Water: Footprints in the Salt

Water is an essential element. Not in the sense of the periodic table of elements. Water is a molecule from the combination of those two of those elements. But we will define element as a building block for life. According to Captain Planet those building blocks were: Earth, Fire, Wind, Water, and Heart (In no preferential order of course)! With those combined you get Captain Planet. From the movie the Fifth Element the 4 basic elements were Fire, Earth, Wind, and Water and the 5^th being a super-human. Our understanding for the need of water is essential. Some may take it for granted but I am sure that all can come to the same conclusion of our inevitable demise without water. We simply cannot survive.

The old adage is that an individual should consume 8 cups of water a day. The Mayo clinic says 13 cups for males, 9 cups for females. www.mayoclinic.com/health/water/NU00283. There is no one formula for determination of individual physical needs. It is based upon activity, diet, and other criteria. As we have seen in our Water PPT slides, the uses for water goes beyond regular consumption but into many facets of life such as agriculture, production, daily use and many other activities outside the realm of drinking.

One of the interesting things to understand is the concept of Water footprint, which is the directly linked to human consumption in for any use needed. This is the amount of consumption that any one area, one country, one state or any other representative region or people group may partake of. It is also interesting to note the external footprint that a country may have. Some places simply do not produce enough resources for their own domestic use and must import from other regions of the world.

For Example:

• ·         Japan with a foot print of 1380 cubic meters per year per capita, has about 77% of its total water footprint outside the borders of the country.
• ·         The water footprint of US citizens is 2840 cubic meter per year per capita. About 20% of this water footprint is external. The largest external water footprint of US consumption lies in the Yangtze River basin, China.
• ·         Source: www.waterfootprint.org

With the understanding that we have a need for water consumption and also that there are many countries that are more privileged to have sources of water domestically, or the ability to import from other regions, there is a need to ensure the ability to consume water. It is essential for life.

We want to go beyond the realm of Sustainability, like our book says, and into the realm of Thrive-ability where we do not just maintain our ability to live and produce at our current pace and efforts, but we want to expand our efforts with no ceiling in sight and no harm nor depletion to the environment. We can easily deduct that with more water, more agricultural products (or other activities) can be produced. This is good, right? We then find ourselves at the need to determine a viable option for water supply if our current freshwater supplies are limited and we must conserve as it is. We have already turned our heads to desalination, which is the process of removing some amount of salt and other minerals from saline water.

Desalination can reduce salt levels to below 2 grams per gallon, which is the limit for safe human consumption. (www.livescience.com/4510-desalination-work.htm). To make seawater fit for human consumption its salt content of approximately 3.5% must be cut to 0.05% or less. (www.economist.com/node/21524186) If we are able to tap into this supply of water with an effective and efficient model, our endeavors that are usually hindered by water supply would break open and we would be capable of so much more! A random thought is that over-consuming desalinated water could potentially bring changes and harm to the oceanic ecosystems. That is beyond the scope of this discussion and I’ll leave that to the hands of the Marine Biologists.

Financial feasibility maintains the hurdle for many projects and alternative methods to consumption and living. Simply, we have to be able to provide a solution that economically makes sense. Financial feasibility may not be the wisest choice in that we have to choose between existing or holding a fist full of money when we die, but nevertheless it is the way-of-the-land. And I believe with enough intuition and drive and passion, we will achieve these goals of alternative living. With that said, Wikipedia states that “Desalination remains energy intensive, however, and future costs will continue to depend on the price of both energy and desalination technology.”  This goes in line with much of other resources that we employ. We may have found a breakthrough technology or advancement in technology that will revolutionize society but until the costs of production decrease and the price to the consumer is comparable to that of other substitutes of equal utility, consumers will still consume the older cheaper product. According to an article “Why desalination doesn’t work (yet)” (www.livescience.com/4510-desalination-work.html) the primary cost of desalination is the energy cost associated with production. Efforts to reduce this cost have been a focus point for researchers and scientists. The energy source of most plants have been fossil fuels or nuclear energy. While other places such as a desalination plant in Perth, Australia and another in Bungendore, New South Wales utilize Wind Power Energy. (Wiki)

To put things into perspective, in January 17, 2008 a WSJ article state, “In November, Connecticut-based Poseidon Resources Corp. won a key regulatory approval to build the US$300 million water-desalination plant in Carlsbad, north of San Diego. The facility would produce 50,000,000 US gallons of drinking water per day, enough to supply about 100,000 homes…Improved technology has cut the cost of desalination in half in the past decade, making it more competitive…Poseidon plans to sell the water for about US $950 per acre-foot [1,2000 cubic metres (42,000 cu ft)]. That compares with an average US $700 an acre-foot that local agencies pay for water.” There is still a price differential that must be worked out to bring desalination into a competitive arena against other sources of water. Another cost consideration includes transportation. Though the desalinated water output may be close in cost to other sources, the transportation costs to get the desalinated water from the coast to inland areas that are possibly arid or in a high mountain range severely raise the prices to the consumers, making it a less desirable solution.

Nevertheless, in our article above, we can hold to the statement that “Improved technology has cut the cost of desalination in half in the past decade, making it more competitive.” This gives us hope that this option is very near to our future, and the positive effects to society that desalinated water brings is very promising.