is actually one of, if the not highest, user of energy on this planet. From pumping water through municipal networks, from private lakes or wells, moving waste water, and of course the transportation of trucked and bottled water all over the globe - the amount of energy required to supply this neverending distribution stream is enourmous. Consider how much effort it takes to move a single 5 gallon jug of water. Now consider how much energy is spent to move millions of them.

However, in typical media fashion, the argument generally shown is fairly one sided. There are some excellent points in the support of bottled water which should be illustrated:
1) Emergency relief. Deploying bottled water to emergency zones is a quick and easy solution to provide life-sustaining support to those trapped in areas with no access to safe drinking water (think of those caught in earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, etc.). Without safe drinking water, the real disaster starts days after the event.
2) An alternative to other drink choices. I would rather see children (and adults for that matter!) choose a bottle of water over pop/soda. Though the health/safety issues are cited as a concern, let's keep some perspective - there are far worse choices for the health of our population than water in a bottle. I often choose another drink over tap water myself, but would hear a word or two from my dentist to be chugging diet cokes all day long.

So though the bottled water industry is caught up in a whirlwind of controversy of bad press, I don't think it's all bad news. I do believe though that U of W is just the first of many schools to eliminate the sale of bottled water in this country. We'll just have to wait and see who is next!

Is water a RIGHT, or just a NEED?

As you may seen, the World Water Council sponsored World Water Forum recently recognized "safe drinking water" as a basic human need, but stopped short of calling it a basic human right. The same council, comprised of members from 150 countries, recognize the issue as central to quality of life and acknowledge that approx. 1 billion people around the world lack access to safe drinking water, with 2.5 billion lacking access to proper sanitation services.

This perhaps subtle dissention of wording is reflective of a fiercely heated battle that is brewing over water infrastructure the world over. The fact is that modern and safe water infrastructure is either non-existent around much of the globe, or is old and inadequate. To upgrade pumps, pipes, and water treatment equipment will never be "affordable" under any current funding model that I am aware of.

This is all an extension of an issue we have been up against for years in our very own backyard. There are over 3000 small public water systems in British Columbia that require upgrades to their water infrastructure just to meet current demand and/or provide some basic level of protection against contamination. The scrutiny from the Provincial government has been much more pronounced since the tragedy in Walkerton, but little movement has been made in most jurisdictions. It seems that time and time again, the show-stopper comes down to money. Without a way to fund and finance these projects, too many just don't get past an initial review or the design stage.

The lack of commitment from the World Water Forum to call safe water a "right" reflects the colossal problem facing our developing and developed nations - a problem of available capital to fund the required development. I believe we are strongly in need of some creative solutions to deploy the solutions to those areas that need it most. Fortunately there's no shortage of bright minds and willing players to chip away at the problem. Here's hoping the global recession will strongarm even more innovation into an industry that really is up against one of the most challenging health and safety issues in the world!