Journalist Heather Dugmore is up in arms about Shell’s bid to start hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) over 30000 square kilometres in the Karoo in the hunt for natural gas reserves. Here’s her article “Will Shell Frack up the Karoo?” which ran widely in the press this week:

Farmers, communities, environmental organisations, geologists and water specialists are up in arms about global energy and petrochemical company Shell’s application to explore for shale gas over 30 000 square kilometres in the water-stressed Karoo.

The proposed exploration method, called hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking’ involves drilling boreholes 4-5 kilometres deep, followed by the introduction of a mixture of chemicals, sand and millions of litres of water into the boreholes under enormous pressure to fracture the geological structures and force the free-flow of shale gas, also called ‘natural gas’.

This process determines whether viable amounts of shale gas exist for future exploitation based on the same method.

“Fracking has been described as ‘planting chemical bombs underground’ says Environmental Consultant and farmer, Fritz Bekker who is spearheading an opposition group of farmers and non-government organisations against another application by a company called Advasol (Pty) Limited to explore for gas from Struisbaai to Mossel Bay, extending 20 kilometres down the southern Cape coast.

“With an approved exploration right, an applicant such as Shell may drill as many exploration boreholes as it can afford, which may be hundreds or even thousands depending on the area’s geology. Each borehole may be subjected to the fracking process,” continues Bekker.

“It is important to note that the most significant adverse environmental impacts of earth gas exploration may already occur during the exploration phase.

“Fracking has been condemned in many countries in the world and despite assurances from companies using this method that they will prevent any leakages, I need to warn farmers, landowners and communities in the Karoo that it poses a significant threat of chemical and gas contamination to the region’s scarce water sources. Both the surface and ground water is highly vulnerable to contamination once pressurized shale gas is liberated through the drilling and fracking process.

“The long-term effects of toxic chemicals used in the fracking process are only now becoming apparent in countries where it has been used. The chemicals used during fracking in America have been positively linked to cancer, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, asthma, learning disorders and endocrine disrupting effects.”

“If they drill they will also need large quantities of water and storage space for vast volumes of flammable, potentially toxic drilling mud in dams close to each drilling site.”

Shell’s background document states that they are investigating a number of potential water sources to support the water-intensive fracking process, including “sea water, surface water and deep saline aquifers”. What they fail to say is that millions upon millions of litres of water are required for the process, which the Karoo does not have, and that as Bekker says: “It takes one litre of hydrocarbons such as shale gas to pollute one million litres of water.

Shell has appointed Golder Associates (Golder) to compile the Environmental Management Plan and to undertake the public consultation process. Shell’s application to explore for shale gas has been submitted to the Petroleum Agency South Africa (PASA), which administers applications as a designated agent of the Minister of Energy. Golder’s background information document states: “PASA is expected to make a decision during 2011 whether to award the initial three year exploration rights.”

Brent Baxter, Business Unit Leader, Environmental Services at Golder explains that “once a company lodges an application for an exploration right under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act they have 120 days to submit an Environmental Management Programme (EMP) in support of the exploration rights application. This is a legislated timeframe. Shell thus needs to submit an EMP, in support of each of the three exploration rights applications that they have lodged in the Karoo, by 18 April 2011.”

To compile the research required for the EMP, the background document says: “a number of technical studies will be undertaken as part of the EMP process. Desktop studies will cover the larger application area and some fieldwork will be undertaken in selected areas to support the findings of the desktop studies.”

The mention of “some fieldwork” is alarming. “The EMP by its nature must include specialist studies by geologists, ecologists, as well as specialist groundwater and surface water studies. Without these studies they cannot responsibly comment on the potential impact of gas exploration or mining required in the EMP,” Fritz Bekker explains. The applicant will not be able to budget for the management or mitigation of adverse environmental impacts that they have not identified properly during this phase of the application.

Specialist environmental surveys such as botanical, hydrological and ground water investigations should be planned to take cognizance of seasonal variance, which is now not possible because of Shell’s haste to obtain approval.

Baxter responds that “fieldwork to inform the EMP will be conducted by specialists between mid January and early February 2011 after which the draft EMP will be compiled. This fieldwork will of necessity be broad-based seeking to characterise the broad environment within which the proposed project takes place and seeking to verify information available in public datasets, such as national groundwater database information.”

This means they are giving themselves two to three weeks of fieldwork to inform an EMP of this magnitude. Baxter says the period cannot be extended because of the 18 April deadline to submit to PASA.

It begs the question whether an environmental management plan can ethically be presented without an indepth assessment of the potential impact on the environment.

Baxter reassures that an Environmental Impact Assessment will be conducted “for any activities which are listed under the NEMA, before exploration activities commence”.

One would expect so, but it still does not address the potential fracture in the EMP process. Asked why Golder and Shell did not rather apply for the period granted for the submission of the EMP to be extended, Baxter said this was not possible.

The first of several meetings to be hosted by Shell and Golder is to take place in the Karoo town of Hofmeyr on Monday 24.

Many farmers, communities and interested and affected organisations have not been informed about the meetings, nor about the application. Those who are aware of it are trying to spread the word as widely as possible, which is what Golder should be doing. However many interested and affected parties attend, it promises to be a heated exchange.

Asked how they had advertised the meetings, Golder’s Public Participation Officer, Toni Pietersen, replied that they placed adverts in national and community newspapers. She said that it is unfortunate that they were placed approximately one week before the meetings were scheduled to begin; explaining that the Christmas period had hampered the timing. She adds that they had sent emails and posted the background documents to as many landowners, communities, farmers and affected organisations as they could locate.

Their distribution process appears to be lacking since not even the President of Agri Eastern Cape, Ernest Pringle, who farms in the affected area, received contact or background information from them. Neither did the Chair of the Rooihoogte Farmer’s Association in the Middelburg district, Ed Kingwill, nor did the Regional Chief Director for the Department of Water Affairs in the Eastern Cape, nor the Nama Karoo Foundation, the conservation agency working to protect and preserve the natural and cultural heritage of the Karoo, based in Richmond and Graaff-Reinet in the Karoo.

All received the information by chance via associates.

“I have seen a documentary on frack mining and after I watched it I thought thank god I will never have to deal with this in the Karoo. So I thought until I received word about Shell’s application two days ago,” says the Nama Karoo Foundation’s Marina Beal.

“Water, much of which is ancient water dating back millions of years, is the most precious commodity in the Karoo. This is a semi-desert area and it is a well-known fact how scarce water is in the Karoo, many parts of which are only now emerging from one of the worst droughts in decades. The potential for contamination of water through fracking is significant and potentially environmentally devastating.”

Geohydrologist, Ahee Coetsee, who farms in the Middelburg district comments:

“My initial reaction is that we all have to be extremely careful because despite assurances from mining companies that they follow ethical and green environmental procedures, we only need to look at the coal fields and acid mine drainage to know that while we might have excellent environmental laws, the enforcement of them and technical know-how is lacking.

“We simply do not understand enough about the aquifer systems in the Karoo, which is why various studies are being done, such as by the Water Research Commission to look at the dolerite ring aquifer systems of the Karoo, from the surface to a depth of 3-500 metres.

“There are many and varied aquifer systems in the Karoo, some dating back 300 million years and older. If Shell is planning to drill down to 4 kilometres and more, and if the boreholes constructed are not 100%, there can be cross contamination between aquifer systems.

“If they do not comprehensively research and understand the hydro-geology of the exploration area, then they will need to be investigated from a technical and legal point of view.”

Professor Bruce Rubidge, Director of the Bernard Price Institute for Palaentological Research at Wits University elaborates that when Shell talks about drilling down 4-5 kilometres in the Karoo, they are talking about accessing the Ecca group of rocks dated at approximately 270-million years: a time when the Karoo was an ancient marine environment.

The Karoo is globally renowned for its fantastic wealth of fossil material, and Rubidge, who is a son of the Karoo, says “I care greatly for the Karoo and I would hate to see a big petroleum industry set up there. It would destroy the character of the Karoo.”

Shell justifies the application in its background document by referring to shale gas as “the cleanest of the fossil fuels” and stating that: “South Africa is faced with the challenge of being able to meet future energy demands of an expanding economy. Developing a natural gas energy supply to help meet this growing demand would be of considerable value to South Africa.”

What they fail to state is that the carbon footprint becomes outsize if they start calculating the process of extraction of shale gas through hydraulic fracturing, the process of accessing water from an as yet unidentified source, including possibly transporting in sea water, transporting the gas to market and the potential environmental degradation in this pristine part of the world.

As Africa’s highest emitter of carbon, the government has committed to transform to a low carbon economy with a focus on renewable energy programmes, notably solar and wind. The Karoo is high on sun for solar power plants but extremely low on water.

running tap

Future water shortages are a growing concern for business, according to a global survey published today.

The research shows that more than half of the 147 firms responding expect problems with water in the next 1-5 years.

It says 60% of firms have already set performance targets on the way they use water.

The report predicts that the issue will get much worse as the world demand for water is projected to soar over the next few decades.

The UK’s chief scientist John Beddington has warned that water scarcity will form part of a perfect storm of environmental problems.

And today’s report from consultants ERM was requested by institutional investors who want to know how much risk their investments face from water problems.

