|
A balmy Sochi. Photo: Flickr user waferboard under a Creative Commons license. |
Meanwhile, California
has seen record
low snowpack – a critical source of
fresh water for California farms and homes for the rest of the year.
On the other end of the
spectrum, the “polar vortex” has put a hard freeze on large portions of the
United States, stalling out regional economies, while leaving the more northern
icepacks – those in Alaska and Greenland, for example – susceptible
to unusually warm temperatures.
This winter’s extremes,
the record summer heat and drought in different parts of the world in recent
years, and the “100-year storms” happening seemingly every year of late, are
sending a clear message: unpredictable is the new normal.
The implications of this
reality cut across all aspects of our lives. And, it starts with our water
future.
As I’ve previously
described in these pages2, water – the
world’s silent currency – is a fundamental determinant of growth. As the foundation of our
economies and societies, our global water system carries a roughly $500 billion
annual price tag3 – a cost expected to
double as billions more global consumers come on stage.
Historically, we have
built this infrastructure – dams, levees, canals, and water treatment plants –
based on the expectation that they will reliably serve our needs for decades,
or even centuries. They have been built to withstand the most predictable events
– based on long historical time series of hydrological and climate data – with
the assumption that things will remain largely unchanged.
But, things are
changing, and changing fast. As a result, we can’t just “engineer” a
sustainable water future. As current infrastructure becomes increasingly
inadequate in the face of a changing climate and a rapidly urbanizing world, we
must make our future choices based on a broader portfolio of possible
solutions.
|
Flooded banks of the Mississippi River. Photo: © David Y. Lee |
In this reality, the
role of nature in securing a sustainable water future becomes critically
important.
Take flood protection on
the mighty Mississippi River, for example. My colleague, Jeff Opperman, a
senior freshwater scientist and the leader of our hydropower practice, wrote
a great story about this a couple years ago in our Conservancy Talk blog.
In 1927, a 100-year
flood struck the lower Mississippi. More than 100 levees failed or were
overtopped, killing hundreds of people and displacing more than half a million
from their homes. The disaster proved that we could not completely depend on
our assumptions of how the most extreme weather events would behave, nor could
we depend on the solution – a levees-only, “walled off” approach – that we
thought would protect us from such events.
In direct response to
this disaster, the Army Corps of Engineers began looking at the entire river
basin for better flood protection options, rather than relying solely on the
disjointed system of levees. This new approach included setting aside
floodplain areas, which could reconnect to the river during major flood events
– thereby giving the river more room to spread its floodwater and reducing
pressure on levees.
Fast forward to another
100-year storm on the Mississippi in 2011. Despite the fact that this storm
carried even more water than the 1927 storm, none of the levees failed, damage
to property was relatively minimal, and there was no loss of life. By blending
nature with built solutions, the Army Corps was able to expand the set of
possibilities that the Mississippi River basin was prepared to absorb.
Nature is resilient,
cost-effective and adaptable – whether its floodplains along the Mississippi or
healthy watersheds that can help us more sustainably secure drinking water
amidst increasing demands.
The challenge in
achieving blended, more flexible water solutions is one of scale. Even if
natural infrastructure accounted for roughly 10 percent of the anticipated
future cost of our global water systems, we would still be looking at roughly
$100 billion in investment in such solutions – an order of magnitude larger
than the conservation community’s current collective scale.
Achieving scale,
therefore, will require leadership from businesses, governments, and
communities. We must pivot away from the traditional “white coats” management
of water in the background of society to an active management of shared risks
by all parts of society.
To motivate leadership
and drive investments, we must continue to demonstrate the power of nature in
helping us manage against these risks as resources become increasingly
constrained.
As extreme droughts
increase in frequency, farmers will need to grow more on less land, using less
water. As 100-year storms become more frequent, governments and dam builders
will need new tools and science to enable new water infrastructure projects
that optimize the diverse functions of an entire river basin. And, as urban
populations balloon, everyone will need to invest more in protecting the
world’s natural sources of drinking water.
While we may have been
able to engineer the 2014 Olympics in a sub-tropical location that appears to
be phasing out its ability to support winter sports, we won’t be able to
engineer a sustainable water future in this less predictable world without
looking to nature to help us.
References:
1. Scott, D., Stieger,
R., Rutty, M. and P. Johnson (2014). ‘The future of the Winter Olympics in a
warmer World’. University of Waterloo. Available online at: https://uwaterloo.ca/news/sites/ca.news/files/uploads/files/oly_winter_games_warmer_world_2014.pdf. 2. Boccaletti, G. (2013). ‘Nature’s silent
currency’. Global Water Forum. Available online at: http://www.globalwaterforum.org/2013/03/20/natures-silent-currency/. 3. White, S., Biernat, J., Duffy,
K., Kavalar, M.H., Kort, W.E., Naumes, J.S., Slezak, M.R.
and C.R. Stoffel (2010). ‘Water markets of the United States and the
World: A strategic analysis for the Milwaukee Water
Council, Milwaukee, Wisconsin’. Final Report. Available online at: http://www.kysq.org/docs/White_WaterMarkets.pdf.
To read the original post, click here.