Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Jeopardy Game Answers Revised:
See here for the Jeopardy Game Question:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43612250
The actual answers are:
Louise Fortin, Director of Trade, Quebec Government Office with Claude Smith of IWS and Claude Hebert of Evolu-Tec
Source: http://rcciws.com/Press%20Releases/MIR%202009%2011%2017.pdf
See below for picture:
Originally, there had been some "speculation" that the individuals in this picture was, Claude Smith of IWS, Claude Hebert of Evolu-Tec and a person described as "jean" on this discussion board. Due to the above link as provided in today's press release, it is clear that this isn't "jean."
fun
FRPT Chart:
MaryKateAustin created a chart by request. See link:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43671914
If you want the chart, which can also be found below, just replace the "(" with "[" and ")" with "]" found in the below string then paste into a message or I-Box. Enjoy! Good luck!
(chart)stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=FRPT&p=D&yr=1&mn=9&dy=0&i=p68445451665&a=183739390&r=5067(/chart)
fun
FRPT Chart: Thank you MaryKateAustin.
From what I understand, the recent drop was due to a contract that was lost. Thank you for your valued time and consideration.
Sincerely,
funmaxus
FRPT please.
House Passes Broad New Security Regulatory Legislation for Water Supplies – House legislation to create a new EPA regulatory security program for drinking water and wastewater utilities passed the House on a vote of 230 – 193 today (see summary of legislation).http://hsc.house.gov/SiteDocuments/2868points.pdf
ghcnj,
I keep finding pictures of them at the 2009 Atlanta International Environmental Trade Mission:
http://www.environmentaltrademission.org/
Here's another picture of Claude, Claude and "jean?"
Larger picture below...
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Environmental-Trade-Mission/101875853475#/photo.php?pid=2697674&id=101875853475&fbid=161042403475
Man, that "jean" person that everyone keeps talking about surely gets around!
fun
Shirley Franklin in running for EPA region chief?
http://atlantaunsheltered.com/2009/07/22/shirley-franklin-in-running-for-epa-region-chief/
EPA, EPA, hmmm I wonder where I've seen that before?
Oh yeah that's right RCC Holdings Corp and their sole subsidiary, IWS...
EPA
http://www.epa.gov/etv/vt-wqp.html#deconwt
What is the ETV program: The Environmental Protection Agency created The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program. The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program verifies the performance of innovative technologies that have the potential to improve protection of human health and the environment. ETV accelerates the entrance of new environmental technologies into domestic and international marketplaces. Verified technologies are included for all environmental media—air, water, and land.
http://www.epa.gov/etv/
ETV
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06130s.pdf
Please see below for the reports, which can be found on the EPA, ETV website:
Company/Technology Name International Wastewater Systems
Model 6000 Sequencing Batch Reactor System (With Coagulation, Sand Filtration, and Ultraviolet Disinfection)
Verification Report and Statement Report (PDF) (97 pp, 1.59 MB) August 2006
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06130.pdf
Statement (PDF) (7 pp, 200 KB)
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06130s.pdf
Test/Quality Assurance Plan
Quality Water Systems, Inc. (International Wastewater Systems), September 2004
Verification Protocol
Protocol for the Verification of Wastewater Treatment Technologies (PDF) (54 pp, 592 KB) April 2001
http://www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/04_vp_wastewater.pdf
Environmental Technology? Verification Report
Evaluation of a Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Technology
International Wastewater Systems, Inc. Model 6000 Sequencing Batch Reactor System
(With Coagulation, Sand Filtration, and Ultraviolet Disinfection)
Prepared by NSF International Under a Cooperative Agreement with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Pages: 97 (The Full 97 page report)
http://epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r06130.pdf
IWS Demonstrated their SBR6000 System at the EPA Convention in Washington. To be able to demonstrate at the EPA Convention you must be an EPA/EPV Vendor.
Video Here: http://www.voanews.com/mediaassets/english/2008_05/Video/wmv/EPANewGreenTechnology-vb.wmv
EPA ETV and SBIR Programs
Participants:
RCC Holdings Corp.
RCC International Wastewater Systems, Inc.
http://www.scgcorp.com/etvsbir08/Orgs.htm
EPA/600/R-09/043 April 2009
Today’s Environmental Technologies—Innovative Solutions for Regional Issues
U.S. EPA ETV and SBIR Programs Regional Workshop,
October 7–8, 2008, U.S. EPA
Participants:
RCC Holdings Corp.
RCC International Wastewater Systems, Inc.
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:tg1fveDVJNwJ:www.epa.gov/etv/pubs/600r09043.pdf+rcc+%22claude+smith%22&cd=40&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
President of IWS to Speak at EPA Conference
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200708/ai_n19497698/
Voice of America Includes RCC/IWS System in EPA Washington Science. The Voice of America, which first went on the air in 1942, is a multimedia international broadcasting service funded by the U.S. government through the Broadcasting Board of Governors. VOA broadcasts more than 1,000 hours of news, information, educational, and cultural programming every week to an estimated worldwide audience of more than 115 million people. http://www.voanews.com/english/figleaf/wmafilegenerate.cfm?filepath=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Evoanews%2Ecom%2Fmediaassets%2Fenglish%2F2008%5F05%2FVideo%2Fwmv%2FEPANewGreenTechnology%2Dvb%2Ewmv
err, The judges will take the first half of that answer!
fun
Ooh, I'm sorry but that answer is incorrect.
Hint: One individual works for a sole subsidiary of RCC Holdings Corp. The other individual works for known JV of both RCC Holdings Corp and the sole subsidiary. hint hint.
Its time to play Jeopardy. Remember to answer the question in the form of a question. If the answer provided isn't answered in the form of a question, then the answer will be considered incorrect. Ok, so let's get started.
Q. Name two of the three individuals in the picture. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Environmental-Trade-Mission/101875853475?ref=share#/photo.php?pid=2697639&id=101875853475&fbid=161042158475
Jeopardy Theme Song:
Big names attended that Water Symposium. Nice find.
ESD Institutes Water Symposium: List of Reports
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/index.htm
The Engineering Society Of Detroit
ESD Institute
DOWNLOAD THE ESD INSTITUTE WATER SYMPOSIUM REPORT:
REPORT
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/report.pdf
Appendix A: Michigan Clean Water Executive Summary
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/A.pdf
Appendix B: Michigan Clean Water List of Participants
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/B.pdf
Appendix C: Facilitators and Water Committee Biographical Information
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/C.pdf
Appendix D: The Engineering Society of Detroit and ESD Institute Board of Directors
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/D.pdf
Appendix E: “The Engineering Society of Detroit Overview for Clean Water
Symposium” — Darlene Trudell, Executive Vice President, Engineering Society of Detroit
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/E.pdf
Appendix F: “Clean Water Symposium” — Christopher J. Webb, J.D., FESD,
and David A. Skiven, PE, FESD, Co-Directors, ESD Institute
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/F.pdf
Appendix G: "The MEDC Water Technologies Cluster” — Gil Pezza,
MEDC — Water Technologies Initiative
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/G.pdf
Appendix H: “The United Nations Global Compact: CEO Water Mandate” —
David Berdish, Sustainable Business Strategies, Ford Motor Company
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/H.pdf
Appendix I: “Water, Waste Water and Drinking Water Issues in Michigan” —
Peter Ostlund, Michigan DEQ, Water Bureau
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/I.pdf
Appendix J: “Master Plan Visioning Work Group” — Charlie Fleetham, Project
Innovations, Inc.
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/J.pdf
Appendix K: “Energy in the Great Lakes — Applications at Detroit Edison” —
David Sonntag, Engineer, DTE Energy
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/K.pdf
Appendix L: “GM — Water Conservation Strategies” — Rob Threlkeld,
Utilities Engineer, General Motors Corporation
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/L.pdf
Appendix M: “Water Withdrawal Assessment Process” — David Hamilton, Chief,
Water Management Section, Michigan DEQ, Land and Water Management
http://www.esdinstitute.net/water/report/M.pdf
ESD Institute
http://ww2.esd.org/home.htm
The University of Michigan-Dearborn is an interactive, student-centered institution committed to excellence in teaching and learning. For more information, visit
http://www.umd.umich.edu/
Additional Water links to business and bids:
http://www.wastewaterbids.com/waterrelated.html
"One could only assume that VERT has 10's of millions of shares."
The real is whether or not Vert actually intends to sell 10's of millions of shares. LOL!
fun
They must not have calculated the answer using the Algo Spreader contained within the Excel spreadsheet yet.
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, "GO COWBOYS!" 1ST PLACE IN THE NFC EAST!
Thank you FuturesJackal,
Without a doubt, this was one of the best reports I've seen on the industry to date. What also struck me was that it didn't cover every country in the world. The focus seemed to be on Europe as this is where the report originated but even then it didn't cover every European country.