It shows that 39% of the firms are already suffering from water related issues – including disruption from drought or flooding, declining water quality, and increases in water prices.

Sectors reporting the greatest exposure to water risks include food, drinks & tobacco and metals & mining.

Firms are increasingly recognising the risk to their brand if they are seen to be wasteful with water in countries where it is in short supply.

The growing demand for companies to measure their performance mirrors the existing trend for firms to measure their output of greenhouse gases. The ERM report says if firms measure their use of a commodity they tend to draw up policies over the use of that commodity.

But it says water differs from carbon in the sense that there are often alternatives to fossil fuels but there are no alternatives to water.

The challenge lies in managing what we have among competing users, whether they are firms, communities or natural systems.

The research was organised by the Carbon Disclosure Project, which does research on behalf of 137 institutional investors representing US$16 trillion of holdings.

Jacqueline McGlade, director of the European Environment Agency, welcomed the disclosure initiative. “Climate change is altering global water availability, meaning greater scarcity in some regions and more flooding in others. We must adapt our infrastructure and our consumption,” she said.

Source – By Roger Harrabin Environment Analyst, BBC News

ocean

The ocean—the seas—are made up of 96.5 percent pure water. The remaining 3.5 percent is made up of 75 other elements. Six elements are responsible for 99 percent of the sea’s saltiness. They are: chloride, sodium, sulfur, magnesium, calcium, and potassium. Most of the saltiness comes from the compound sodium chloride (ordinary table salt).
Where do the elements come from? The wearing away of rocks on land. As rock erodes, rivers carry the salts and other minerals to the ocean. Volcanoes and undersea springs also release salts to the ocean.

• Some parts of the ocean are saltier than others. Hudson Bay has lower levels because of fresh water entering the ocean from lots of rivers and melting ice.

The private sector could play a more prominent role in investments in the water sector, Water and Environmental Affairs policy acting deputy director general Mbangiseni Nepfumbada said on Tuesday.

Speaking at a Water Investment World conference, Nepfumbada also said that South Africa had to improve the quality of its water supply and reduce unlawful use and water loss.

He stated that not enough was being done to highlight the importance of water, which should be seen as a catalyst for development.

International Finance Corporation (IFC) water and sanitation specialist Patrick Mullen said that the gap between water supply and demand would increase by 40% in the next 20 years.

“Only private finance would close the gap with an investment of about $50-billion a year, as well as treating water, like oil, as a commercial resource,” said Mullen.

He cited political risks, returns in term of tariffs, which limits bankable deals and the regulatory environment as impeding investments in the water sector.

Mullen stated that the IFC had observed an increase in private sector investment in emerging markets.

“We have identified opportunities in Africa as a focus area and at the moment, water has been a profitable sector in the corporation and investments have yielded 35% returns,” he said.

By: Dennis Ndaba -Edited by: Creamer Media Reporter

Environment and Water Affairs Minister Buyelwa Sonjica has apologised to the residents around the Hartbeespoort Dam west of Pretoria for the poor water quality.

She visited the area on Wednesday to see the problem for herself and promised swift action in curbing the pollution problem.

Sonjica said the polluted water is flowing into the dam from upstream, mainly Gauteng. She has blamed the economic hub for most of the tourism attraction’s problems, but said development in Gauteng cannot be stopped.

Sonjica has promised to have water treatment plants in Hartbeespoort upgraded within three months so they can cope with Gauteng’s massive pollution outbreak.

However, she said treating the dam itself is a long-term project that needs to be supported by all sectors of society in order for it to have any impact at all.

Global-water-footprints-170x300

It’s always of interest to see how other countries do in their water usage.  A recent U.S. Geological Survey found that in as soon as three years, U.S. residents living in all but 14 states will be faced with water shortages and within the next 15 years, two thirds of the world’s population will live in areas facing moderate to severe water stress. With this sort of crisis facing us, we thought we would post the global water footprints of various countries. This is not so that we can shift responsibility to the other countries – definitely not! Rather we believe it is good for us to occasionally benchmark our progress and pat ourselves on the back if it is warranted, before continuing the process of water conservation.  Unsurprisingly, the US is the world leader in water use.  South Africa is actually doing fairly well, and we believe there is high awareness of the importance of water conservation in this country.

If you would like any further information about any of the Water Rhapsody products in order to reduce your water usage please do not hesitate to contact us.

Robinson_Lake_1_1138750b

For years Neels Van Wyk suspected something was wrong with the water on his farm, worries that grew as mining and government officials started frequenting the area to test nearby rivers.


Photograph by: Ashley Kemp

Van Wyk, 48, lives in Westonaria on the southwestern outskirts of Johannesburg, surrounded by four major mines which over the last 120 years extracted gold and uranium.

