Rethinking Water to Leave No One Behind

Last March, the United Nations convened for their meeting on water, only the second of its kind in almost half a century.Now, the world has gathered again for COP28 in Dubai, and the list of such conferences continues to grow. However, if nothing changes apart from the climate, one has to question if we truly grasp the gravity of our development and lack of planification. Although we frequently state facts and describe the problems we face, seldom do we pivot the narrative towards concrete plans, decisions, and solutions. I often wonder, do we really understand water as much as we talk about it?

Despite our Earth being 70% covered by oceanic waters – a fact that gives our planet its blue appearance from space – this watery veneer is incredibly thin relative to the Earth’s total volume. To visualize this: if we were to gather all the saltwater into a sphere, it would only be around 1,385 km in diameter. Doing the same with all our fresh water would result in a sphere with a diameter of 272 km, and the water we can actually access, and use would form a ball of a mere 56 km – roughly the size of the Canary Islands.

This 56-kilometer sphere remains relatively constant thanks to the hydrological cycle. It’s bewildering that with all our technological advancements, we still rely on the water cycle to regulate its production in the places we choose to settle or produce food. This is especially important to consider, as by 2050 our population will be 20% larger than it is today, and our consumer habits are increasing, not decreasing. How can we be more numerous, consume more, and yet hold the water cycle responsible for not having enough water?

So, if there are purification processes using seawater or wastewater capable of sustainably producing high purity water, why is there still a debate about the quality, efficiency, and necessity of desalination and water reuse? Why question whether reuse should be direct or indirect when we know the resulting quality is high purity water? This baffles the scientific community. The reason? Many individuals now rely on media narratives rather than delving into information scientifically.

We have overlooked the education of the very generation that now leads the decision-making processes. We often undermine the profound impacts that our decisions, even seemingly mundane ones, have on the environment. Consider this: choosing to drive an electric car that consumes 20 kWh per 100 km to a supermarket 10 km away would mean consuming 2 kWh of energy. However, have you ever wondered what else that energy could do?

Surprisingly, those 2 kWh could desalinate up to 800 liters of water. Taking into account factors such as distribution, treatment, and taxes, it’s plausible that at least 500 liters of this purified water would reach our taps. That’s a staggering 100 times more than a 5-liter bottle we might have purchased! And, if it were water reuse, we could potentially be speaking of 1000 l!

A common misconception is that desalination is both costly and energy-intensive. Yet, few juxtapose the energy they expend daily against the energy needed for desalination.

Taking Spain as an example, the energy cost of water from the Tajo-Segura transfer, one of Spain’s most significant hydraulic engineering projects, averages 1.21 kWh/m³. In contrast, desalination processes consume around 3 kWh/m³, wastewater treatment averages 0.5 kWh/m³, water reuse ranges between 1 and 2 kWh/m³ and bottled mineral water soars to an astonishing 35 kWh/m³ (ANEABE). The latter doesn’t even account for the extra energy involved in bottling, storing, and distributing.

To provide a more relatable comparison, the energy required to desalinate seawater for the daily needs of a family of four is equivalent to powering an energy-efficient refrigerator, running a dryer for 38 minutes, a microwave for 72 minutes, an electric stove for 60 minutes, or boiling water in a standard kettle for 40 minutes. To put it in another perspective, a single Google search equates to around 0.12 liters of desalinated water. Meanwhile, a query on ChatGPT, based on energy consumption, translates to between 0.4 and 4 liters of desalinated water.

A study by the United Nations University and Utrecht University reveals that around one billion m3/d of wastewater is produced globally. In the hypothetical scenario where we treat 100% of this wastewater in line with current regulations (a challenging outlook in today’s world), existing standards still permit the release of microplastics, PFAS, hormones, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, personal care items, and various natural and synthetic compounds. Even at low concentrations, these contaminants pose significant health risks. Prolonged exposure can lead to hormonal imbalances, increased cancer risks, and antimicrobial resistance. The latter is projected to become a potential leading cause of death, surpassing cancer by 2050 if we don’t intervene.

Another overlooked yet alarming discovery is the excessive groundwater pumping, which provides drinking water for both humans and livestock, and aids in crop irrigation during times of scarce rainfall. This represents a bubble in the global food supply that cannot continue indefinitely.While this phenomenon isn’t solely due to groundwater extraction, it underscores the urgent need for aquifer recharge and the importance of conserving our water reserves. 10% of the world’s food relies on excessive pumping of groundwater. This represents a bubble in the global food supply that cannot continue indefinitely. Investing in recharging our aquifers means investing in the water and food supply of our future. Achieving a sustainable and water-positive world is no longer an option, but an imperative.

As the article underscores, we face urgent challenges in water management. Yet, it also calls for an emphasis on the most pressing issues, urging the scientific community to guide our priorities. Seawater discharge resulting from the desalination process is approximately 50 million m^3/d, which is 20 times less than the wastewater discharged. The global scientific community is satisfied with the progress made so far in this domain. This begs the question: why do we place such immense focus on this area, and not on the aforementioned, more pressing issues?

As we have seen, achieving access to freshwater is well within our technological capabilities, even less so when considering the commitments from major corporations to become water positive. However, a recently released study from the Pacific Institute highlights the alarming rise in water-related violence that threatens water security worldwide. Their interactive timeline documents a surge in violent water conflicts over the past two decades, fueled by growing water scarcity from climate change, population growth, and resource mismanagement. If more corporations embraced water stewardship to achieve water positive goals, they could help alleviate these tensions through sustainable and equitable water management rather than exacerbating resource competition.

With a heightened sense of awareness and armed with knowledge, each one of us holds the power to make choices that not only illuminate a path towards sustainability but also redefine our legacy on this planet. Our individual decisions, when made with consciousness and purpose, can culminate in a collective force that safeguards both our planet and the generations to come. In every action, in every choice, lies an opportunity to champion a brighter, more sustainable future for ourselves and for Earth. The next time you read an article or hear a person speak about these water sources, you’ll be equipped with the discernment to judge the veracity of their claims. Let’s not just be passive consumers of information, but active guardians of our planet’s most precious resource.