WaterWired

No More Hydro-Secrets? Implications for Transboundary Water Resources Conflict Management

My recent trip to the University of Oklahoma was enlightening on a number of levels. Some things I  expected: meeting bright students and engaged faculty, learning more about social entrepreneurship and the ethics of development from Laura Brunson, an incredibly bright PhD student whom I have known for several years.  She will surely make her mark on the water world in a big way.

Perhaps the most serendipitous aspect of this visit was my last appointment on Saturday morning with Dr. Yang Hong, another U of AZ hydrology PhD ( Soroosh Sorooshian’s student) and his doctoral student, Humberto Vergara. Hong is an Associate Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science (CEES) and is working with NASA developing rainfall-runoff models and other tools and assessing stream discharge using remotely-sensed (satellite) data.

An aside: my experience with and knowledge of rainfall-runoff modeling is mired somewhere in the 1990s with the likes of TOPMODEL That model is still around, no doubt greatly improved and adapted as a GIS model and capable of using the kind of data Hong had. And then there were the linear and nonlinear reservoir models I dabbled with in the late 1970s and early 1980s (see the wonderful Linear Theory of Hydrologic Systems, by James C.I. Dooge, U.S. Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 1468, 1973). But now I really digress.

What Hong and Vergara showed me was quite provocative. I’m not talking so much about the scientific aspects, but the management and political implications. What if you could know your neighbor’s – friend or foe – hydrology: stream discharges, rainfall-runoff characteristics, water balances, groundwater depletion and storage, etc.  And what if your neighbor knew your same information? Transboundarywater management and negotiations might be a little different than they are now. Might be hard to hide data or present faulty information.

We have already seen how GRACE data provided information on the groundwater depletion in India and the response from some Indian officials (read more about GRACE here).

All the above reminded me  of a situation a decade or so ago when I was involved with three riparians on a surface water project. I naively suggested that we ought to consider groundwater as well. Boy, did the walls go up, especially from one riparian who had plenty of good-quality groundwater and did not want to share data. End of discussion.

We still have a ways to go but I suspect we will get there sooner than we think. Dr. Hong told me that his rainfall-runoff model predictions have an unacceptable level of uncertainty in watersheds with areas under 10,000 square kilometers (about 3900 square miles). And then there is the issue of ground-truthing remotely-sensed data. I can hear someone denigrating remotely-sensed data by saying, "Those aren't real data."

But in the near future, resolving and managing transboundary and other water conflicts might have a different dimension, thanks to our eyes in the sky.

Next stop: water quality.

“Can’t wait” – Bart Scott, NY Jets linebacker, when asked how he felt about playing the Pittsburgh Steelers for the AFC championship

"When it comes to the future, there are three kinds of people: those who let it happen, those who make it happen, and those who wonder what happened." -John M. Richardson, Jr.

Video: 'The Forgotten Cycle' and Opining on Groundwater Aquifers, Political Will, Underground Aquifers, and Past History

I got this video by Sahana Singh from Peter Gleick's Facebook page. It's a cute little clip.

I would argue that we do manage the water cycle - just not very well.

But the video is spot-on about the lack of political will. There is no reason why 1.1B people do not have access to safe drinking water and 2.4B lack access to even basic sanitary facilities.

 

Curmudgeon alert: Let's please lose the terms 'underground aquifer' (used in this video) and its ugly friend 'groundwater aquifer'. These terms are bad enough when used in the popular media, but they occasionally appear in the scientific literature as well.

Let's dispense wth past history and previous experience and start anew.

“Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment.” -- Unknown

GWI: When I Hear the Word 'Stakeholder' I Reach for My Gun

This article from Global Water Intelligence intrigued me so I thought I would pass it on.

After Tucson, you would think a different title would have been in order. Duhhhh...

The water – food – energy nexus has emerged as one of the major themes of the World Economic Forum in Davos this week. With food and energy prices both rebounding towards 2007 levels, it is easy to understand why: the world can’t produce more food and more energy without more water.

It is one thing for an event like Davos to highlight such issues. It is a different matter to produce meaningful solutions. The event organisers have published a video summarising the issue and making some suggestions about what we need to do about it. Apparently the first thing we need is “integrated multi-stakeholder resource planning for the long term”. This is NGO-speak for “we need to book our places at next year’s WEF right now”.

The second suggestion is “regionally focused infrastructure development”, which is a bit platitudinous, but at least it is not a crime against the English language. Similarly, the fourth and final suggestion, “technological and financial innovation”, is one of those things which really should not require a summit of world leaders in Switzerland to pledge their support to before anyone can agree that it is a good thing.

That leaves the third point, “market-led natural resource pricing”. Readers of this column will know that this is something I feel strongly about, and it is good to see that the WEF has included it at the top of its Global Risks Agenda. It would be nice if they spelled out in plain English what they mean: people must be prepared to pay more for water, energy and food. It is a tough message that has to come from the top. My concern is how this sits with the soft talk about stakeholders.

In my experience, electricity companies don’t consult all the stakeholders before they put up the price of electricity. Nor do supermarkets worry for a minute about their stakeholders before they put up the price of food. But put up the price of water, and the stakeholders must have their say.

It is for this reason that in the battle among the three basic necessities of life – food, water and energy – you know which one is going to be at a financial disadvantage. 

 

This post requires a curmudgeonly quote:

“There are probably more annoying things than being hectored about African development by a wealthy Irish rock star in a cowboy hat, but I can’t think of one at the moment.” – Paul Theroux, referring to Paul Hewson (aka Bono), The Honolulu Advertiser, 8 January 2006

Or an inane one:

"To me, one of the most exciting things i: the world is being poor." --
Thomas Monaghan, founder of Domino's Pizza, whose personal worth wass
estimated to be $500 million at the time he said thia (c. 1993)

Long Day In Oklahoma - From Central America to the South Caucasus: Water Resources in Developing Countries

Excellent day at the University of Oklahoma's WaTER Center, seeing old friends and meeting new ones. Home tomorrow.

Here is a copy of my presentation, From Central America to the South Caucasus: Water Resources in Developing Countries:

Download Campana_OU_28_Jan_2011_Long

"A fool and his money are soon elected." -- Will Rogers 

Zetland's Webinar on Water Management, And It's ...Free?

Just pulled this off David Zetland's excellent Aguanomics blog.

Date and time: 28th January 2011 -- 4:00 p.m. (GMT) / 11:00 a.m. (EST)

Presenter: David Zetland - economist who blogs at aguanomics and the author of the book, "The End of Abundance: A guide to the new economics of water scarcity."

The success (or failure) in provision of public water supplies to municipal and industrial customers is NOT determined by technology or money, but by good (or bad) management, as overseen by politicians and regulators.

In this webinar, David Zetland will give a brief overview of these facts, before discussing the reasons for success and failure in two or three locations worldwide.

Listeners will be encouraged to offer their own observations and diagnoses and cases for success and failure...

Cost: Free!

Register for the webinar here.

Free? Isn't he always claiming that we should price water according to its real worth? What about lectures by economists?

All kidding aside, I'd watch this if I could.

"Did you ever think that making a speech on economics is a lot like pissing down your leg? It seems hot to you, but it never does to anyone else."  -- Lyndon B. Johnson