The report also did a nice job of categorizing the challenges that need to be met over the coming years. Only at the end did the report then point an investor toward their funds they were pitching.
I think that there are a number of possible investment opportunities available to investors, but being able to identify them as they come along can sometimes be a daunting task. Something I've noticed with water investments is that they generally have less volatility, and only rarely see exceptional movements in pps, and so this type of investment may be geared toward a longer term investor than those that want to flip a stock. Clearly water should be included in an investment portfolio as a long term investment, depending on the type of equity and/or etf held, much in the same manner as perhaps gold. Indeed, I believe water is blue gold.
I think in the coming days, I would like to start to assemble a list of sorts of companies that are involved with water, either directly or through a subsidiary starting from the bottom up. I think that would certainly provide a worthwhile opportunity to those contemplating investing in water and just haven't explored all the available options to them. Much like some of the boards that cover say, gold or silver stocks.
Your thoughts?
fun
Commentary: Once again, just as the double bottom support line is tested, we see a PR.
fun
<<NEWS>>
141 Capital’s Principals Return Shares
Date : 11/12/2009 @ 7:55AM
Source : Business Wire
Stock : 141 Capital, Inc. (ONCP
141 Capital’s Principals Return Shares
141 Capital, Inc. (OTCPK: ONCP).
141 Capital announced today that its CEO, Errol Stone, and Paul D. Strickland, Jr., a director, have collectively contributed 310,000,000 shares of 141 Capital stock to the Company. The shares will be returned to 141’s treasury.
Errol Stone, CEO stated: “We are pleased to make this contribution of 310,000,000 shares. It represents tangible value to our shareholders as it substantially reduces the issued and outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock.”
About 141 Capital, Inc. (www.141capital.net)
141 Capital, Inc., is a publicly traded company based in Chicago. Its primary operations involve commodity trading for its own account utilizing trading systems for trading financial products listed on the world's derivatives exchanges. 141 Capital encourages its shareholders to email any and all questions and suggestions. We usually respond to questions after business hours and understand it may take several days to receive a response. Email: info@141capital.net.
Safe Harbor Act: This release includes forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that involves risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, the impact of competitive products, the ability to meet customer demand, the ability to manage growth, acquisitions of technology, equipment, or human resources, the effect of economic business conditions, and the ability to attract and retain skilled personnel. The Company is not obligated to revise or update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect events or circumstances
Relax. Take a deep breath and then exhale. Go for a walk around the block, or get some exercise. Things are likely to change as they always do. You just never know what might happen. ; )
fun
SAM (Sustainable Asset Management)
SAM Study
Water: a market of the future
Dec 2007
32 Pages
http://www.sam-group.com/downloads/studies/waterstudy_e.pdf
(Below is selected text and pictures from the above pdf file)
"Overall, water consumption has risen sharply in recent
decades. In 1900 annual water extraction volumes
totaled approximately 770 km3. This figure
had doubled by the middle of the century, to 1480
km3. Thereafter consumption soared to 3840 km3
in 2000. This trend is likely to continue in the coming years,
with consumption surpassing 5000 km3 in 2025.3
The extra demand can be explained on the one
hand by relentless population growth and on the
other by higher per capita consumption due to improved
living standards."
PRIVATE CONSUMPTION: WATER BRINGS
PROSPERITY
An average European uses between 150 and 400
liters of water every day for his personal requirements.
Consumption in the US is almost twice as
high, at 580 liters/day per person. In China, by contrast,
the figure is only 90 liters per day on average.
In many developing countries, individual consumption
is well below the limit of 50 liters per day specified
as the critical threshold by the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO).5
In many countries, wastewater is not adequately
treated (or not treated at all) before being channeled
back into the water cycle. These countries
therefore have to cope with undesirable impacts on
human health and the environment. Around 2.4
billion people worldwide have no access to adequate
sanitation. The situation is particularly critical
in Africa, South East/Central Asia and parts of
South America.5
Countries with an efficiently run urban water management
system have invested large sums in their
infrastructure in recent decades. In Switzerland, the
specific repurchase value of the entire public and
private sewer system, along with all the wastewater
treatment facilities, comes to almost CHF 100 billion.
This works out at CHF 13,600 per head of population.
6 Many of these installations are now de
AGRICULTURE: THE MAJOR CONSUMER
Agriculture is easily the world’s heaviest consumer
of water, most of which is used for irrigation. It
takes around 2500 kcal per day to meet one adult’s
energy requirements. One kilogram of bread contains
around 3500 kcal, and it takes roughly 1000
liters of water to produce one kilogram of bread
under optimum growing conditions. Based on this
assumption, it takes around 260 m3 of water to feed
one person for one year with a vegetarian diet.
The more meat contained in a person’s diet, the
higher the associated water consumption. When
meat accounts for 20% of a person’s diet, twice as
much water is consumed for its production.1 This calculation
does not take into account the fact that
conditions for food production are seldom ideal.
Much of the water used is wasted due to crop failures
and losses in irrigation. If production losses are
factored in as well, 550 m3 of water are required to
feed one person a purely vegetarian diet for one year
Because rainfall is distributed so unevenly, not all
countries are able to produce enough food for their
own population. Many governments therefore
have to resort to importing food, which in some
cases accounts for up to 35% of all imports. The situation
becomes even more critical for these countries
if food prices are forced higher by adverse
weather conditions or competition from biodiesel
production. It is perhaps surprising to find that arable
farmland registered only an insignificant increase
worldwide in the period 1960-2000. As a consequence,
the area of cropland required per person
has fallen from around 0.45-0.25 hectares during
this period.
INDUSTRY: CONSUMPTION STABILIZED
AT A HIGH LEVEL
Water also plays a crucial role in industrial production,
whether it be for paper production, tire
manufacture, electricity generation, mining or oil
exploitation. In Europe, industry accounts for just
over half of water consumption, while in the US
the figure is just below 50%.
In contrast to agriculture and urban water management,
where consumption is steadily rising, the situation
is slightly more positive for industrial water
use. Global water consumption by industry rocketed
during the period 1950-1990, from around 150 km3
to over 800 km3 per year.2 Since then, industrial water
consumption has continued to rise worldwide,
but at a much slower pace than in previous decades.
The figure came to roughly 950 km3 in 2000. At the
same time there are significant regional differences.
In Europe and North America, industrial water consumption
after 1980 settled at around 200 km3 p.a.
(Europe) and 300 km3 p.a. (North America). The annual
increase in industrial water consumption has
also been much more gradual in Asia.
2.1. DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
There are three ways in which demographics will
affect water consumption:
– The world’s population will continue to grow in
future decades.
– More and more people are moving from the
countryside into towns.
– General living standards are improving, especially
in the two countries with the largest populations:
China and India.
CONTINUING BOOM IN GLOBAL POPULATION
The world’s current population of approximately
6.6 billion people will continue to swell over the
coming decades. The UN predicts a global population
of 9.2 billion people by the year 2050.
Demand for water will of course escalate purely
in response to this population growth. Experiences
in recent decades even show that water consumption
has grown at a faster rate than the general
population. This trend is mainly attributable
to continuous improvements in living standards. In
1950, for example, per capita annual water consumption
averaged 580 m3. This figure had already
risen to 625 m3 by the year 2000. Given the population
boom in regions such as Asia especially, this
underlying trend is unlikely to be reversed for some
time.
INCREASING URBANIZATION
Rapid population growth is occurring in tandem
with increasing urbanization. More and more people
are moving from the country into the city, usually
because of a real or perceived lack of employment
opportunities in rural regions. The urbanization
trend is clearly reflected in the number of
megacities. In 1950 there were only 86 cities with a
population of over a million, but this figure had
already risen to 387 by 2000.
The number of megacities is increasing rapidly in
Asia, Africa and Latin America especially. The cities
are growing not just in number, but in size: in the
year 2000 the world’s 100 largest cities had an average
population of more than 6 million people.2
UN forecasts indicate that almost 60% of the
world’s population will be living in urban areas by
2030. The proportion is roughly 50% at present,
compared with 29% in 1950.7 Rapid growth of
cities presents a huge challenge to the water sector.
