DAM(N), I HAD NO IDEA I WAS DEWATERING AMERICA

I’ve railed against the wasteful and dumb use of water before. These days, the tech billionaires and the administration actively promote cryptocurrencies and other wasteful uses of water.  A single bit-coin transaction can use 6.2 million times more water than a credit card swipe. Why? Electricity, power demands.

Electric demand in the US is expected to increase by over 75% in the next 25 years. Much of that demand will come from crypto-mining and data centers. Another chunk will come from rising temperatures resulting in longer cooling seasons and higher cooling loads (climate change). So, what does that have to do with water?

We are still using technology from the mid-20th century to generate electricity. Turbines driven by steam, created by superheating water. On average 2.0 gallons of freshwater are consumed to generate one kWh of electricity. The exception, of course, is hydro-electric dams/turbines. Here’s the average breakdown:

 ·         Water Used in Coal Fired Power Plant to Generate One MWh:          35,000 gal

·         Water Used in Nuclear Power Plant to Generate One MWh:                2,200 gal 

·         Water Used in Gas Fired Power Plant to Generate One MWh:            2,800 gal

 The energy needed to mine one bitcoin has been estimated to conservatively require 155 MWh, about the amount of energy a single family residence uses over 50 days. So, if the mining of a single bitcoin consumes the same amount of water as 6-7 homes in a year, how responsible (or irresponsible) is it to promote and partake in crypto-currencies?

Cryptocurrencies produce no independent tangible benefit. They are just another currency, just another investment vehicle.  A wasteful footprint the world cannot afford. I’m an optimist. I suspect that if people knew these facts, they would choose not to delve into cryptocurrencies.

 

 

WATER WARS Part 1: India & Pakistan

I write thrillers that weave in nature concepts like climate, the environment and water. I have spent my life dealing with one subject, water. My first attempt at a thriller exposed conflict over water between Turkey  and Iraq. Nations have been close to war over water. With climate change, looming conflicts are when not if.

This week’s skirmish between two hostile nuclear powers, India and Pakistan was ostensibly over control over Kashmir, but embedded in that conflict is the resource of water. The Indus River originates in China, flows into India and then into Pakistan. It’s six primary tributaries are he subject of a transboundary treaty (the 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT)), that generally allocates the three Eastern tributaries (Ravis River, Beas River, and Sutlej River to India) and the three Western tributaries (Indus River, Jhelum River, and Chenab River) are split 80% to Pakistan and 20% to India.

 

Well, the old water saying is, “I’d rather be upstream with a shovel than downstream with a water right.” India has been making overt rumblings that it wants to renegotiate the ITW, citing climate change impacts to the watersheds and its demands. Pakistan is not eager; 80% of its agriculture and a third of its hydropower is reliant on its share of the ITW.

 

So, when India blamed Pakistan for targeting Hindu tourists in a deadly attack in Kashmir, it “suspended” the ITW. Pakistan denied involvement in the attack and despite the ceasefire between the parties, the ITW remains suspended with Pakistan threatening legal recourse under the treaty. India really can’t stop the flow into Pakistan, it’s that pesky thing called gravity. Without infrastructure, to divert water the water, it will continue to flow…for now. But there is little doubt that this is a conflict that will intensify as demands increase and the effects of climate change reduce the supply side of the equation.

 

Stay tuned, there are at least seven other simmering transboundary water conflicts. I see another novel brewing.

 

 

WHO’S USING MY WATER?

I always cringe when I hear those two words together: MY WATER. Why, you ask. First, a bit about my perspective. I have spent my life dealing with one subject, water. As a water attorney fortunate enough to represent some of the nation’s most prominent companies, people, and water providers, I’ve heard those two words together too many times.

It's a NIMBY term usually uttered by those that don’t understand where water comes from, how it is used, who has rights to it, and how fragile and treasured water is. There’s a saying: If you have water, you don’t understand it; if you don’t have water, you know water well. In other words, if you’re from the East, you likely don’t give water much thought, just turn on the tap. In the west, water is precious, coveted, fought over.

With that backdrop, let’s get some statistics out of the way.

First, how is water used? Nationally, municipal and domestic use accounts for about 13% of all water use, agriculture 32%, power generation 45% and 10% miscellaneous uses. In the western united states, where water is scarcer, the figures are much different. There, 72% of water used is in agriculture, 22% municipal and domestic, and the balance is a mix.

That may come as a surprise to many that believe urban sprawl and development are the evil users of water. Not really. Not only is the share of water use surprisingly low, most, upwards of 90% of that water returns to the hydrograph in the form of treated wastewater discharge to be used again. In Colorado, my home state, we say “flush, California needs the water.”

In fact, as a result of education and conservation, the nation’s municipal water utilities use approximately the same amount of water now that it did in 1970, despite the population increasing by 40% in that same. Some good news.

The next question is where does the water come from? It depends on who’s using the water and where they reside. The vast majority of water use for domestic, industrial, and municipal uses comes from surface water. For agriculture, nearly 30% comes from groundwater. In some states, this figure is dramatically higher.

Despite far too many states failing to understand the interconnection between surface and groundwater (another reason politicians shouldn’t be left to their own when it comes to science), most groundwater withdrawals tap water connected with a surface stream (tributary water). The exceptions are confined aquifers such as the Ogallala in the great plains, that stretches from South Dakota to Texas. But that is a whole other post.

So, back to my original point. MY WATER. Water knows no geographical or political boundaries. It is a resource to be used wisely and once used available to others. Like energy, water can never be consumed to extinction. All the water that once was at the time of the dinosaurs remains today. Its wise use and recognition as a precious resource will ensure that future generations have an ample supply. How that is done is for the next couple of posts. Stay hydrated and stay tuned.

 

Let's Talk ALBEDO (Not to be Confused with Libido)

Like many, I find the news feed (pretty much the whole spectrum) far too biased, sensationalist, dumbed down, and depressing. There’s a positive story for every negative one, it just never makes the headline. With the advent of false narratives and misinformation, important subjects are being overlooked or obscured. My focus revolves around writing thriller with elements of the environment and natural resources, particularly water, the later I have spent my whole life working with. Water is fraught with myths, mysteries, and politics, most of which can make wonderful literature, particularly thrillers. I invite you to read, share, and comment (respectfully please).

Today’s Post: Positives & Negatives deals with Albedo. The term is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as: The amount of light reflected from a surface. Or, why it makes more sense to rent a white car when traveling to Arizona than a black one during the summer.


 

POSITIVE:

The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC or North Atlantic Current) has in recent years been the subject of increasing concern. The current acts as a conveyor belt bringing warm water from the equatorial region to the North Atlantic. Its role in distributing heat, nutrients, and salt that are essential to marine life and regulating northern hemisphere temperatures. With increased freshwater flows entering the ocean from ice melt, salinity differentials have threatened the current, slowing it down. If it were to collapse, Western Europe and North America would see catastrophic impacts including far colder and longer winters in Europe disrupting agriculture and food security and increased sea level rise in North America, coastal damage, and extreme precipitation swings from rainfall events to drought.

Experts of predicted the AMOC is at a tipping point but a new study, conducted by the University of Bern, Switzerland, has concluded that the current could be far more resilient than originally thought. Scientists studied the transition from the last ice age and found that the current weakened less acutely than previously assumed. While not an “all-clear” moment, it does give some optimism that nature is more resilient to man than originally feared.

NEGATIVE:

Back to Albedo and that hot black rental car. With a loss of sea ice in the Arctic region, darker ocean surfaces absorb more solar radiation resulting in the compounding of effects and an amplified warming cycle. The result is a polar amplification of warming of the Arctic.

To some, this means new open ice-free trade routes, but to the more serious, it is a clear and present danger. Permafrost covers about a quarter of the land mass in the Northern hemisphere and entraps about half of all carbon stored in our planet’s soil. It has long served as the carbon sink of the planet. But, once thawed, carbon dioxide and methane are released intensifying and accelerating the warming of our planet.

The Arctic is warming at a rate of two to three times the rate of the Earth as a whole. If all  permafrost were to thaw, it would release four times the amount of carbon and greenhouse gases emitted by humans since the Industrial Revolution. Game Over. The solution, tackle climate change. Circular, right? Banning the words in books, pretending it’s a hoax, or simply throwing up your arms isn’t going to make the issue go away. Science and nature don’t bend to  politics. They are immutable and unforgiving.

By the way, Albedo is the name of a new thriller novel I just completed and sent to my agent. What could possibly go wrong?