U.N. Chief Warns Of Water Shortages

Secretary-General Says Scarcity Of Water Contributes To Armed Conflicts, Poverty

(CBS/AP)  U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the world on Thursday to put the looming crisis over water shortages at the top of the global agenda this year and take action to prevent conflicts over scarce supplies.

He reminded business and political leaders at the World Economic Forum that the conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan was touched off by drought - and he said shortages of water contribute to poverty and social hardship in Somalia, Chad, Israel, the Palestinian territories, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Haiti, Colombia and Kazakhstan.

"Too often, where we need water we find guns instead," Ban said. "Population growth will make the problem worse. So will climate change. As the global economy grows, so will its thirst. Many more conflicts lie just over the horizon."

He said a recent report identified 46 countries with 2.7 billion people where climate change and water-related crises create "a high risk of violent conflict" and a further 56 countries, with 1.2 billion people "are at high risk of violent conflict." The report was by International Alert, an independent peace-building organization based in London.

Ban noted that it was a drought that precipitated the violence in Darfur, Sudan. "Fighting broke out between farmers and herders after the rains failed and water became scarce," he said of the conflict, which has so far claimed about 200,000 lives and displaced several million people. "But almost forgotten is the event that touched it off - drought, a shortage of life’s vital resource."

Ban told the VIP audience that he spent 2007 "banging my drum on climate change," an issue the Forum also had as one of its main themes last year. He welcomed the focus on water this year saying the session should be named: "Water is running out."

"We need to adapt to this reality, just as we do to climate change," he said. "There is still enough water for all of us - but only so long as we can keep it clean, use it more wisely, and share it fairly."

Ban said he will invite world leaders to "a critical high-level meeting" in September to focus on meeting U.N. development goals - including cutting by half the number of people without access to safe drinking water by 2015 - particularly in Africa.

The links between climate change and supplies of clean water were underscored by Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense, who suggested that the repercussions of rising temperatures - water shortages and droughts - should spur increased efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions. "Unless we put caps on the global warming pollution we’re throwing up into atmosphere, we’re walking into a hell for water shortages," he said.

Ban urged top business executives to join a U.N. project to help poor people gain access to clean water - and he praised Coca-Cola, Dow Chemical and Nestle for their programs and their efforts to be part of the water solution.

Ban's call for global action on water got strong support from several top business executives.

The map at left shows what percentage of country populations has access to both safe drinking water and sanitation. The darkest green signifies countries where less than 50% of people have access to clean water. Source: UNICEF/WHO

"Water is today's issue," said Andrew Liveris, chairman and CEO of Dow Chemical Co., the world's second largest chemical company. "It is the oil of this century, not a question."

"The technology is there [to improve supplies]. We need the innovation to get the business model and the delivery systems to the table, and we're very committed to doing that," he said.

Liveris said there is a lot of water on the planet and "all of us" should be trying to meet the challenge of affordable desalination of sea water and accessing ground water above and below bedrock.

E. Neville Isdell, chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Co., said "this is an issue which ranks next to climate change. ... However, water has got lost as part of the climate change debate."

"The solutions are there," he said, but "the awareness globally and the commitment globally is not there yet."

Isdell urged the world to "raise the issue of water to the level that we have managed to raise the issue of climate change."

He also issued "a clarion cry for engagement," especially with the agricultural sector which uses 70 percent of water resources, compared with 23 percent by industry and 7 percent by "humanity in general."

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, chairman and CEO of Nestle SA, the world's biggest food and drink company, said "time is still on our side but time is running out, just like water is running out."

He said the demand for biofuels is misguided because 9,000 liters of water are needed to produce one liter of biodiesel.

"This can only work because water has no price," Brabeck said. "If we are going to use 1,950 cubic kilometers of water for biofuels when at the same time our ... water reservoirs are already depleted now, you can see that this strategy that we have today - and which is backed by all major governments - is not the right strategy."

"If you would allow market forces to define how to define the value of the water, we could make a big step forward," Brabeck said.

Krupp agreed that ethanol was not only using massive amounts of water but was diverting food crops for fuel, leading to higher food prices.

"We need a market price ... for industrial users and massive (water) consumers," he said. "That will get tremendous efficiency and be a key to solving this problem."

There also has to be a cap on the amount of water withdrawn from rivers and a solution to the global warming problem "because climate is going to be a great accelerator of water shortages," Krupp said.

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

1) You still have not cited any study that quantifies the correltation between CO2 and temperature.

2) Per your own statement sometimes CO2 goes yup before temp and sometines after. If this is true then by simple logic neither controls the other.

3) Just because I do not believe in the PROOF of man made global warming does not believe the extreme need for alternative energy and preserving the earth''s resources for genetations to come.

4) Most of the scientist at the IPCC conference were not climatolighst either. Neither is Al Gore.

[rf35]

"including cutting by half the number of people without access to safe drinking water by 2015 - particularly in Africa."

Actually, cutting by half the number of people -period- would be a wise move for all. Through reproductive responsibility (not having numerous children) this goal is achievable in less than a century. The U.N. needs to focus on the root problem and not the symptoms. Water shortage is a symptom. MMGW, if it turns out to be true, is also a symptom. Elevated CO2 and other GHG''s are symptoms. When you think about it, the U.N. itself is a symptom. The root cause of all these issues is overpopulation.

I cannot comprehend the thought process of anyone who claims humans cannot/have not effected nature. You need look no farther than South America to see the effect man has on the planet. BTW, that effect is another symptom. It''s claims like that that cause me to look with suspicion on the anti-MMGW camp.

pboskovich: You might consider taking some more recent classes. I''m an undergrad - major is anthropology/archaeology but I have recently taken several classes on environmental science, and am currently taking environmental issues. And in the interests of time - I''m 54 and have been discussing and studying this issue for many many years. There is no question in my mind that the current global warming is largely anthropogenic.

the reason I asked if you were a climatologist is that I have seen many many many arguments against the reality of global warming - all of which seem to center on a half-dozen points - one of which is the lead/lag of CO2. In fact, when I said that it does both - you again asked for a study proving a point that 1. we all know doesn''t exist and 2. some know doesn''t matter. I''m not going to waste my time arguing what is quite possibly the most complicated scientific issue of the modern age. I''m not a climatologist, and neither are you. Our opinions are not well-informed, and I have other things to do that are more pressing, as I''m sure do you as well. I''m just going to say that I prefer to do whatever I can to ensure the well-being of future generations, whether it inconveniences me or not.

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

No, I am not a climatologist. I took elective courses in earth sciences and meteorology 20 years ago in college but that is about it. I do, however, read a lot about the subject online. There is a lot of info out there available to the public. The bottom line is that no one has all the answers and anyone who says that they know exactly what is going on is a liar or misguided.

Are you a meteorologist?

If you want a broader understanding about the other side of global warming do a search for a British documentary called the "Great Global Warming Hoax". The movie is about an hour. While this is by no means a complete view of the other side of the issue, you owe it to yourself to take a look at it if you really do care about the issue. Even if you totally disagree with everything you will understand why many of us believe what we do. We are not crazy, we are just looking for hard evidence to support the claims made by many. I have been looking for over two years to find published evidence of man made global warming and I can not find it. Let me know when you do. I would love to read it.

There is also a study by a Dutch scientist that quantifies the relationship between changes in the sun%u2019s magnetic field (sun spots), cosmic rays (from stellar supernova many light years away) and the formation of water droplets. I cannot remember his name but I will let you know when I track it down. The implications of this effect on climate are huge.

[stddating]

Can you tell me what study demonstrates the connection between a raise in CO2 anbd global warming? You cannot because there is none.


#########################
We both almost gave up hope due to herpes/hpv, but just posted our

success story to pozgroup.com, where we met each other.Stop feeling

dejected,don''t let your hopes fade away.Love is bigger than the H

virus!

[stddating]

Can you tell me what study demonstrates the connection between a raise in CO2 anbd global warming? You cannot because there is none.


#########################
We both almost gave up hope due to herpes/hpv, but just posted our

success story to pozgroup.com, where we met each other.Stop feeling

dejected,don''t let your hopes fade away.Love is bigger than the H

virus!

[chipper777]

I know that global warming is an issue but the problems with putting in dams or taking out dams is really a bigger problem. We put in big dams and people say that the turbines are killing all small smult. Then they say if you take out the dams we will have terrible problems with drought. Ever wonder why we as a nation sell millions of pounds of salmon eggs to japan to resell to us for fish bait? Ever wonder why we don''t have more baby salmon? The eggs are used to catch more fish. And if we let out all of the water from the dams, where will the rich people get water for their swimming pools while others are lacking water to live? I maintain that the real reason the world is getting hotter is the fact that millions of people are now using electic tooth brushes. Point is a hundred years ago few people brushed their teeth. It takes energy to look and smell pretty and smile pretty. So conserve water and electricity by taking a bath once a month, or force swimming pool or hot tub owners to share their water so you can get cleaned up, and never use your electric tooth brushes.

pboskovich: Are you a climatologist?

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

Thank you for your intellegent response.

You are right that CO2 levels are higher that they have been in nearly half a million years. However, the studies that I have read regarding the ice core samples show that after every major glaciation period, CO2 always follows a raise in temp. Do you know of studies that show otherwise?

Also, changes in temp and CO2 are observational and do not explain causd and affect. Do you know of any studies that quantify a positive correlation between CO2 and temperature? How do you explain that from 1940 to 1970 when CO2 output started to go through the roof, temperature was goiong down? The CO2 theory is totally incosistent.

pboskovich: core samples show that there is a tight correlation between rise in CO2 and temperature. The fact is - CO2 rises both before AND after temperature increases. The current level is unprecedented in the last 420k years, and it''s going to get much higher. And when massive amounts of methane is released from the thawing tundra, the temperature is going to sky rocket.