Demand for water services, especially for wastewater
treatment, is booming. Extending basic sanitation
will require huge investments in the coming
years. According to UN estimates, over the next
eight years some 900 million people will need to be
connected to a safe supply of drinking water, and
over a billion connected to proper sewage treatment
facilities, in order to achieve the millennium
target of halving the number of people with inadequate
access to a safe water supply by 2015.2
SOARING DEMAND FOR FOOD
The rise in the world’s population and the improvement
in living standards are also having an impact
on food production. The FAO expects demand for
food to be 55% higher in 2030 than in 1998. Food
production must increase by 1.4% p.a. in order to
meet this demand. The surge in demand will be
driven mainly by developing countries. Intensifying
the farming methods used in these countries should
help to meet most of the increased demand for
food. The FAO expects the overall area under cultivation
to expand. At the same time, the amount
of cropland under irrigation is likely to increase by
20%. This will in turn push up water consumption
by 14%, potentially causing local bottlenecks in areas
such as the Middle East and North Africa,
where there is likely to be less water available for
agricultural use. These countries will therefore be
forced to import even more food than at present.
OVEREXPLOITATION OF RESOURCES
The consequences of overexploiting water resources
are already manifesting themselves in different
parts of the planet. Once mighty rivers now
carry only a fraction of their former water volume,
and the groundwater table is steadily falling. 11
countries accommodating almost half the world’s
population – China, India, Pakistan, the US, Israel,
Egypt, Libya and Algeria – currently have a negative
groundwater balance.8
Overexploitation of water has dramatic consequences
at local level:
– In the region around the Spanish city of Huelva
the water table has been steadily falling for some
years because many farmers had been illegally
siphoning off groundwater to irrigate their fruit
crops. This overexploitation is posing a threat to
the Doñana national reserve in particular, which
contains one of the most important marshlands in
Europe.9
– On occasions China’s second largest water course,
the Yellow River, does not even reach the sea, or
peters out into no more than a stream.10
– In the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, the expansion
of agriculture has led to a situation where
the Kaveri river, once 300 meters wide, dries up
on occasion. In some places the water table has
fallen by 300-400 meters.8
– Farmers in the southwest of the US are feeling the
effects of the overexploitation of groundwater:
the level of the Ogallala aquifer, the Earth’s third
largest underground water table, has fallen several
meters in recent years. This has caused many
fertile regions to dry out. Many farmers have had
to revert to more basic crops, which generate less
income. Although the size of the irrigated area
has shrunk again, it will only take another 20-30
years before the Ogallala aquifer dries up completely.
8
In view of these problems, some countries have
plans for large-scale canal systems to divert water
and alleviate the shortage in arid regions. India, for
example, has launched a river-linking project to
combine 14 rivers flowing from the Himalayas with
rivers from the south. China has started work on a
huge project to divert water away from the Yangtze
into the arid regions of the north. And Spain too
also has plans for channeling water from the north
to the south. One common thread of these numerous
projects is that they are often a source of public
controversy and are bound to have serious consequences
for the environment.
TAPPING INTO NEW WATER SOURCES
Although the water supply infrastructure is in a
very dilapidated state in many countries, with large
volumes of water being wasted through leakage,
countries where water is scarce are increasingly trying
to expand freshwater supplies through the use
of desalination plants. The installed capacity of these
plants has increased enormously in recent decades.
Back in 1970 it was only possible to desalinate
770,000 m3 of water per day globally, but this figure
has now been increased to well over 40 million
m3 daily. There is no sign of this trend letting up for
a while, given that annual newly installed capacity
is constantly rising. New capacity of over 3 million
m3 per day was installed in 2004 alone.11 At the
start of 2005 Saudi Arabia had large-scale desalination
plants with a combined capacity of more
than 4.5 million m3 per day in either the planning
or construction phase. The United Arab Emirates
are backing this technology as well: in January
2005 they planned to commission facilities with a
daily capacity of around 4 million m3. The US is also
a big player in this market. At the start of 2005 it
was planning large-scale plants with a daily capacity
of almost 3 million m3. In California alone there
are currently 15 new plants under construction or in
the planning stage
One reason for the boom in desalination plants is
that their production cost has dropped dramatically
in recent years. Especially in the case of plants using
reverse osmosis technology, operating costs are now
three to four times lower than they were 30 years
ago. With production costs of less than one dollar
per cubic meter of water, these plants are achieving
a price level which (depending on the region) is on
a par with conventional tapping water sources.12
Apart from facilities to desalinate sea water and
brackish water, plants are also being built that are
capable of treating wastewater for reuse in other
applications. The City of Madrid, for example, plans
to invest roughly EUR 100 million over the next
few years to expand its water purification facilities
and to install a 1200 km-long pipe network for
reuse of treated wastewater.
2.2. AGEING INFRASTRUCTURE
In contrast with many developing countries, where
many people still do not have adequate access to
safe drinking water, industrialized nations originally
built their water mains back in the early 20th century.
In many areas huge investments are now required
in order to repair and upgrade the ageing infrastructure.
Water supply and sewer systems have
a service life of roughly 60-80 years and in many
cases have reached the end of their useful lives.
Furthermore, the water mains are not being adequately
maintained in some countries:
– The standard of maintenance for the US water
mains and sewer system – like many other areas
of the infrastructure – is far too low. Leaking pipes
mean that large volumes of precious drinking water
are wasted. The City of San Diego, for example,
buys in 300 million m3 of water every year. 25
million m3 are never actually used, which costs
the city approximately USD 22 million.13 The total
water loss nationwide is probably in the region of
23 million m3 per day, which is equivalent to the
combined water consumption of America’s ten
biggest cities.
– The US environmental protection agency EPA has
identified a huge financing gap for the maintenance
of drinking water and wastewater treatment
facilities over the next 20 years: if spending
continues at the current level, the total gap by the
end of that period will amount to some USD 540
billion. Even if investments rise by 3% p.a. in real
terms, the shortfall would still come to USD 76
billion.14
– In London over 800 million liters of water a day
are lost because the decrepit water main has so
many leaks.15 Under pressure from the industry
regulator, the network operator Thames Water
has now agreed to replace over 1500 km of the
ageing supply network over the next five years.
A desalination plant is also to be built at a cost of
GBP 200 million and will eventually supply 15%
of the fresh water currently lost through leaking
pipes.28
– In France and Spain water is also being used inefficiently:
around 30% of water is lost before it
even reaches the end consumer.16
– Even in extremely arid countries, very little care is
taken in using this precious resource. In Riyadh,
the capital of Saudi Arabia, 21% of the water is
lost due to technical faults. In addition, another
36% of water consumption is never billed for various
reasons. Even so, the inhabitants of Riyadh
pay one of the world’s lowest tariffs for their water
consumption.29
– There is also an urgent need to renovate the
sewer system in Switzerland, most of which was
constructed in the second half of the 20th century
and needs to be renewed over the next few
decades.17 Around 23% of the sewer network
currently has significant or serious defects and
needs to be renovated in the mid-term.6 The situation
is even more critical in the residential property
sector, where up to 85% of the pipework is
sub-standard.18
2.3. HIGHER WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
In many countries the population is suffering not
only from a shortage of water, but also from the
poor quality of the water that is available. Over 1
billion people worldwide have no access to safe
drinking water.
This situation is mainly caused by three factors:
– In developing countries many people living in urban
areas are not connected to a proper sewer
system. The wastewater from these households is
released into the environment without any form
of treatment, polluting groundwater and surface
waters in the process. Solid waste is also frequently
dumped into water courses.
– In many countries, industrial effluent is inadequately
treated. This is a critical problem in China,
for example.
– The fact that farmers have managed to increase
their food production so significantly in recent
decades is mainly due to the increased use of crop
protection agents and fertilizers. In many regions,
these substances are now contaminating the
water and polluting the groundwater.
The range of potential pollutants is enormous: organic
matter decomposing in the water removes the
oxygen that is vital for sustaining life; feces contaminate
the water with bacteria and microorganisms
that spread disease; the runoff from over-fertilized
fields floods rivers and lakes with harmful nutrients;
overwatering and excessive groundwater extraction
increases soil salinity; acid rain changes the pH
value; heavy metals and toxic compounds from industrial
processes are contaminating drinking water
and inappropriate cultivation methods are releasing
large quantities of fine particulates into the
water which is also causing the water quality to deteriorate.
The lack of adequate sanitation facilities in countries
with poor infrastructure is one of the major causes
of widespread gastrointestinal disorders. For children
especially, this can have deadly consequences. The
number of deaths caused every year by contaminated
water is estimated at up to 5 million worldwide.
Setting up a comprehensive sanitation system
as typically found in industrialized nations is not
feasible within a reasonable time frame, mainly
because cities in these countries are growing so
rapidly. Because of this, simpler solutions to the
sanitation problem in these countries are being
sought.
One point worth raising in this context is that a correlation
has been found to exist between water
treatment and economic prosperity. A comparison
of different countries shows that those with a high
level of value added spend more money per capita
on water treatment than less prosperous countries.
It is interesting to note from this comparison that
China spends comparatively little on wastewater
treatment.19 It is less surprising to encounter increasing
numbers of reports about severely polluted
watercourses in the world’s most populous country.
