digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

Water: The Forgotten Crisis

sciencedaily.com — This year, the world and, in particular, developing countries and the poor have been hit by both food and energy crises. As a consequence, prices for many staple foods have risen by up to 100%. When we examine the causes of the food crisis, a growing population, changes in trade patterns, urbanization, dietary changes, biofuel production, and clima

show profanity settings
expand all
  • bstory, on 07/15/2008, -6/+17What will the price of oil matter when there is no water to drink?
    • stklaw, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Because a liter of oil is cheaper than a liter of coke?
    • Acglaphotis, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Not much, really. But shouldn't SOMEONE be developing a desalinizing machine?
      • csw1342, on 07/15/2008, -1/+7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination

        Shouldn't someone be inventing Google?
      • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Desalinization is expense compared to just sucking water out of a river, lake or well. It is used where it makes sense - desert areas close to oceans, submarines, etc.
      • dgaspard, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3Shouldn't someone be inventing *wikipedia*?


        There, fixed it for you.
    • theOster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3BRAWNDO! The Thirst Mutilator!
    • BufordT, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1FTA "When we examine the causes of the food crisis, a growing population, changes in trade patterns, urbanization, dietary changes, biofuel production, and climate change and regional droughts are all responsible. Thus we have a classic increase in prices due to high demand and low supply."
      Are we supposed to believe the increased price of transportation of said food has nothing to do with this crisis?
    • eggballs, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Water you talking about?
    • msimeth, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Solving the energy crisis will also solve the future water problem. All that is needed for desalination is energy.
  • aldakemina, on 07/15/2008, -13/+8Eating meat uses up 10 times more water than eating plant foods, ounce for ounce.
    FYI, people can, and do thrive on plant based diets. The only reason people don't is because they don't WANT to. There are a lot of things people are doing for the environment that, ten years ago, they would consider a hassle.
    • SteelChicken, on 07/15/2008, -11/+16vegetarians are weak skinny pussies. insufficient protein and other trace elements.
      How about we do something about overpopulation?
      • DeadlyCouncil, on 07/15/2008, -5/+10For real, they can pry my bacon from my cold dead hands.
      • orangefly, on 07/15/2008, -5/+2i was doing my part for population control, but i just found out my wife is pregnant and her friggin tubes are tied....
      • DeadlyCouncil, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1orangefly, tell your sperm to turn off their wall hacks.
    • elmetald00d, on 07/15/2008, -9/+3vegetarians are dumb. sooner or later they all get one sort of problem or another because of some missing nutrient. I know many vegetarians
    • BossKey, on 07/15/2008, -3/+11There's plenty of vegetarian protein to eat. Just ask all those world-class vegetarian athletes. Just because you can't find it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
    • orangefly, on 07/15/2008, -4/+14"meat tastes like murder and murder tastes pretty damn good"-dennis leary
    • BoneheadFarker, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3People can thrive on plant based diets, but meat is a better source for some essential nutrients. There's no reason to cut out meat completely, and it's usually not a good idea anyways. People tend to forget that they need these essential nutrients, and don't plan their diet accordingly. While producing meat does take more water then producing plants, it's an easier and sometimes necessary way to maintain a complete and balanced diet.
    • Hetman, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5People can live with out masturbating also. I just do not recommend it.
    • brstilson, on 07/15/2008, -4/+2There isn't enough arable farmland in the world to feed every person. You need far less land to feed the same amount of people with meat as you do grain or any other plant.
      • csw1342, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4What do you feed the livestock?
      • Hetman, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4What do you think animals eat? Imaginary grain?
      • Pronoiac, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4They eat low quality grains and grasses that are not fit for human consumption.
      • mieprowan, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3They eat rendered animal products, stuff not fit for human consumption, which can be just about anything, including cat and dog flesh. That's how chickens cost $1 a pound and rice costs $2 a pound. Yuck. Plus they keep the animals in cages so small they cannot move in many cases. Being against eating meat isn't being against killing, it's not wanting to have anything to do with animals kept inhumanely and fed nasty crap. Being against killing in an absolute sense, makes no sense, that's just plain dumb. But it's true that it takes a number of pounds of plant food (or any food) to make a pound of animal flesh, which should be obvious to anyone with half a brain.
    • brstilson, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4People can, and do thrive on plant-based diets--when they remember to take their supplement pills to compensate for the lost nutrients due to the diets.
    • Pronoiac, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5When you say that producing meat requires more water, you're implying that the same land and water could instead be used to grow crops. Only about 11% of the land on earth is farmable and most of it already is being farmed or is being slowly destroyed because of inefficient farming methods. With the exception of deserts and arctic tundras, the rest of the earth's land does sustain some sort of grasses or plants that we cannot utilize directly. The only method we have of converting these resources to food is raising animals. Consider areas such as New Zealand, large parts of Africa and Asia, European highlands, South America and any other region that is either too mountainous, cold, rainy or where the soil is too sandy or of poor quality to cultivate crops. The only option for the people who live here to sustain themselves is the domestication of animals. Also consider the huge amount of people whose diets consist mainly of fish and would have no other way of finding a consistant food supply on islands or places along oceans, swamps, rivers and lakes.

