It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Soon to be Worldwide Water Shortage??

page: 9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 1 2009 @ 06:52 PM
Years later, since following this topic, I've come to the realization, that whether you call is global warming, global cooling, desertification, pollution or whatever other word you want to use to describe it, the potable water resources of the human population are shrinking and changing. I still believe that in the near future we will be discussing a worldwide water shortage not as a myth or possibility but as a factual reality.

In keeping with the intent of the thread, I offer:

Plan today to avoid water crisis tomorrow

Colorado needs more water. As things stand right now, the state will not have enough water for our population in the near future.

We're not talking about a water shortage 100 years from now. This is a serious and immediate problem. Many Colorado communities face water shortages as early as 2010, and the Front Range as a whole is predicted to come up short of water by 2030.

We have to act - and we have to act now with improved water conservation and new water projects.

Perhaps we will overcome this potential problematic issue in the future, but until then...

Drought parches much of the U.S., may get worse

Unsustainable Pattern of Water Use??

Water and energy limiting factors

Water availability will be an equal or greater challenge, Peterson said. “Currently, significant areas across the world have no guarantees of water quality. And the cost of bringing water to people is significant.”

Peterson said water use patterns across the globe are becoming unsustainable. “Future water shortages will challenge human health and the environment.” He said water needs must be at the core of government strategies in the future.

“In some areas water supplies are already limited by lack of economic development.”

and to the above poster... welcome aboard.

posted on Jan, 1 2009 @ 07:13 PM
reply to post by AlexofSkye

The amount of USABLE water changes.

I don't know about you, but I don't care to start drinking filtered sewage water. Or contaminated by farm runoff. Or that a chemical plant dumped into. Or that ran through a coal mine. Or is contaminated with lead and mercury. or has been trickling through a landfill in recent years. How about that has been used to cool those turbines? That was recycled from a car wash.
Or the toxic cleaner, fabric softner, grey water that comes from billions of households.

posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 03:14 PM

1.8 million children died last year of unclean water.


your tea tasted to sweet so you poured it down the drain


see the difference?

posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:32 PM
California sees billions in losses from drought

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday declared a state emergency due to drought, requested broad conservation measures and said agricultural revenue losses in the coming season could top $2 billion.

Total economic losses in 2009 could be nearly $3 billion, the governor said, and he requested urban users to cut water consumption by 20 percent and state agencies to implement a water reduction plan.

"Even with the recent rainfall, California faces it third consecutive year of drought and we must prepare for the worst -- a fourth, fifth or even sixth year of drought," Schwarzenegger said in a statement.

Right on schedule.


Worst Drought in Half Century Shrivels the Wheat Belt of China

[edit on 27-2-2009 by loam]

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 08:33 AM

Water cut off in Mexican capital

Mexico City officials have shut down a main pipeline providing fresh water to millions of residents because reserves have fallen to record low levels.

The closure, due to last 36 hours, will affect five million people, or a quarter of the city's population.

Unusually low rainfall last year and major leakage are blamed for leaving reservoirs less than half full.

If you keep reading, they intend repairs to the system because it apparently leaks 50% of the water it transports.

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 08:45 AM
What is next , shortage of light? Who invents all this stuff anyway.
There is no possible way to run out of water, I can obtain water from thin air.

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:16 AM
No it doesn't go to Mars. That would be interesting to see though.

Yes the amount of water stays the same.

Where it goes is a different story, and in what form.

If the weather has been messed with enough, it could all end up in spot.
So yes, we still have water, but in one location.

Or all the fresh water is moved somewhere else and turned into ice.

The amount of usable water changes also. AS we dirty fresh water, we have less of it to use. It gets turned into sewage, grey water, used for industrial practices, etc.

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 11:36 AM

Originally posted by pepsi78
What is next , shortage of light? Who invents all this stuff anyway.
There is no possible way to run out of water, I can obtain water from thin air.

The question isn't so much "is there water around", because of course, there is. The question is more about how long your body can go without water before dying.

The question is not about supply, it's about demand, but more importantly uninterrupted demand, that is, if water is not available for even a short period of time, there will be problems, and perhaps death. So while you are right of course, and you can extract water from the air, you must agree that your permission to do anything with the air or the water, is dependent upon the government, or whatever gang is running your town.

I think the question is more about control. As I walk through Wal-Mart I see a very, very tiny "food and water" section with little comically-small shelved bits of non-foods there and overly-plasticized little bottles of water that say, "Nestle" on them.

nestle_targets_aquifers_and_springs_in_ new_england_for_bottled_water/

IRS to Go After US-held Swiss Bank Account Records
Sunday July 6, 2008

According to a court statement by a former UBS banker, the Swiss bank holds about $20 billion in "undeclared" accounts for [THE RICHEST] U.S. taxpayers.

Under the law, all U.S. taxpayers are required to report to the IRS all financial accounts in a foreign country if the total value of the accounts exceeds $10,000 at any time during the calendar year. Willfully failing to report such funds can result in a penalty of up to 50 percent of the amount in the account at the time of the violation.

Italics mine. So whilst they drain/redistribute our water, they also hide 30 billion USD so the richest of their collaborators can avoid taxes. Nice. Meanwhile most Americans are being hounded by the IRS for sums of few thousands of dollars. Also, both rich and poor are enjoying bottled water and also the fine television programs. Instead of a new Boston tea party, maybe we need a Boston chocolate and water party?

Anyway, mid-America, also there is an issue recently with some Colorado authority saying that people couldn't collect rainwater due to mosquitoes (potentially not actually) and the reason for this issue is because the authorities up there have already coined the value of the water before it even condenses in the air. Collecting Water From Sky: Illegal

What's funny is that these people will probably try to say they are trying to protect the runoff and not have it redistributed but that is a total lie because the runoff and rivers are far more affected by corporate irresponsibility than by citizens trying to act pro-actively. Any authority which promotes any anti-human sort of thinking, is going to fail, imo.

Let's all protect the rivers and groundwaters of America. I have posted here about the East Coast of the US and what foreign corp(se)orations want our water and hopefully they'll be prevented. Then about the middle of America and the county authorities efforts against the people there. Also there is water protection happening on the West side of the country as well, but in this case, the results might be painful, but are actually beneficial. Potentially Los Angelenos may have to water their lawns less so as to preserve the salmon, the rivers, and the waters of California North. I think that is a good thing, because if one moves to conserve (or re-introduce) the salmon to the Trinity, Feather and Sacramento rivers up north, then one creates the salmon as a sort of symbolic living soldier, who protects the river.

This issue is dear to my heart, and will always be: Protecting the California water supply from corporations and/or terrorists and/or corrupt authorities and/or any and all threats, is the job of the world, and that includes all the people who eat the yummy cherries and almonds and apples, etc, etc which the California waterways produce. Most of it goes to Asia of course because they'll pay fifty bucks per cherry over there --Hey that's yer free market for ya, but still, the point is that protecting the waters of the world benefits all who are IN the world. I am so glad to see that there is movement at the top, to protect the Fountainhead of California. Let no Gold Rush ever again affect the Sacramento River or its tributaries, be it corporate or otherwise.

As long as the fish and the wildlife are protected, a protected river and water table will literally feed billions of people. If unprotected, the opposite might also apply.

posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 01:40 PM
Two years later and the theme continues:

North China is dying...and the solution that may scar a planet.

posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 01:44 PM

Originally posted by loam
Two years later and the theme continues:

North China is dying...and the solution that may scar a planet.

Well, that ought to settle it.

new topics

<< 6  7  8   >>

log in