Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Earth
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Some 2.5 billion gallons of water are used to frack oil or gas wells in the U.S. Every day. Nearly all of that water is lost, either in the fracking or by disposing it down a borehole. And industry's water consumption is dwarfed by agriculture, responsible for more than 80 percent of this country's enormous water use.
With climate change beginning to affect water supplies, what can be done?
A panel at the recent Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy summit attempted to answer that question. In agriculture, it will take both better breeding—for more water efficient crops—and smarter irrigation. Our power plants could send less steam into the sky with hybrid air-and-water cooling systems. And local, state and federal governments could begin to reform an often hidebound water rights system. Not to mention that we'd all better get comfortable with the idea of reusing water over and over again.
On the other hand, as a new $1 billion facility rising on the California coast may prove, maybe we just need to increase the water supply. The Poseidon desalination plant aims to turn seawater into hundreds of thousands of gallons of freshwater annually. The only problem is: it's expensive and it requires a lot of energy. And producing energy requires water, which requires energy to clean, which, well, lather, rinse, repeat.
—David Biello
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
See what we're tweeting about
12 Comments
Add CommentWater volume here on planet Earth is, for all practical purposes, a constant. While water is redistributed based on usage the total volume of water is pretty much a constant. That which goes up due to evaporation returns to earth as rain. That which is used in our homes for laundry and other necessities of life may not immediately be reusable but ultimately returns as rain or well water and industrial usage is basically the same. The problem with water is a logistics issue. Man wants to use water where where water doesn't naturally occur - farming the deserts as an example or providing water to cities like Los Angeles. The Henny Penny syndrome, pertaining to water, is a planned part of a giant conspiracy to sell water at an enormous profit. Note that a very large portion of American water is now owned by foreign interests. Not only do they own nearly all bottled water companies, they also own many of the water utility companies around our nation. As US cities near bankruptcy they start selling off assets to help pay for their foolishness - municipal water utilities are a good example. I have to laugh when we're told that 80% of our water usage is agricultural. While that statistic may be true, that agricultural usage is the very best example of how every drop of water used in that process returns to earth one way or another. Water is constantly being recycled. If some of the energy used to scare us about water's scarcity were funneled into exploring less costly methods of desalination and purification we would all be far better off and the future of our world would be ensured.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thislittleredtop: the minimum energy required to desalinate water is limited by the laws of thermodynamics: it's a matter of entropy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere has been incessant research over, probably 100 years, to find ways of doing it which require less energy, and it's still being researched right now. You can take it though, that any future improvements are unlikely to be dramatic.
Your post is an example of the cargo-cultism which bedevils any rational and realistic discussion on energy themes.
littleredtop might be right, but in areas like the desert where agricultural water comes from groundwater, it is being used far faster than the cycle can replenish. Even along the Colorado river lake Mead is so low that many feel the turbines which make energy for many cities won't be able to do so as their intakes will be above the water line. The water may come back to earth, but it may not be where we want it to be.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA good first step would be to stop fracking! Aside from removing the injection water from circulation, it can potentially contaminate additional groundwater...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisStupid question: Wouldn't it be energy efficient to place a coal or natural gas fired power plant by an ocean, use the ocean water to provide steam, then cool the steam back to water using ocean water. Thus you create electricity and distilled water at the same time. This would seam like an obvious pairing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiscookchh : Not a stupid question! : there are plants that do this:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujairah_power_and_desalination_plant
In practice, I think large scale implementation is a question of economics, depending on price of energy, price of water and engineering factors.
Up till now the balance of advantage has in many places just not been large enough.
It makes even more sense with nuclear power, which, of course, means virtually CO2-free energy and water:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf71.html
A significant factor not mentioned is that the global population has nearly tripled, from 2.5 billion in 1950 to >7 billion today. Moreover, it's expected to increase to 9 billion in 30 years, an increase of 2 billion - an increase exceeding the total population of the Earth at any time in history prior to 1927.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAside from industrialization and agricultural growth, is there any remaining question that global water resources are becoming increasingly scarce?
jtdwyer is right - we need to stop our population increasing, and indeed we need to start reducing thr number of children we have to at most two per mother so that we can have a decent life and let other species have some space on what is after all their planet as much as ours.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut we also need to change our water-using habits - and in particular our food-eating habits. Eating lots of meat uses up lots and lots of land and water. We need to eat mostly plants, and plants grown with rain, not irrigation water brought in with huge amounts of energy and depriving somewhere else of its water.
Tony Allan is a water engineer, and he's worked on water engineering projects all around the world, but he realized that wherever people have irrigated sooner or later they've run out of water, and that while water engineers may have a small role it's farmers who can solve the water crisis - and all the rest of us who eat what they produce need to change what we do. His book 'Virtual Water: Tackling the Threat to Our Planet's Most Precious Resource' is essential reading for anybody who wants to understand this.
http://www.ibtauris.com/Books/Earth%20sciences%20geography%20environment%20planning/The%20environment/Management%20of%20land%20%20natural%20resources/Drought%20%20water%20supply/Virtual%20Water%20Tackling%20the%20Threat%20to%20Our%20Planets%20Most%20Precious%20Resource.aspx
Good! Maybe sinking the water will help compensate for all the aquifer water we draw to grow food for fuel.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince "Large-scale groundwater extraction for irrigation, drinking water or industry results in an annual rise in sea levels of approximately 0.8 mm, accounting for about one-quarter of total annual sea-level rise (3.1 mm). According to hydrologists from Utrecht University and the research institute Deltares, the rise in sea levels can be attributed to the fact that most of the groundwater extracted ultimately winds up in the sea." http://www.uu.nl/EN/Current/Pages/Wereldwijdonttrekkenvangrondwaterleidttotzeespiegelstijging.aspx
If you're referring to fracking waste water pumped into the ground, as I understand it's contaminated with undisclosed 'proprietary' chemicals. Not good!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI find this very interesting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHave the water needs of present/future nuclear power plants and the consequences been dialed into this estimate somewhere?
Has there been a study that asks if the US may in the mid-term face a serious water crisis?
What budgets/funds are/should be set aside for water recycling and desalination?
I'd be interested in US sources/research/links that may not be mainstream or in the making.
The main cause of water shortage is agriculture not industries not household use. You need more mini dams and better irrigation system. Steam power plants consume little water because they recirculate the water through condensers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWind and solar PV don't need water to produce power. Use wind turbines to power desalination plants.