      If the entire world were to cut meat out of their diets, the 4 out of 6 billion people who are not starving would soon join the 2 that are. Hopefully, through science and technology we can develop more efficient and productive sources of food, meat and plant alike, but we are not there yet. The argument becomes even more bizarre when you add organic farming to the mix which would cut down the world's crop production by at least a third.

      I've found logically arguing with vegetarians to be a futile effort 99% of the time but this misinformation needs to stop. Sure, you can survive on a completely meat-free diet and if that's what you want to do, go ahead it's a free country. It isn't a balanced or good long term diet but if you do it correctly and take the time to micromanage your intake of nutrients, you probably can live a relatively healthy life. But you vegetarians must take a step down from your pedestal and take a look at the science because you're not saving the world and your diet doesn't make sense.
      • mieprowan, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2Your post is more intelligent than most here, as to raising animals on non-farmable land. You might have to rethink your arguments against "organic" farming, though, considering that centralized petroleum-based farming is going to get more expensive all the time. Organic farming is about using what you've got, including human labor, and it demands soil conservation. It does not assume an easy source of cheap energy that we will never run out of. If you think that's foolish, then we shall have to agree to differ.
      • Pronoiac, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1I have to admit I've fought the organic battle less than the vegetarian battle being surrounded by vegans(2 sisters a cousin and my ex-girlfriend). The problem I have with organic farming is it seems blatantly regressive to throw the centuries of technological advancements in agriculture and throw them out the window in favor of minimalist "back-to-nature" methods. If organic farming is such a realistic and efficient method of farming why did we start using pesticides and fertilizers in the first place? It just doesn't seem to fit. We've always had seeds, dirt, water and sun, what we've lacked is technology. It's the fertilizers, pesticides and selectively bred seeds that increase crop yield and make the crops more reliable and easier to preserve along with innovative farming techniques that have increased the world's food source.

        If we can throw the chemicals and petroleum intensive equipment out the window and switch to organic methods without decreasing the crop yield, I'd be all for it. It would cut costs and pollution. Unfortunately I don't see how that is possible and what really pisses me off is when anti-development and anti-technology organizations like Greenpeace slander new methods such as gene-altered crops and spread misinformation. If food and agriculture were hypothetical or a whimsical issue of debate I wouldn't be so passionate about it or even against organic foods but the problem is 2 billion people are starving and without technological ADVANCEMENT(sorry for caps, there's no italics option heh) I don't see anyway we can convert our current crops or begin organically farming in a world with an ever-increasing population. Two billion people are starving and many of the other 4 billion aren't exactly fat and happy and when things like Greenpeace convincing Zambia to turn down tons of gene-altered crops that could feed millions of starving people, it really gets me going.

        As far as the energy issue goes, we will need to use more energy and the world will too as it continues to develop. If we can move forward in wind, solar, nuclear and hydro-electric energy in a timely manner, I think it will go a long way towards solving the world's hunger problem as well. Energy is the solution, not the problem and as is the case with everything, scientific development is the only thing that can get us to where we want to be.
    • theOster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2and having a car creates a substantial carbon footprint. do you own a car?
    • theOster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2also, sources?
    • nycmac247, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2LOL aldakemina, keep putting that ***** in your body and we'll talk again in 30 years and see who is healthier
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -0/+31) You make it sound like 10 gallons of water must be "consumed" to make a pound of meat. Ten gallons of water weighs 83 pounds. If the meat were 100% water, that only accounts for 1 pound. Where did the other 82 pounds of water go? Ok, back into the ecosystem, where it will be recycled. That same ten gallons may have produced thousands of pounds of meat over the years. In other words, who gives a flying *****?