Many rivers in China are so badly polluted that not
even industry can use the water. According to official
statistics, the drinking water of 300 million Chinese
people is classed as contaminated, and in nine
out of 10 cities it is unfit to drink.10
NEW POLLUTANTS IN THE WATER
In industrialized countries, decent water quality is
more or less guaranteed nowadays thanks to the
provision of advanced water and wastewater treatment.
But these countries are increasingly facing
new challenges. Investigations in Switzerland have
shown that despite the construction of new sewage
treatment plants, hazardous chemicals are still entering
the watercourses. Especially in times of heavy rainfall
acute concentrations of toxic nitrogen compounds,
such as nitrite and ammonium, are being
detected at sewer overflows, and large quantities
of pesticides and nitrate find their way into the
groundwater when they are used in farming.20
Another problem is the constant stream of new
substances and compounds entering the water
cycle which wastewater treatment systems are unable
to remove entirely. The trickiest are endocrineactive
substances, which can have a negative impact
on any living organisms in the water. Another
problematic aspect as far as wastewater treatment
is concerned is that many of these substances are
excreted in human urine. The water used for flushing
heavily dilutes these substances, however, thereby
making it more difficult to remove them, despite
using the latest technologies in sewage treatment
systems.16
GREATER HEALTH AWARENESS
For increasing numbers of people in developed
countries, water is not only a basic commodity, but
also of a lifestyle product. In Germany, for example,
today’s consumer can choose from around 500 different
domestic water brands, all of them different
in terms of taste and origin. And these are complemented
by many other types of mineral water imported
from abroad
2.4. CLIMATE CHANGE
In many regions of the world, climate change will
have a significant impact on global water resources
in the coming decades. In its latest report, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)22
anticipates the following trends:
– In the high latitudes and in some tropical regions,
the average annual runoff will increase by 10-40%
by the middle of this century.
– It is likely that even more areas will be affected
by drought, and water shortages will be more
common.
– An overall increase in the frequency of heavy
downpours is predicted. This also makes it more
likely that human settlements will experience
severe damage.
– The volumes of water stored in glaciers and the
snow pack will decline over the course of the next
century. This means that after a phase of increased
discharge there will be less water available
in regions supplied by meltwater running off
from major mountain chains. This is an ominous
development, because over a sixth of the world’s
population currently lives in these regions.
IMPACT WILL VARY FROM ONE REGION
TO THE NEXT
In addition to these general statements, the IPCC
also provides forecasts on the effects of global
warming on specific regions:
– In Europe, Mediterranean countries will be most
heavily affected by climate change. The IPCC predicts
that Southern Europe will generally have to
cope with far more difficult conditions, including
high temperatures, extreme drought, poor water
availability and subsequently limited potential for
exploiting water as an energy source.
– In Central and Eastern Europe, IPCC predicts less
rainfall in the summer. This could spell trouble,
since some parts of this region already experience
relatively low rainfall throughout the summer.
– In Central, Southern, Eastern and South East Asia
the volume of fresh water available in the large
river basins is predicted to fall.
– The water supply problems in Southern and Eastern
Australia, as well as in New Zealand, are likely
to deteriorate up to 2030 due to evaporation and
less rainfall.
– In North America, it will mainly be the west of
the country that is affected by the impacts of climate
change on the hydrological regime. Rising
temperatures in the western mountains will
make the snow pack shrink, increase flooding
in winter, and will result in lower runoff volumes
in the summer. This is likely to intensify competition
for the overexploited water resources in that
region.
– Even countries that do not directly experience water
shortages as a result of changing weather
conditions will feel the ripple effects of climate
change. In Switzerland, for example, low-lying areas
can expect to experience more frequent and
in some cases more devastating flooding in winter
and spring as a result of climate change. At
the same time, unusually dry spells in the summer
are likely to increase significantly
EXPANSION OF DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
Worldwide, more than USD 65 billion is spent every
year on maintaining and expanding the water
mains. In addition, the operating costs amount to
over USD 100 billion. Investment costs are expected
to almost double by 2016. Strong growth is also
forecast in wastewater treatment. Current annual
investments of approximately USD 75 billion will
climb to roughly USD 140 billion by 2016. In the
case of both drinking water and wastewater, almost
two thirds of the investments will be directed
to water distribution networks and sewer systems.25
Providers of services and equipment such as pipes
The bulk of this growth is attributable to the burgeoning
global population. Since the population is
growing fastest in developing countries, economical
but also efficient technologies are needed to
cater for these countries’ requirements. Decentralized
systems for water supply and wastewater
treatment also play an important role here, since
the provision of new infrastructure cannot keep
pace with the rapid growth of urbanization in
booming cities
3.2. ADVANCED WATER TREATMENT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Demand for wastewater treatment is set to rise
sharply in the coming years. This is particularly true
for Asia: in India and China, untreated industrial
and communal effluents are posing a serious threat
to the population’s health. In these two countries
especially, enormous investments are required to
bring wastewater treatment up to a standard that
is commensurate with these countries’ economic
standing.