Most of the mines closed down 11 years ago, when pumping of underground water reserves also stopped.

Now researchers worry that toxic mine water is rising toward the surface and seeping into nearby water supplies, contaminating rivers with a cocktail of acidic and sometimes radioactive waste.

“My concern is that I use borehole water which could be contaminated. I sell peaches and vegetables to the hawkers and they sell it to the community. What if the vegetables are contaminated and we don’t know that,” Van Wyk said.

Activists fear rising water levels in the mines have created an underground time bomb that could threaten the country’s nearby financial capital Johannesburg in 16 months.

The threats are massive: groundwater contamination, health risks like cancers, poisoned soils, and fears for the city’s buildings.

“The matter has to be addressed with great urgency,” said Mariette Liefferink who heads the Federation for a Sustainable Environment.

“Acid mine drainage is as corrosive as swimming pool acid but it also contains a cocktail of radioactive and toxic heavy metal.”

Toxic waters are now lurking just about half a kilometre in mined chambers below surface but rising by 30 centimetres (one foot) a day, even before the seasonal rains get underway which could increase the rate threefold.

The government says the heavy metal-laced swill could hit enter the last safety buffer, an area stretching 150 metres below surface, by early 2012.

But it believes South Africans should not be panicking yet, with former finance minister Trevor Manuel dismissing fears that Johannesburg residents would be sloshing around the streets in gumboots as ridiculous.

“It’s urgent but it’s not a crisis,” said Marius Keet, a senior regional water affairs official.

“But we’re not supposed to reach that stage – we have to do something before that.”

The state says it has a year to find a solution. A new ministerial committee produced a report in October, but has not released the findings.

In July, the water affairs department warned of catastrophic results if Johannesburg’s groundwater was contaminated or mines began decanting below the city centre.

“We will not allow that – it’s definitely not going to happen. It will not decant in the city of Johannesburg,” Keet told AFP.

Toxic mine water surfaced eight years ago just west of Johannesburg, and still flows out of the ground during heavy rains.

“The underground mining basin is now flooding and has flooded with acid mine drainage to a point that it now spills out on to the surface,” said Liefferink.

The run-off has poisoned soil, made a dam radioactive and wiped out life in affected waters, she said.

South Africa has 6,000 abandoned and derelict mines — many run by firms now out of business, leaving the state responsible for 70 percent of them.

But government lacks the 1.5 billion rands (217.6 million dollars, 156 million euros) needed for a 10-year rehabilitation plan.

Just one pump to remove the water costs 218 million rands, but the current budget for this is 14 million.

“Where the basins are flooding, there are no management plans in place. Where it has flooded in the western basin, it’s now just crisis management,” said Liefferink.

“What is lacking here is the political will and commitment to implement these plans and also to apportion liability.”

water-time-bomb

By Tony Carnie

Trade unions are turning up pressure on the government to tackle the country’s dirty water “time bomb” as a matter of urgency – or face the prospect of national protest action.

The Federation of Unions of SA (Fedusa), the second-largest trade union group in the country, warned yesterday that the government was neglecting the management of clean water, including scores of overflowing sewage treatment works that should be placed in “intensive care”.

Fedusa said it would prefer to see the problems resolved in the interests of the public rather than embarking on protest action, but it had nevertheless served a warning notice on the government last month in terms of section 77 of the Labour Relations Act.

This allows worker groups to embark on protected strike/protest action to promote or defend socio-economic interests if grievances cannot be resolved by the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac).

In a memorandum to the government, Fedusa said it was no longer a secret that South Africa’s water security was under threat.

“The media inundate us every day with news reports, pictures and film footage of raw sewage and industrial effluent being pumped blatantly into dams, streams and rivers, thus polluting one of our most precious natural resources to the extent that it poses a dreadful danger to all forms of life.

“Hardly a day goes by without reports of water purification and sanitation plants that have fallen into a state of disrepair, because local authorities no longer have knowledgeable people with the necessary expertise to maintain the plants.

“The result is unsafe water running from taps (particularly in rural areas) and disgusting sewage bubbling up from manholes in the streets of many towns.”

Despite the apparent culture of “total disrespect” towards water, this was not the time to play the blame game, but rather to work together to solve it.

“The fact is that 98 percent of South Africa’s available water supply is already fully utilised and the country is sitting on a time bomb which will affect each and every person within her borders. Enough has been said to confirm that we are dealing with a problem of gigantic proportions.”

Problems such as inadequate staffing, funding and expertise had been identified by the Water Affairs Department five years ago, while the department’s latest Blue Drop drinking water report showed that only 55 percent of municipalities managed to score higher than 50 percent.

The companion Green Drop report on waste water treatment suggested that 76 percent of municipal sewage works scored below 50 percent, while many had in effect scored zero.

The Fedusa report said 19 major dams across the country were highly polluted, scores of wild animals had died in the Kruger National Park from drinking polluted water and some farmers were unable to irrigate crops because river water was polluted.

To add to the problems, the Water Affairs Ministry was on record as stating that R100 billion was needed over the next three years to restore water infrastructure, but the available budget was only R26.8bn.

However, Nedlac has to try four times to resolve the grievances before protected protest action can begin. The first meeting was held yesterday in Joburg.

Leon Grobler, CEO of Fedusa affiliate the United Association of SA, said: “All our members need to drink water to survive and we see it as part of our duty to society to get involved and to ensure that the potential health impacts of drinking polluted water are avoided.”

He said the government had agreed to form a joint steering committee of Fedusa and government representatives, but had also requested a 30-day recess to consult government ministers and officials.

Fedusa also raised concern about the problem of acid-polluted mine water in Gauteng as well as chemical pollution from mines in Witbank and other parts of Mpumalanga.

Fedusa said the World Health Organisation calculated that about 3.4 million Africans died every year from drinking unsafe water or because of poor sanitation.

University of Stellenbosch health sciences epidemiologist Jo Barnes warned of the deadly health hazards of polluted streams, rivers and dams and said more emphasis should be placed on tracing pollution to its source.

“We need a commitment from all South Africans to seriously and visibly act fast to address the issues that are now threatening the lives of the poor,” she said.

Fedusa demanded that the Water Affairs Department identify dysfunctional water and wastewater treatment plants and place them in “intensive care” under a national project manager who should draw up a programme and prepare a budget to restore the water infrastructure.

The Water Institute of SA should also be approached to explore the possibility of fast-tracking the training of water treatment staff.

“The handover of ‘restored’ plants to the respective municipalities should be conditional on the correct staff being appointed and trained.”

The Water Affairs Department could not be reached for comment. – The Mercury

oil

Russia is considering becoming the world’s top supplier of fresh water as growing demand turns it into a strategic resource. That is if it can upgrade its own consumption to modern standards.
If you pay attention to the perils that future may bring, you probably know that the oil will run dry, the sea level will rise and drown coastal regions, and that fresh water will be such a valuable asset that even the oil price will seem low in comparison. All this provided that the world will not end in 2012 in accordance with Mayan prophecies, of course.

The future global water crisis is indeed a gloomy thing: by 2030 half of world’s population will face a fresh water deficit, according to the UN’s World Water Assessment Program forecast. Thirsty nations will take up arms against their saturated neighbors. People drinking polluted water will become ill. Ecologies will die out when the rivers feeding them are depleted for the sake of human farms and factories.

Read more

Russia has world’s second-largest water reserves after Brazil (it’s hard to compete with the Amazon River, but having in your territory the world’s largest lake, Baikal, which contains 20 per cent of the world’s fresh surface water, really helps).

Could it be that in 20 years the country, in addition to being a reliable supplier of hydrocarbons (or holding EU in energy grip, if you prefer this point of view), will also be a top supplier of stuff to drink?
The problem does exist, but…

Global demand for fresh water is growing steadily. Not only is humanity itself becoming more numerous, it also consumes more water per capita than it used to. The latter happens indirectly as developing countries become hungrier for things requiring much water to produce – paper, synthetic fibers, even home appliances and cars, but first of all foods.

Agriculture is the single biggest consumer of water, accounting for some 70 per cent of the total volume we expend. And among different food products demand different volumes of water to produce. One kilo of beef “drinks” an estimated 15,000 liters, compared to 1,000 liters needed for one kilo of wheat. The new armies of cows and pigs grown to replace rice on the plates of Chinese workers make this hidden strain on rivers and groundwater.

Conflicts over water are evident, especially in regions where the resource is scarce. Water consumption is one of the stumbling blocks in the conflict between Israel and Palestine, as well as a constant source of tension between the Jewish state, Lebanon and Jordan. Turkey is in a quarrel with Syria and Iraq over the use of water from the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. Other hotspots include Central Asia and Northern Africa.

Health problems which poor water quality can cause are also hard to deny, with an estimated 80 per cent of diseases in the world linked to it in some way. For instance, world’s largest mass arsenic poisoning – which is believed to have affected up to 77 million people in Bangladesh over 40 years and account for some 20 per cent of deaths in the country – was caused by contaminated water. Ironically, the source is the numerous wells drilled with help from international organizations to provide water cleanse it of pathogens.

However, a 2006 UN report on global water deficit points out that much of the problems stir not from the physical absence of freshwater, but rather from poor governance and lack of investment into things like sewage treatment and efficient use of water. Despite arid climate, wealthy Persian Gulf countries can afford desalination and extraction of fossil water, which, combined with good consumption practices, allows providing its population. Of course, it is of little consolation for the poor folk, but leaves room for optimism nevertheless.
Water superpower – not just yet

The goal of the future is to deliver the existing water from places of abundance to those in need. But if you are picturing great pipelines running from Siberian rivers to Spain and tanker fleets carrying Baikal water to the sheikhs, you are a little bit unrealistic. It is not economically viable.

Water is much cheaper than oil or gas, which means the cost of its transportation puts a greater barrier on trade, and annual volumes consumed are much greater. For instance, Russia’s domestic water consumption is 180 times higher than that of domestic oil consumption.

The solution could be great channels, which would bring water to buyers in a natural flow, but those require extremely high capital investment. Even China, famous for cyclopean infrastructure projects, is hesitant to pay for its South–North Water Transfer Project, the system of channels which would supply the water-hungry north of the country with water from the south. Putting such investment for the sake of foreign buyers rather then your own economy would be optimistic and short-sighted at best.

Also, unlike with energy, alternative sources of fresh water are there to be used. Sea water desalination has being improving over the decades, and the most cost-efficient facilities produce water at around $0.5 per cubic meter today. There is also iceberg towage, which is done on a limited scale in Canada now, but has the potential to become a regular enterprise in a thirstier world. Optimistic estimates promise iceberg water at $0.8 per cubic meter.

A more realistic approach would be the development of domestic industries, which require much water, like agriculture or production of nuclear power, and exporting the products instead.

Finally Russia, with all its water riches, has problems providing its own population, and the fact that most of the people live in the European part of the country while water is more abundant in the east is just a small part of the problem. According to government estimates voiced at the international forum Pure Water 2010 in Moscow, less then 40 per cent of Russians drink safe water. Some 25 per cent of the people have no centralized water supply at all.

Water usage in Russia suffers from poor efficiency, which is two to three times below that in Europe. To change the situation, large-scale investment into water saving technology and public campaigning are needed. A government-sponsored modernization program currently on the table is expected to be launched next year. Prime Minister Putin said its budget will be $300 million over the first three years. The sum “is not grand, yet noticeable” he admitted.

Alexandre Antonov, RT

water lily

Water is a remarkable substance – central to life, it feeds our nations, drives our industry, washes away our troubles, quenches our thirst, and brings beauty and pleasure into our lives. Barbara Schreiner

South Africa is a country that, contrary to belief, does not have an abundant supply of water and could well be described as a semi desert region with a water shortage. The average rainfall of South Africa is 397mm, compared with a world average of 860mm.

The distribution of water on the earth
Salt Water 97%
Brackish Water 0,4%
Fresh Water 2,6%
  • Icecaps, Glaciers
2,0%
  • Ground Water
    (Water found underground)
0,59%
  • Rivers, Lakes
    (Surface Water)
0,01%
  • Atmosphere, Biomass
0,001%

From the table above, only 0,60% fresh water on earth is available for human consumption and the environment. It will therefore be a wise decision to use this resource efficiently.

Nelson Mandela once said:
“We in South Africa have ourselves faced hard questions and had to make hard choices in this regard. We know that political freedom alone is still not enough if you lack clean water. Freedom alone is not enough without light to read at night, without time or access to water to irrigate your farm, without the ability to catch fish to feed your family. For this reason the struggle for sustainable development nearly equals the struggle for political freedom. They can grow together or they can unravel each other. Threats to our governments in the century ahead will come from poverty, if anything.”

(Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs and aspirations of the current generation without compromising the ability to meet those of future generations).

To overcome this struggle between sustainable development and political freedom we have a responsibility to use our limited water resources equitably, and in ways that will not reduce their quality and usefulness for future users, or cause harm to the environment.

Factors contributing to a serious water crisis in South Africa are:

  • Our increasing human population leads to an increase in water consumption – many of whom who do not have adequate access to water.
  • Water loss through a high evaporation rate.
  • Siltation of dams.
  • An increase in droughts (Maybe a cause of global climate change, due to pollution?)

Situations will change and decisions in strategic matters will need to take our natural resources into consideration. Responsible management is the core of sustainable development.

The question arises whether water consumers in South Africa appreciate its relative scarcity in our country and exercise appropriate responsibility in its use and minimize the negative impacts of our activities.