      2) Most meat comes from animals whose diets are made up largely of things that humans can't or won't eat (like grass, hay, orange peels, etc). So they're cycling things humans can't eat into something humans CAN eat - meat! Yeah! Isn't it great how that works out?


      By the way, I love vegetarians. They're delicious. If you are what you eat, then I'm a vegetarian.
  • crazyjake, on 07/15/2008, -3/+17wasn't there a guy on the colbert Report that pretty much solved this problem.

    here he is!
    http://gizmodo.com/370698/colbert-first-vid-of-dea ...
  • skewl, on 07/15/2008, -5/+3There are serious and extremely worrying factors that indicate water supplies are steadily being used up. Essentially every calorie of food requires a liter of water to produce it.
    • JointVenture, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1OK, kill yourself.

      Thanks for your contribution to humankind.
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5All this water that's being "used up" - where is it going? Are the aliens from V siphoning it off and taking it to their home planet?

      Even if they are, no worries - the global warming will cause the seas to rise by 20 or 30 feet! You'll be SWIMMING it water! Woo-Hoo Global Warming!
    • mieprowan, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2This thread has a remarkable number of uneducated replies. Two striking points in the article were that water should be stored underground, and that irrigation in many areas is still terribly inefficient. They did not even begin to address salinization problems, which effectively ruin arable land, when irrigation is mismanaged. There is a lot that can be done yet to improve production on arable lands, but it has to be done in a low-tech manner because of economic considerations. And there's nothing wrong with that, it worked for thousands of years, but unfortunately people did not understand the effects of their water mismanagement and ruined a lot of good land.
  • AmyVernon, on 07/15/2008, -7/+1a very important issue...
  • daonlyfreez, on 07/15/2008, -6/+6"When we examine the causes of the food crisis, a growing population, changes in trade patterns, urbanization, dietary changes, biofuel production, and climate change and regional droughts are all responsible. Thus we have a classic increase in prices due to high demand and low supply."

    Oh really?

    The points mentioned are only the cause of a _fraction_ of the price-hikes, the _main_ cause is speculation, the supply/demand argument is moot.
    • lofispy, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Exactly...the number cause of the price hikes is greed and an engrained sense of entitlement among a sheltered few...while, supply and demand isn't exactly a moot point, both should factor into any understanding of this growing crisis...
    • zacharytelschow, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1For a very basic understanding of the evil speculators virtually everyone continues to denounce, go here:

      http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams071008.p ...

      Long story short: supply and demand doesn't dictate prices be where they are now, but speculators are betting that prices will rise. If they're right, they soften the blow and prices won't swing as wildly. If they're wrong, they're out a crap ton of money. So what's your beef?
  • tekism, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3water FTW!
  • DeadlyCouncil, on 07/15/2008, -1/+17When I was in 7th grade, my social studies teacher used to tell me that future wars would be over water resources and not oil... I thought he was being over dramatic, but I guess we'll see.
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3Yes, someday you'll pay a DOLLAR for ONE QUART of water in a bottle!

      AIIIEEEE!! The end times are here! AAAAIIIIEEE!!!!
      • stuffradio, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1I have a well... we get our water from the rain and it gets filtered :P
      • stuffradio, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1You dugg me down for that? I live in Canada, I live on farm land... don't have to be so jealous about it.
    • zacharytelschow, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2The countries talked about as lacking water resources also lack the resources to fight a war. Your social studies teacher was an alarmist crackpot.
      • DirtyBinLV, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1The leftist alarmist crackpots at the US Department of Defense said the same thing. I can't find the report easily, but they predict at least one major regional conflict in the next 25 years will be fought over water resources.
      • mieprowan, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3The good people of what we call the Middle East have been fighting over water ever since they got there, and continue to do so today. Israel is an obvious example of a country that has water problems and does have nukes. They don't have a lot to work with but the Jordan, and several countries are at odds over the Tigris and the Euphrates. The West Bank is on top of a major aquifer. There are other examples.
      • DeadlyCouncil, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2That "alarmist crackpot" was one of the best damn teachers I ever had.
  • kosser, on 07/15/2008, -11/+4the biggest problem with water in the united states is how much fluoride is in it. that is the greatest problem
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Yes, the commie bastards are polluting and purifying our precious bodily fluids! Don't worry, I'm taking care of it. I've got something here called "Plan R", that's R for Robert.

      Peace on Earth, Purity of Essence.

  • BradleyNowell1, on 07/15/2008, -5/+28They're completely right...let's start worrying about renewable resources that make up more than 70% of the planet's surface...because there's no such thing as desalinization.
    • brstilson, on 07/15/2008, -0/+17Desalinization is an expensive, energy intensive process. It is still far less expensive to get fresh water out of a well than it is to distill sea water.

      And we're not "running out of water", either. There is no water crisis. There is exactly the same amount of water on earth that there was 200 million years ago. Water from the oceans is evaporated, then condensed down to rain and the cycle begins again. The earth itself is one huge desalinization plant.

      The problem is the distribution of water. African countries aren't poor and starving because they don't "live where the food is." The problem is they're all run by military dictators who could give two ***** about the people. Most of the "aid" sent to these nations goes to the dictators, who keep it for themselves rather that distribute it to their people. Corrupt governments are the problem, here, not a shortage of resources.
      • serif69, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5I'm pretty sure having no potable water and soil that doesn't sustain any sort of abundant crop has something to do with the poverty and starvation.
    • nebben, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4In the Western United States, water rights are some of the most serious issues that have been dealt with for over a hundred years. People kill over these things. Try telling someone with water rights that doesn't get their water about desalinization plants. Good luck with that. Are you going to ship all that water a thousand miles inland on a bike?
  • mrzeero, on 07/15/2008, -0/+14Here is a bad ass water bottle that has a filter inside and can clean 1,500 gallons of water before the filter needs to be replaced.

    http://www.lifesaversystems.com/index.html
    • Paranoidmarvin, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1That is pretty cool!
    • brstilson, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2Sorry, but I want my water with all the Bacteria, Viruses, Cysts, Parasites, and Fungi intact. Seriously. We're all obsessed with cleanliness and filtering and being "germ-free" that we're all in the process of weakening our immune systems. In the words of George Carlin, our immune system NEEDS germs to practice on. That way, when the really bad bugs come around, our immune systems will be ready.

      The immune system is an amazing thing, and it's incredibly adaptable, but only if it has things to adapt to.
      • mrzeero, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5The water bottle is not for filtering potable water. It is supposed to be used in cases where the water available would make you very sick or kill you.
      • honesttussey, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5dude it's for camping/survival, it's not for filling up with tap water
      • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1So you drink out of the same toilet your dog does? ;)
    • moxley, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1There are several technologies like that - they all seem really awesome, for a lot of reasons - especially in the developing world...But in relation to this issue the question you have to ask yourself is: How much water does it take to produce each one of those and the materials used to create them?
      • hlehmann, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1The amount of water that's used during the manufacture of these products makes no difference. Water, unlike oil, doesn't go away forever once you use it. Saving water by not building these products in some factory in China is not going to increase the amount of clean drinking water available in some third-world slum. By manufacturing cheap, easily serviced water filters, however, there is at least a better chance of an infant somewhere surviving his first few years.
        On the other hand, the only way you'll get 1500 gallons from a water filter this size is by starting with fairly clean water to begin with. The more stuff is in the water to get trapped by the filter, the faster the filter gets clogged up and becomes useless.
  • norman619, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3The answer to the water problem is pretty simple. It also happens to be VERY dangerous. We can make water. The problem is the joining of 2 H atoms with 1 O2 atoms is HIGHLY energetic. The explosion of the Hindenburg actually crated water and illustrates how dangerous it is. There are a few groups right now working on finding safer ways of making water which is the ideal way to deal with this.
    • republicker, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1An window unit a/c makes drinkable water, whats you point?
      • norman619, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1No that is not creating water. That is collecting existing water vapor in the air as condensation. You are aware of the fact that we are surrounded by water right? A portion of the air we breath is water vapor.

        The actual making of water involves the bonding of 2 hydrogen atoms with one Oxygen atom. This process releases literally an explosive amount of energy.
      • republicker, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Why would we create water when its all over the planet? Dozens of "water from air" home units are readily available.
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Yeah, we should attach some kind of water-vapor recapture device to the Space Shuttle - it must make a crapload of water on every launch!

      [rolls eyes]
      • norman619, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1You obviously never took a science/chem class in your life. I will forgive your ignorance.
      • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Tell me again about "O2 atoms", Mr. Wizard.
    • h4ppydotcom, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4Hang on a minute...

      ...are you seriously suggesting that the way to solve a problem which, at it's root, concerns one of the most abundant resources on the surface of this planet (water) is to find a way to tame the reaction between hydrogen gas and oxygen?

      Where are you going to get all the H2 to make the drinking water?

      And if you say "from water" I'll slap you.
  • talonjasra, on 07/15/2008, -0/+6Well, water wouldn't be an issue if we all wore Stillsuits
    • h4ppydotcom, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1You really *want* to drink your own sweat?

      But +1 for the reference
  • forcedfx, on 07/15/2008, -0/+10Horrible use of the comma.
  • MorphicMusic, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Water, it's whats for dinner.
  • zbeast, on 07/15/2008, -2/+10Big difference between water and oil.
    Oil by it's nature is in limited supply it was made by the planet may years ago.
    Water is everywhere it may not be drinkable but it can be made drinkable.
    Oil is consumed, when we burn it going and its not coming back.
    When water is used, it's just used, it gets recycled via evaporation and transpiration.
    It can always be converted from undrinkable to a drinkable state.
    We don't have to import water via boat from other nations,
    We don't have to miles out to sea for water.
    There will never be an opec of water.
    • Haoie, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Well actually, there were plans to tow iceburgs to parched areas. That's a form of importing.
  • chrissku, on 07/15/2008, -6/+2I have a friend who works for the EPA who told me that water shortages will trump the oil crisis. Humans CAN survive without oil, water not so much.
    • doctechnical, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4Well, if he works for the government, he must be right.
  • JasonCox, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Build your village by the river, insert some numbers, add some periods, put 'Profit!!!' at the end. You win.
  • fegul, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The people that will tend to be the hardest hit by climate change trends will often be the people that contributed the least to it and/or the people that are the least prepared to handle it.

    Like Sub-Saharan Africa.
    • JointVenture, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Dude, Africans are totally responsible for their living conditions. Look what Mugabe did to a once fertile and progressing nation.
  • Paranoidmarvin, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Living in the North of Scotland, I didn't think water would be a problem.

    Until the other day I saw a huge reservoir was half empty - patches of rock were exposed that hadn't been seen since the dam was built over 50 years ago.
    I wish I had pictures of it, it truly was staggering.
  • Vital8, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media/graphics/Zoom/4 ...

    and what do you call this?
  • calipan, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2If its forgotten, then maybe its not so much a crisis. At least not yet. Peoples have a finite number of Panic slots available to them. Its about 3. Currently, Oil, Economy, and War occupy these top slots. Once one is freed up then we can start panicking about Water.
  • zeitgueist, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9The forgotten crisis? My ass, this type of article is on here once a week.
  • toyrifle1, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5so, where does all that water go then?
    • tufftugg, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3 Please, diggers will not be dragged into a discussion on a scientific level, you already got dugg down, I'll digg you up one.
  • hydroplane, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Quick! Buy up water futures!
  • tufftugg, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1 I guess it's time for Canada to start building the wall to keep the American's out! I think you're only allowed to screw up one country per tour.
  • TubbyMcGee, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3water is not going anywhere. it is water. the same amount of water that has been on this planet is still on this planet in one form or another. it's a biosphere. our collection methods and sources may need to change but the water is still here. But if you feel better about it. be scared. also, a piece of the sky fell in a remote part of the world on Thursday...
  • LogicBomB, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1As long as I turn on the tap and clean water comes out, I will continue to forget this crisis and hope the problem lands on our children's shoulders.

    ... Why are you looking at me like that? It's a good enough reason for the government...
  • balser6, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1My kids complain about living in Cleveland, Ohio (as do a lot of people), but I keep telling them to look north. We live on something like 1/5th the world's fresh water supply. This could be a great economic advantage for the old rust-belt cities of Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, et al. Not to divert it - the Great Lakes Compact is designed to prevent that - but to draw people and industry back to the area.
  • dgaspard, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2This is complete ***** to stir up controversy to put water on the market to be publicly traded like they did with oil.... We all see how that worked out.
  • republicker, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1A well planned out hole in the earth w/ fresh vegetation inside and a piece of plastic to cover it can produce all the water a human needs to survive. I don't think there is a shovel or plastic shortage is there?
    • hlehmann, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Any place on earth that has enough green vegetation to get enough water from by this method for an indefinite period of time already has water, otherwise the green vegetation wouldn't be there. This is hardly a way to solve any regional water shortages.
    • republicker, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Your an idiot. Look up "desert survival" and get back with me.
  • pirategaspard, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2And the Solution to the potable water problem is: Alcohol

    "Survival of the Sudsiest"
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
  • 4321234, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2In other news, this morning President McCain again demanded the municipal government of Niagra Falls, Ontario abandon their WMD programs. In a strongly worded ..........
  • nycmac247, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Endgame has fairly good evidence from World Bank, etc. showing that they knew this was coming and let it happen to consolidate power...

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053 ...
  • JointVenture, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1DIGG has become the 21st centuries CASANDRA.
  • Thrilltone, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Pipe seawater to the desert and distill it all with massive collections of Thermal Solar Power systems. Fill our energy needs and create fresh water at the same time. Maybe it will even help slow down the rising seawater levels?
    • hlehmann, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1"Maybe it will even help slow down the rising seawater levels?"

      You're joking, right? You would have to get rid of a few thousand cubic *miles* of seawater to lower the oceans by even an inch. Even then, all this distilled water would soak into the water table or evaporate, which of course means that it all eventually winds up right back in the ocean.
      • Thrilltone, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I know but at least it's not a resource we have to worry about depleting.
  • Tantrum, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It's not forgotten, there's just too many other ones on the front pages right now ...
  • biogears, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2This is starting to smell like the next media 'crises', after global warming peters out.
    Just like the ozone hole, Hurricane increases, homeless, heterosexual aids, avian flu, and on and on.....

  • roddack, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Last I checked the planet was still ~75% covered in water
  • trollick, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1If it is forgotten it is not affecting too many people, so by definition, it is not crisis.
  • BDOUG, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I'm sure there is a drinkable water supply problem that will only get worse with humanity's rampant overbreeding... but that 1 liter per calorie factoid seems extremely dubious to me.
  • pjpark, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4Buried as inaccurate. The cause of the food crisis is lack of freedom and lack of capitalism. Zimbabwe did not go from the breadbasket of Africa to starvation because of "global warming". If we continue to blame everything on superstitions like climate change, then our problems will only get worse.
    • Barackalypse, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Zimbabwe never was the breadbasket of Africa, Rhodesia was. Zimbabwe was formed when Ian Smith gave Rhodesia over to the locals and all the mean evil white people left or were chased off. People in Rhodesia used to enjoy one of the best standards of living in all of Africa, and 30 years later they probably have one of the worst, and for Africa that's saying a lot.
    • mieprowan, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1The food crisis has a number of causes, and one of them, a big one, is that there are a lot of people out there who are eating two meals a day, who used to eat only one. China, India. Rising petroleum prices is another part of it. And little things like ten years of drought in Australia, where for some strange reason they grow a great deal of rice.
  • unpolloloco, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2So, people in areas with a ton of water need to use more of it, so that it will enter the water cycle faster there, and rain more in the areas that don't have as much. Problem solved.
  • seifip, on 07/15/2008, -1/+0Nobody awaits it but water will surely become a much bigger problem and a much more expensive resource than oil in the following decade...
  • chaski6630, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1While scientist observe record-breaking drought conditions in the American West and Southwest, Coke and its competitors continue to bottle water from Atlanta's water system, then sell it back to the people for a profit. In India, Coke and Pepsi have drained community wells, leaving thousands of residents without water, yet the bottlers sell its pricey products to more affluent costumers who can afford to pay. In China and Pakistan millions of people without access to water are forced to drink from polluted water supplies. In these countries, water corporations have strong political ties with regulators that oversee municipal water and bottled water markets, such that regulators give the corporations a license to control community water supplies. The more water becomes a high priced commodity, the more public water sources and universal access to water becomes threatened. Water is a public trust; when it is treated as a commodity our democracy, health and environment suffers.

    For more information: http://www.thinkoutsidethebottle.org
  • rmeddy, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Why are people trying to promote this Non-Problem? Distraction perhaps?
  • Gazzali, on 07/16/2008, -1/+03/4 of the world is sea...lets make water out of it
  • executorzz, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Let's sell $4 a gallon water to the middle east.
  • borez, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Retard
  • greenfyre, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Let's see.

    California is burning, OK is in severe drought as is most of Texas, the drought in the SE last year had some towns down to 2 hrs/day of water and it's still going http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html the Ogallala aquifer that supports most of the agriculture in the mid-west is dropping like a stone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer...

    ...and still half the people here think we have the technology to deal with the problem of water.

    WTF do they get their news??? FOX???
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.