The Associated Press recently reported that a Federal appellate court may overturn the landmark 2003 accord that divvies up Colorado River water. The accord determines how much of the rivers’ water goes to users in seven Western States, including California. At the center of the dispute is whether water that had been traditionally used by Imperial Valley farmers must be sold to urban dwellers in coastal San Diego, and what that exchange means for the potential recovery and long-term stability of the Salton Sea.

While the issues involved here are legally and environmentally complex, they all point to the larger reality facing water users throughout the world: our supply of fresh water is limited, and the demands on it are many. Whatever the court decides with regard to the Colorado River accord, its tenets may not hold in the coming decades regardless. The combination of a booming global population (and the food and fiber demands that accompany that growth) and climate change will lead to a certain outcome. All water users, whether urban dwellers or farmers, will have to learn to do more with less.

New York Times reporter Leslie Kauffman’s recent piece Stone-Washed Blue Jeans (Minus the Washed) makes a strong case for keeping your favorite dungarees out of the dirty clothes hamper. It turns out that the life-cycle of a pair of jeans – from growing the cotton to running them through the wash – consumes more than 900 gallons of water. And, as is the case with so many of the daily goods we use, the majority of that water is used in agricultural production.

Ms. Kauffman’s article talks about the role Levi Strauss & Co. is playing in educating and supporting cotton growers throughout the world about how to make the most of their limited water resources. I had the privilege of attending a small event at the company two weeks ago, where the fabulous Michael Kobori (aka, Levi’s Vice-President of Supply Chain Social and Environmental Sustainability) celebrated its efforts and those of other cotton retailers that joined Levi Strauss in its participation in the Better Cotton Initiative.

The vast majority of the world’s cotton comes from China, the Indus Valley (India and Pakistan), and the United States. With this kind of concentration in production, it only takes one regional flood or drought to cause world cotton prices to skyrocket, as they have in recent years. Taking steps to use known technology to irrigate crops saves money and resources and reduces cotton farmers’ vulnerability to the whims of nature.

Every drop of water saved through efficient irrigation adds a drop of drinking water back into the world’s communal cup. And less water spent on growing fiber – like cotton – leaves more water to irrigate food crops. Because whether we like it or not, the pressures of increasing droughts, floods, and populations are together pushing us toward a world in which efficient use of water is no longer a choice. It is at our peril that we delay investments to improve agricultural water efficiency.

Voters in the Lone Star State have a chance to support the safety and security of their water future on November 8, 2011. Proposition 2 would amend the state constitution to increase the bonding authority of the Texas Water Development Board to $6 billion.

Bond funds through the Water Board are made available to local governments throughout the state to fund water and wastewater infrastructure retrofits. Allowable improvements under Proposition 2 funds would include both conservation and flood control projects, two areas of infrastructure that in many parts of the state are long overdue.

Proposition 2 currently enjoys widespread support among constituencies ranging from the state’s business community to environmental advocates. If the constitutional amendment passes, it will serve as a beacon to water utilities throughout the nation as an example of how to invest in water infrastructure.

As I saw when I was General Manager of a major water utility in the West, the public understands that ensuring the availability of fresh drinking water and the proper treatment of wastewater is a necessity, not a luxury. With an annual national investment shortfall of $20 million in wastewater infrastructure alone, I’d say it’s high time utilities around the country started paying attention to how Texas has built public support for this investment in its water future.

October 2011 marks the 39th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, without which many of our nation’s rivers, streams, and beaches would be flooded with the type of toxic waste that caught fire in Ohio’s Cuyahoga River in 1969. That infamous fire marked the start of the modern environmental movement in the United States. It also inspired the Federal government to step up efforts to ensure proper disposal of wastewater throughout the nation. These efforts included both regulation and Federal funding for states to upgrade and maintain wastewater infrastructure.

We are fortunate in the United States to have strict regulations that ensure proper wastewater disposal. Even though we understand the water cycle of evaporation-condensation and precipitation that we learned in school, sometimes we forget that all water is recycled. That means that whatever toxins go into our wastewater will one day end up in our drinking water. Like with so many things in life, prevention is the best medicine when it comes to keeping water clean.

As we celebrate this 39th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, let’s all remember to do what we can to keep our global shared resource of fresh water clean and free of toxins. It also means being willing to pay for upgraded wastewater treatment infrastructure. Because whether or not the Cuyahoga catches on fire again, some portion of the water flowing down that river will one day end up in your drinking glass.

Everyone’s talking about carbon footprints these days, but when’s the last time you thought about your water footprint?

Although alternatives are quickly being developed for fossil fuels, there is no alternative to fresh, clean water. Global demands on our finite water supply are increasing thanks to a booming population and changes in precipitation patterns brought on by climate change. There is an urgent need to develop innovative policies around water use and wastewater treatment, and yet, there is surprisingly little being done to address these challenges.

Join water utility expert and co-author of Running Out of Water, Susan Leal, and bestselling author Alex Prud’homme, who has a forthcoming book about water, for a lively discussion about what can – and must – be done to increase our long-term water security. The conversation will be moderated by journalist Jesse Kornbluth, frequent contributor to Vanity Fair, the New Yorker and the New York Times, who has edited the online cultural concierge service HeadButler.com since 2004.

A Conversation on Water
November 16, 2010
8 am
Council of the Americas
680 Park Avenue
NY, NY

The New York City system is overtaxed especially during storm surges that are happening more frequently. These investments are a sound decision. It is good to see the Bloomberg continues to lead the city to a better future. This is wonderful news.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/science/earth/29sewage.html?ref=water

For those interested in immersing yourselves in all aspects of water environmentalism. I think you will find this article helpful.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/greenlife/2010/08/book-roundup-wednesday-water-reads.html

We would all benefit from healthier waters – not to mention cleaner beaches on hot summer days.

The folks at Green-Talk.com and I had an interesting conversation about Running Out of Water the other day.

Take a look and let me know what you think.

Susan

Susan Leal speaks with Green-Talk

In May, while just across the Charles, Bostonians had to boil their water, Cambridge residents were untouched by their sister city’s water crisis. Why? Although Cambridge, Massachusetts, is within the MWRA geography, it does not depend on MWRA for its water.

Way back in 1889, the town of Cambridge decided to develop its own drinking water source. And, nine years ago, Cambridge decided to invest over $40 million to upgrade its water treatment system and maintain water independence for its 101, 000 residents. Cambridge also had the foresight to develop a back up plan, just in case their primary water system fails. Smart move? Yep!

So, while Boston businesses were shuttered and residents were clamoring for bottled water, Cambridge basked in being an oasis in every sense of word.

Smarter? They may be…