[pboskovich]

Is there anyone out there capable of intelegent debate? I get a lot of insults but no seems to have the ability to give a counter point to anything.

Once again...Ice core samples show again and again that temperature goes up first and then 200-1000 years later CO2 goes up. This seems to show that temperature controls CO2 output not the other way around.

Can anyone give one scientific study that seems to show otherwise?

[occamsrazor1]

Many of the same "experts/commentators" jumping on the global warming bandwagon, were saying in the 1970''s a new Ice Age was upon us. Is their purpose to curry favor with the junk science of the month club? Or is it the desire for simple "connect the dot" answers to everything because they are overwhelmed by the complexity of such issues and cannot provide sound bites to back up the media/political bully pit? It just may be human arrogance believing humans are the masters of Earth and the belief humans can control/change natural events by giving them an identified "cause/effect" when one isn''t available based on the data/research.

[pboskovich]

erasmus6

Believe it or not it is possible to care about protecting the environment and not believe the global warming myth.

[pboskovich]

rushlimpdrug

Actually, I look over a lot of the pier reviews for many of the studies. Let''s take the computer model currently being used by the IPCC. When data from 1970 to the present is used it correlates very nicely with the model. However, when data from 1900 to the present is used it shows that the temperature should be about 6 degrees higher than it is now. I call that a flaw. If a computer model is accurate it needs to be accurate over any time period. This fact was actually pointed out by many scientists at the last IPCC summit and it was ignored by the panel''s published statement. If the only place you get your info is the NY Times and CBS you would never know this. Can you say "Media Bias"?

Let''s take the ice records being used. In every instance when there is an increase in CO2 temperature goes up. What your narrow mind and the rest of the global warming sheep seem to ignore is the fact that EVERY time temp goes up first and then CO2 goes up. This would seem to show that temp controls CO2 not the other way around. I would call this another flaw in the interpretation of the data. Do you understand the difference between opinion and fact?

To answer you other question... I do not wear any underwear.

Stop being a mindless sheep and look for answers yourself. If you open your mind to other posibilities you might actually learn something.

[bcweitzel]

I suggest that you read up on some of the facts that do not support the "Global Warming" claim before you all go and claim that it is SCIENTIFIC FACT. Please keep in mind that, as with any scientific experiment, until you can PROVE your argument it is still just A THEORY!

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

"Are you a total reetard? You actually looked at the research and it was flawed?"

I am not pretentious enough to expect you to understand the website listed above, especially since you spell "retarded" wrong (something ironic about that).

"Your post is actually laughable."

Yes, rushlimpdrug, your post is laughable. It has no social redeeming value other than comic relief.

"You are full of c-r-a-p. If you had really researched it you would have found the information. I don''t believe that you were ever on board."

If you can''t s-p-e-l-l it without hyphenating, then don''t.

BTW, I did read up on it (not sure how far pboskovich did, I would assume at least some), and I have found the information. The pro-warming propaganda DOES NOT "PROVE" ANYTHING! If warming is true, they have not PROVEN that it exists or the true cause of it through the standard SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

As soon as you can debunk everything at http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ with your "enlightened and superior knowledge", I will eat humble pie. Until then, by God don''t go around claiming it is a universally accepted FACT and those that think it is junk science are "reetarded".

[rushlimpdrug]

pboskovich

Are you a total reetard?
You actually looked at the research and it was flawed?
Do you wear your underwear backwards/inside out?
Your post is actually laughable.
bye

[tngreen]

There are two interrelated issues not explained in this article. Western corporations wish to dam up waterways in underdeveloped regions in order to create electricity to power factories, under the guise of modernizing these areas'' water supply systems. The locals then have to buy water that used to run freely. Next is the fact that electric production depletes more water than does straight-up water usage.

These free marketers are evil people who would starve out Third Worlders to profit large corporations.

[runningralph]

They''re building a big wave pool in the desert in Arizona. Forget agriculture, think real estate.

[clestes-2009]

This reminds me of the story where Nero fiddles away while Rome burns.

The dumbf*ck leaders of UN Security council are wasting time farting around with Iran over its non existent weapons program among other things, and not spending time on issues that are far far far more important .

And just like climate change, they will wait until some disaster, Darfur is not close enough to home, before they wake up and say "We got to do something now".

Loss of water supplies is going to cause much more chaos and loss of life than Iran.

There are bunch of useless idiots.

pboskovich:
"Trends
There is a close correlation between Antarctic temperature and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (Barnola et al. 1987). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows that the main trends of CO2 are similar for each glacial cycle. Major transitions from the lowest to the highest values are associated with glacial-interglacial transitions. During these transitions, the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 rises from 180 to 280-300 ppmv (Petit et al. 1999). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows the present-day levels of CO2 are unprecedented during the past 420 kyr. "

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm