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!