Pollution

Pollution as a negative Impact on Water quality
Pollution takes place as a result of point sources such as the discarding of waste through the end of a pipe, and diffuse sources such as fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, fuel, diesel, oil, etc., finding their way into groundwater sources.
The usage of bulk fuel tanks underground, where leakages can occur is also an example of a point source where pollution can take place. In the past incidents of the groundwater having been irreversibly polluted have occurred; costing millions of rands to remediate the pollution by pumping out the polluted ground water over a period of time, treating it and replacing it with clean water. Waste dumps as well as leaking chemicals (example 210 L drums of fuel placed directly on soil) can also be pollution sources.A few every-day activities at your base that may cause water pollution:

  • Refueling: a diesel, fuel spill.
  • Usage of equipment and chemicals
  • Waste: Littering.
  • Storage of vehicles.
  • Washing of vehicles and aircraft at an area with no separator pit.
  • Usage and storage of chemicals oil, fuel, tar, etc.
  • Storage and usage of pesticides and herbicides.
  • Disposal of contaminated oil.
  • The disposal of chemicals down the drain.
  • Storage and disposal of hazardous waste (ex. used fluorescent light tubes.)

Our activities will always have impacts, but the requirement is for such impacts to be minimal, manageable and within acceptable limits, according to relevant Environmental legislation.

The National Environmental Management Act (Act no 107 of 1998, chapter 7 section 28) as well as the National Water Act (Act no 36 of 1998, chapter 3, part 4 section 19)
deal with pollution prevention.
To comply with legislation we must take reasonable measures to prevent pollution from happening.

Prevention of pollution

  • Storage of chemicals (fuel, diesel, etc):
    “Bunded” walls or an area build (according to South African National Standards- SANS) to contain the source, when leaking occurs.
  • Refueling:
    Have drip trays and fuel spill kits ready! Be alert while refueling and focus on the job at hand. (Major spills have occurred in the past while refueling.)
  • Facilities:
    Ensure the necessary standard oil /grease traps or separator pits are in place at wash bays, refueling areas, workshops, fuel sidings, kitchens, etc. (Refer to SANS)
  • Hazardous Waste ex Fluorescent Light Tubes:
    A waste company must dispose off hazardous waste (ex. fluorescent light tubes). The company must give a disposal certificate to the relevant member dealing with the waste company.
  • Waste: Litter
    Don’t litter! In the biodegrading process of waste, chemical reactions take place that may have a negative impact on groundwater.
  • Usage of equipment and chemicals:
    Be responsible in your actions and try to avoid any negative impact your activity may have on the environment.

Humans are always the last receptors in environmental pollution and pollution will therefore affect human health!

Water resources available must be used in an efficient way at our Air Force Bases as to ensure the availability of this scarce resource for generations to come.

Water Efficiency

There are essentially three ways to save water: Reduce, Re-use and Repair.

1. Water Efficiency at work:

Reduce your daily usage of water and identify ways in which you can be efficient in water usage. Be more water wise:

  • Put a 1 litre plastic bottle filled with water in a toilet’s cistern to reduce the amount of water used when flushed. A toilet uses 11 litres of water every time it is flushed and is the biggest user of indoor water. If a toilet is used 16 times a day at a section it will use 176 litres of water per day. If a 1 litre plastic bottle is placed in the cistern, the section can save 16 litres of water per day by being water wise.
  • Sections can also refit their toilets with a dual flush system that uses less water every time when flushed. A dual-flush system uses less water (4 litres per flush) for liquid wastes and more water (9 litres per flush) for solid wastes.
  • Sweeping the paving instead of washing it down with water.

Reduce your daily usage of electricity. (Water is used in the generation process of electricity). Switch off the lights as well as other electrical appliances when no one is present in the office for a long period of time.

Re-use water wherever possible. Virtually all water coming out of a tap can be used at least twice and is called grey water. Identify water that you can re-use elsewhere. Some plants don’t respond well to soaps and detergents, but grey water can be re-used on most lawns.

Repair leaking pipes, taps and toilets cisterns or report to the Facility & Environmental Management Section (FEMS) at your base. A dripping tap can waste as much as 60 litres of water per day or 1 800 litres per month. A leaking toilet can waste up to 100 000 liters of water per year.

Outside the office area we can also have an indirect impact on water usage. Whether it is the eradication of alien invasive plants or water wise gardening.

2. Invasive plants and the environment

Invading alien plants have become established in over 10 million hectares of land in South Africa and are the single biggest threat to plant and animal biodiversity. These plants waste 7% of our water resources, intensify flooding and fires; cause erosion, destruction of rivers, siltation of dams and estuaries, poor water quality and can cause a mass extinction of indigenous plants and animals. These plants consume more water than indigenous plants and therefore lead to the loss of water in catchments.
This is the reason why alien invader plants must be removed from our Air Force Bases! Focus more on planting indigenous and water wise plants. The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (CARA) provides for the control of weeds and invader plants.

3. Water Wise Gardening on Air Force Bases:

Gardens are one of the biggest water consumers and can be designed and maintained in a water efficient way.

a. Water at the right time
(Watering at the right time of the day saves water and money.)

  • Avoid watering on windy days, as evaporation rates are higher than on a calm day.
  • Water less often in winter and more often in summer.
  • Water less often in cool weather and more frequently in hot weather.
  • Water at a cool time of the day to reduce evaporation – evening or early morning. Watering in the morning decreases the chance of mildew.
  • When good rains fall, stop watering for a few days.

Water deeply but less often. Deep soaking encourages roots to utilize moisture deep in the ground and enable plants to thrive between watering and in times of drought.

b. The amount of water needed depends on the soil type.

  • Water clay soils heavily but slowly and less often.
  • Water sandy soils frequently with less water.
  • Water loamy soils with a moderate amount of water but less often than sandy soils.

c. Zone the garden
Group plants together according to their water requirements. The Low – or
No- water zones will contain plants, which use very little water and essentially survive on the rainfall available in the region. The medium water zone will contain plants that will need some extra watering. The high water zone will contain plants that require regular frequent watering.

d. Mulching
Keep flowerbeds well mulched. Mulch keeps the roots of plants cool and moist, and also saves water by preventing evaporation. Mulching also reduces erosion by allowing water to penetrate the soil. Types of mulch are large bark chips, pine needles, partially decomposed compost, fallen leaves and lawn clippings.

e. Choosing the right plant
Another way of conserving water is to choose climate-appropriate plants. This includes all indigenous plants that are endemic to your region, as well as plants from other parts of the world with a similar climate to your own regional climate. Planting indigenous plants is always more of an advantage with regards to the conservation of South Africa’s indigenous flora and by preserving ecosystems in the garden. Naturally drought –resistant plants: some water-efficient characteristics:

  • Grey foliage
    Water efficient plants often have grey or blue-green leaves. The light colour reflects the sun’s rays away from the plant, thereby keeping the plant cooler, which in turn reduces transpiration. Examples are some succulents and the African daisy (Arctotis spp.)
  • Hairy leaves
    Hairs surrounding the stomata (minute openings, through which water is transpired) slow down air movement past the stomata, thereby reducing water loss. Examples are Lamb’s-ear (Stachys byzantina) and Gazanias or Gousblom.
  • Closing leaves
    The leaves of some plants close when they are water stressed. This reduces the number of stomata exposed to sunlight, and reduces water loss through transpiration.
  • Waxy cuticle
    A waxy coating to the leaf helps to prevent moisture loss. Kalanchoe spp. and wild figs (Ficus spp.) are examples.
  • Plants with lighter colours on the undersides of their leaves
    When stressed, they turn the lighter side upwards to reflect the sun away. Examples are Gazanias and Wild olive (Olea europaea susp. africana).
  • Reduced number of leaves
    Some plants reduce moisture loss by dispensing with them. Other plants start shedding their leaves during drought periods, in order to reduce moisture loss. Examples are the karee (Rhus lancea), Acacia spp., Buffalo thorn (Zizziphus mucronata).
  • Sturdy internal structures
    Soft-stemmed plants wilt easily in the heat. Water wise plants have a strong internal skeleton, which supports the leaf and prevents wilting, enabling them to survive for longer periods without water. Examples are the Crane flower (Strelitzia reginae) and Thatching reed (Chondropetalum tectorum).
  • Leaf size and shape
    Many water wise plants have small or needlelike leaves. This minimizes the surface area from which water is lost by evaporation. Examples are the Blue marguerite (Felicia amelloides) and Erica spp.
  • Succulent leaves
    Water is stored in thick fleshly leaves to be available when necessary. Examples are Aloe spp. and Vygies.

These were just a few ideas on how to be water efficient. In the end we will all benefit from being water wise as well as ensure the availability of this precious resource for ourselves… and most importantly for our children.
Although our country does have the National Water Act to regulate all matters relating to water, the saving of water should not be seen as a nuisance and something we have to do. It should be part of our daily routine and a way of life.

The Limpopo river, according to
the National State of the
Environment in 1996 is one of the
Rivers that exceeded the amount of
water available.

Information obtained from Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Rand Water, Department of Agriculture, Tshwane University of Technology and Northwest University – Centre for Environmental Management.
For ways on how to prevent pollution and to be water efficient on your base, contact your Base Environmental Manager for more information.

Lt. D. Naidoo at (012) 312-2568 Air command Unit – DBSS

© 2013 The Water and Solar Company Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha