Shortages: the new normal
California and several cities in Taiwan have issued water rationing measures over the past few weeks. A quick Google search will tell you that these places are not alone in the fight against water shortages: Some parts of Africa and South America are facing dire water shortage problems, threatening people’s basic livelihoods. In Sao Paulo, the economic heart of Brazil, the term “water refugee” has emerged to describe population relocation as a result of shortages.
Although some of the shortages can be attributed to meteorological cycles, the persistence, severity and inconsistencies of droughts across the globe, is without a doubt a product of anthropogenic climate change. Nevertheless, there are country-specific problems that have led to not only the inevitability of drought, but the exacerbation of it.
In the case of the west coast of the US, California relies on snowpacks as its primary source of surface water such as streams and lakes. However, this year marks the fourth consecutive year that the state’s snowpack is below normal. When surface water falls short, groundwater is drilled to make up the difference.
On April 1, for the first time in history, California Governor Jerry Brown issued an ordinance to reduce water use by 25 percent. The biggest problem with his executive order is that the agricultural sector consumes the majority of water, but remains the only industry that is exempt from the latest rationing.
Taiwan, on the other hand, has 2.6 times more rainfall than the world’s average, but is classified by the UN as an area with “scarce water resources.”
The challenge with Taiwan’s water situation can be generalized into three main areas: the disproportionate amount of rainfall across seasons (plenty of rain during typhoon seasons, but little to no rain between November and May); the nation’s topography (steep slopes and short rivers) that makes conserving rainwater difficult; and heavy sedimentation (due to illicit economic activities and landslides) in reservoirs, which limits water storage capacities.
A leaky delivery system as a result of outdated pipelines does not help either. The Ministry of Economic Affairs announced that Taiwan saw the lowest rainfall since 1947 last autumn and winter, warning the public of the urgency of the matter. Similarly to California, Taiwan started its water rationing in several northern cities, leaving only Taipei unaffected. One of the major reservoirs reported a capacity of 25 percent, the lowest since it went into operation in the 1960s.
When faced with extreme resource scarcity problems, especially when they hit one of the most essential elements to sustain life, we ask ourselves why and how we brought the problem upon ourselves in the first place? And more importantly, is there a way out of the downward spiral?
Indeed, national policies could be refined so that reservoirs can operate more efficiently; water pipelines could be repaired to reduce leakages. Prices should go up to more accurately reflect the real cost of utilizing water as a natural resource. And people’s behaviors need to change and water conservation should be rooted in their daily activities. These are some of the most critical and logical steps to tackle the global water crisis, one step at a time.
However, we must start addressing the elephant in the room; the fundamental driver that led to extreme weather events, in which drier places are subject to severe droughts and wetter places are exposed to intense floods — namely, anthropogenic climate change.
Many have come to the conclusion that climate change is not a technological problem, nor is it an economic problem — however, it can be viewed as a behavioral problem. Why is that? The solutions below can all be traced back to behaviors — whether it is government behavior, the behavior of the free market, the educational system or the behavior of any and every individual — the very paradigm we created is the problem creating water shortages. And here is how we can change that.
From a policy perspective, national governments and international multilateral oil and gas associations should advocate against subsidies on the fossil fuel industry. Many countries have already submitted “intended nationally determined contributions” in which they commit to ambitious energy mixes with reduced fossil fuels. Countries like China and India should take the lead in ending dirty-fuel subsidies, especially when their primary energy supply comes from coal.
From a market and incentive viewpoint, carbon taxes should obviously still be on the table, but perhaps a “water tax” could be introduced, by which water usage that exceeds a certain threshold will be subject to levies. Those tax dollars could go toward the renovation of old water pipelines or cleaning reservoirs.
On a more personal level, we can start water conservation by pledging to take five-minute showers, limit car washes and remove grass lawns and replace them with desert plants. To take this to another level: One could retrofit laundry machines so that water from them can be used on drought-resistant plants, for example.
Finally, let us be reminded that it does not seem all too impossible that wars this century will not be fought over oil, but over water. If we act now, we can still reverse that reality.
Angela Yeh
Taipei
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers