Water

August 8, 2019

BW photograph of trees reflected in a puddle after a thunderstorm.

Copyright 2019 Kevin P. Mick Photography. All rights reserved.

And lack thereof.  The content herein would be well-taken in combination with that of the recent post “Hot”.

NPR’s 1A aired a discussion this morning concerning “water stress” and the risk of reaching “Day 0”.  Please listen to the broadcast for the definition of those terms and the conditions creating them.  The World Resources Institute recently published this report, which forms the basis for that discussion.  The full WRI report is also worth a read.  That millions will be displaced due to sea level rise subsequent to melting arctic ice as a result of climate change is a cruel irony.  The same can be said for the cycle of drought/flooding experienced in many parts of the world.

Interestingly, and importantly, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently released a  report regarding the impact of agriculture on climate change.  This report also addresses water management as does that from the WRI.  The IPCC report, though, underlines the point that current agricultural practices create an extraordinary amount of methane, a greenhouse gas that is much better at trapping heat than CO2 and is thus a significant contributor to climate change.  As such, a reduction in meat and dairy consumption as well as a re-allocation of agricultural land would be necessary in order to intervene in the escalating environmental damage wrought by a lifestyle dominated by such dietary habits.

WBUR’s Here and Now addressed the IPCC report by focusing on the degradation of the Amazon rainforest.

The BBC’s Newshour also covered the IPCC report this morning (8/8/19).  As part of the coverage, several person-in-the-street interview clips were broadcast at the beginning of that segment.  Perhaps not surprisingly, some were not interested in diet modification and others needed more evidence of the environmental damage before considering a change.  It was not clear as to what more info would be needed to recognize the need for intervention.  Would those individuals read the IPCC report?  Would they listen to the rest of the BBC segment for the details about land degradation and climate change? A few did say they would alter their eating habits.  While these responses were expected, they are not in the aggregate encouraging.

Part of the problem here is the “all or none” manner by which the environmental impact of diet is presented and/or perceived-either one must give up all meat and all dairy or do nothing different.  Indeed, one of the best ways to create resistance is to tell people that they have to give up “all” of something.  (As an aside, this is one of the prime tactics used by the NRA and others to promote the fear of gun control.)  Heels dig in and the planet continues to cook (if you pardon the pun here).  There is middle ground.  This article details the potential benefits if one were to forego the eating of beef for just one meal a week.  Of course, the further one moves away from a meat/dairy heavy diet, the better for the environment.  This is not new information.

It goes without saying that water and land are intricately intertwined.  It also goes without saying that humans continue to adversely impact that relationship in ways that further jeopardize the flora and fauna that populate the planet.  The recent WRI and IPCC reports make that abundantly clear.

The information is available.  The science is there.

Take care.

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: