http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sandra-postel/freshwater-conservation_b_1367152.html?ref=green
This article challenges the reader to think in new ways
about water conservation by displaying statistics about “humanity’s water
footprint.” Though conservation of freshwater is usually thought about in terms
of actions such as “turning off the tap” or “taking shorter showers,” Sandra
Postel, the director of the Global Water Policy Project, brings a new dimension
to the issue in this article when she writes about the use of water in the
manufacture of consumer goods and agricultural production. She cites recent
studies about water usage, showing how our global “water footprint” is so
gigantic due to the fact that many of our daily activities insidiously
implicate us in the overconsumption of water, from wearing a pair of leather
shoes to eating a big juicy burger. She compares the water footprints of
various countries, showing that the United States has a water footprint two
times the size of the average country’s footprint. This can be explained in
part because of our extreme consumption of meat compared to foreign countries. Furthermore,
Postel traces the imports and exports of “water” by calculating the amount of
water used in the crops and products transferred across borders. Not
surprisingly, countries that export great quantities of their water in the form
of crops are now beginning to experience more severe water shortages than ever
before.
It
is just this sort of example that is needed to make “real” the effects that
over-consuming practically anything has on our environment. For example, buying
just two new cotton shirts consumes 5,400 liters of water! In the United
States, where our water supply is fairly abundant compared to other countries,
it is easy to restrict our water conservation to habits we can see with our own
eyes. Thinking about water from a global perspective, however, makes known the
ways in which improved business practices (such as Unilever’s new “drip
method”) and institutional initiatives (like the Alliance for Water Efficiency)
can serve not only big business’ bottom lines or the rural impoverished, but
conserve water for all due to the current “trading” of water that occurs
through the exchange of goods and agricultural products.
Though
thinking about water resources in this way allows for a multitude of
innovations regarding conservation, it also holds a number of personal moral dilemmas
that manifest themselves in everyday choices. If we are truly serious about
reducing our water footprint, this means changing our actions towards
consumption in general. Do you think Americans are ready to scale down their
meat-eating habits, which are four and half times higher than the global
average? Will we really think about how much water the cotton crops grown to
make our new pair of pants needed? Through this article, the interconnectedness
of all “green” efforts, and the ways in which they reinforce one another, can
be clearly seen.
The toughest change to enact in a society is behavioral change. In order for Americans to decrease their water footprint, they have to change their daily behavior which is incredibly difficult in a society that is resistant to change. Since the United States feels no imminent threat to their water supply, they will be slow to start even small changes in their daily lives. One way to help people start enacting change is through education. A nation-wide education campaign about the current global water supply picture is necessary for citizens to realize what is happening outside of our society. Another powerful tool for enacting change is through mimicry of leaders and peers. People will follow the change set forth by people they look up to and also their peers in the community.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, education is a powerful tool with which to start. Each town or community should try to encourage change that is feasible for them to start with, and build a plan that is reasonable.
I too think this article does a good job putting the US' high water consumption into something concrete that people can see. I agree with Summer that there will be a challenge to getting people to think about their water consumption since water shortage is something that the US will likely not experience directly (for a long time at least). I think educational articles like this are good for giving people a better picture of where their water consumption actually comes from. I like Summer's idea of a nation-wide educational campaign, because it would focus more on how we ALL need to reduce our water consumption, and also makes global water strain, an fairly abstract problem to us, into a more legitimate concern and creates more social pressure to consume less. It is also great that companies like Patagonia are not only producing products with less water but also promoting reducing on the consumer end.
ReplyDeleteAnother important point from the article is that water really has no substitute. This means that water prices will rise, driving up the price for other goods, which can also reduce consumption. I also think that measures to address more visible environmental concerns will also decrease water consumption, since these efforts are all interconnected, as Biofinity said.
It was a compelling point in the argument that water is both necessary irreplacable, and I like dharmabum's point that if water prices rise, the prices of goods will also rise. Increasingly limited water supplies can also create a situation in which those who control water can exploit its importance and make it very expensive. The rhetoric of the article is convincing. In the beginning it directly addresses the reader and it points out specific and relatable examples that are nonetheless powerful. They are tangible ways to appreciate the consequences. It develops into a slightly more technical argument when it starts discussing the study, but it concludes with proposals for some solutions that certainly make sense. I think that encouragement for both consumers and producers to be more conservative and efficient is valid, but I wonder about using the statistics for liters of water used to make clothes as support. I appreciate them as examples of how water goes into everything we used, but I suspect things like quality and the money and energy used to dispose of and acquire new shirts if one made with less care is developed are also relevant when providing statistics.
ReplyDeleteThe general trend about changing consumer demands here is a very good one, and I think that the shortages altering the prices higher will eventually encourage a demand for less watery products. However, it would be preferable to stop consuming water before it becomes an incredible low-supply good.
ReplyDeleteWith as many billion people as we have here on this planet, water is becoming an incredibly high-demand resource. It personally blows my mind that we go through probably tens of thousands of liters of water a day (if the two cotton t-shirts a day number is correct), while others (like India) are struggling to get enough drinking water for one day to its people.
I realize that we are not chugging thousands of liters of water every day, but I think that disconnect with the true value of our lifestyle is an invisibility that needs to be rectified. We as consumers need to be able to identify at least the magnitude of our consumption and the large-scale costs it has. But I'm afraid that it will take a while for us to get to that point, and it will probably be when we're already in an even more extreme global water shortage.