19 September 2013

Speed blogging

  1. Water in Canada: Some Canadian Environmental Indicators are getting better [see the comments], and a paper estimates the impact of abstraction charges on use. I bet you didn't know that Canada has both quality (oil, gas, mining pollution) and quantity (most of the water goes north, away from people) problems with water.*

  2. Perhaps New Orleans can persist by adopting Dutch-style canals and "flood-friendliness"? It will take years decades to restore the bayou, but some in the state are fighting back against the iron triangle of oilmen, politicians and engineers. Colorado, meanwhile, is facing an existential crisis that may change minds in a hurry.

  3. A Congressional Research Service Report on Hydraulic Fracturing and the Environmental Protection Act [pdf]

  4. TheWaterChannel has a webinar on "Salinization, Water Scarcity and Future Agriculture" on 24 Sep

  5. The IWRM ToolBox is a free library of background papers, policy briefs, case studies and references aimed at improving water management

  6. You probably know that 19 percent of California's electricity goes to treating and pumping water. Did you know that 8 percent of residential electricity goes to growing pot indoors? Legalization would reduce electricity use, carbon emissions, water pollution and (obviously) crime. Maybe Imperial Valley could REALLY switch to high value crops? That's a California I'd like to see!

* In a recent email exchange with a representative of IPIECA, I asked how they were implementing their goal of "promoting consistent freshwater reporting." The rep's responses was
IPIECA does not collect any data from its members, however our sister organisation OGP collects data which it publishes in its environmental performance indicators report [pdf]. The latest report does not include fresh water, however OGP is now collecting this information which will be included in future reports.
Fail.

1 comment:

  1. That article you cite on Canadian Env. Indicators by Joel Wood is really a shoddy piece of research. I'd suggest looking well, almost anywhere else. It makes a number of classically bad assumptions in water policy analysis. I listed a few on my blog here: http://jeremyjschmidt.com/2013/07/17/the-myth-of-water-abundance-is-back-thanks-to-the-fraser-institute/

    ReplyDelete

Spam will be deleted. Comments on older posts must be approved.
If you're having problems posting, email your comment to me