 | Green Buildings, Green Queens? Green LA? | The Oil Drum: Local | The State of the (Energy) Union (and a SOTU open thread) |  |
21 comments on Can New York Replicate Water Success with Energy
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
User login
Personnel
Classic posts
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
PONYC Archives
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
In Switzerland, water consumption per capita has gone steadily down in the past 30 years, despite the growing adoption of ‘modern’ hygiene (showering at least once a day, using deodorant, washing hair every few days, shaving legs, wearing clean underwear everyday, or even more often, etc. etc.) and ‘modern’ cleanliness, for. ex. driving a shiny, clean car.
a) better infrastructure (those leaks, etc.) and more parsimonious industrial use as well as better irrigation procedures in agriculture. Recycling of water. Changes in industry, as mentioned above.
b) Households (the stats don’t do a good job between distinguishing between a and b, sorry), but here is the point: in homes, electricity and cleaning products (made from ‘fossil' and mineral products in part) have displaced water use. Vaccum cleaners, powerful cleaning products, ventilation systems, modern buildings, modern flooring and wall covering (oil..), new machines (waxers, no water..), washing machines for clothes (sparing in water but high on other energy), the giving up of washing dishes (plastic / wood throwaways or a machine that uses little water and very powerful cleansing materials), etc. have had a tremendous effect.
The reason? It is easier. Using basically mostly water to wash clothes, people, surfaces, walls, other, stone terraces, terra cotta floors (almost gone now), food, babies, (argh, those baby wipes - it all counts you know), plants (got your shine-a-plant bomb ready?), toilets, garbage cans, etc. also requires elbow grease, physical work.
Ex: Today, to clean my home, I use no water at all. (Except to swill the sink..) I use industrial products and machines. No water.
I'd like to add that the country with the highest water recycling rate worldwide is Israel (more than 50% if memory serves right.)
I suspect (but don't know) that a big factor in the Swiss case has been tighter environmental controls on industry, plus shifts in industry composition.
Here's my thinking. Switzerland has an economy based heavily on manufacturing (who knew?). But much petrochemical production, for example, has gone elsewhere. And when industry was suddenly faced with a *cost* for using water, in a very Swiss way, they did something about it.
Which is not to say that recycling and very obvious changes in plumbing aren't hugely useful. for example, I scream when I see those 'auto time flush' urinals in institutional settings.
But I *think*, without researching it, that in the likes of California it has not been reductions in per household use of water (always distorting, because people per household has been falling in most countries for a long time) so much as more efficient use of water by industry and agriculture.