Every year around USD 150 billion is spent worldwide
on wastewater treatment, and this figure is
set to exceed USD 240 billion by 2016. The challenge
is not simply to channel the water back into
the waterways once it has been treated, but to
process it so that it can be reused for other applications
(e.g. for watering golf courses). Graywater recycling
facilities with a daily capacity of 15 million
m3 were installed in 2006, and total capacity is set
to rise to 59 million m3 by 2016.
A number of different technologies are also used
for graywater reuse. Membrane systems offer particularly
promising growth potential: sales are expected
At the same time, new challenges are constantly
arising. For example, the contamination of wastewater
with endocrine-active substances presents a
serious problem that urgently needs to be solved in
the near future, as conventional sewage treatment
plants are generally not up to the task. The entire
chain – from the polluter through to release into
the waterways – needs to be rethought. If attempts
to remove the problematic substances at source are
unsuccessful, more sophisticated wastewater treatment
techniques, such as ozone purification, will
be necessary in industrialized countries at least.
DRINKING WATER DISINFECTION
Providing clean drinking water is one of the main
missions of the water industry. The task here is to
provide water not simply in sufficient quantity, but
also of sufficient purity. There are a number of ways
for treating water to make it fit to drink: including
disinfection with ozone, chlorine or chlorine dioxide,
ultraviolet radiation or purification using membrane
filters. Ozone and UV treatment both have
significant growth potential. The market for membrane
technology is particularly attractive, with
sales in the drinking water segment expected to be
roughly eight times higher in ten years’ time than
they are today.
DESALINATION
In recent years desalination has become far more
popular as an alternative for meeting mounting
demand for water. At the end of 2006 desalination
plants with a global capacity of roughly 42 million
m3 of water per day were in service. This capacity
is predicted to pass the 100 million m3/day mark by
the end of 2016. Desalination using membrane
technology (reverse osmosis) is gaining ground over
thermal desalination techniques: in 2006 around
USD 1.8 billion was invested in thermal technologies,
compared with USD 1.4 billion in membrane
systems, but these figures are expected to reach
USD 3.5 billion and 4.5 billion respectively by the
year 2016.
3.3. DEMAND-SIDE EFFICIENCY
In many regions of the world, water has now become
a precious good. The most efficient way to
prevent overexploitation of available water resources
is to invest in technologies that promote more efficient
water usage. The aim here is to achieve the
same level of service with less water, without compromising
on convenience and performance.
Today the market for industrial water treatment is
worth USD 24 billion and is forecast to grow to
around USD 37 billion by 2016.25 This market also
includes the manufacture of technical equipment,
the provision of chemicals and additives for water
treatment, and the development of integrated solutions.
Thank you FuturesJackal for the kind comments. Major changes are happening with regard to the EPA and pending legislation in Congress. UN's Copenhagen conference in conjunction with the MDG will be perhaps announcing some major changes as well. Correctly placed investment will benefit everyone and everything. Again, thank you for creating this board and allowing for a place for research to be posted about the World Water Crisis.
fun
Sponsored by the Committee on Water
Adopted by the NARUC Board of Directors July 22, 2009
http://www.naruc.org/Resolutions/Resolution%20on%20Tax%20Incentives%20for%20Water%20Infrastructure%20Investment.pdf
Resolution Seeking Tax Incentives to Encourage Infrastructure Investment
WHEREAS, Water and wastewater utilities routinely face difficulty securing financing at
reasonable rates for large, multi-year, capital intensive infrastructure projects; and
WHEREAS, The current financial crisis is making access to funding for vital water system
upgrades and repairs even more difficult; and
WHEREAS, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates the costs to replace
aging water and wastewater infrastructure and comply with water quality requirements could
approach $1 trillion over the next 20 years; and
WHEREAS, Investment in water infrastructure means jobs while also assuring that Americans
have access to safe, reliable, and clean water; and
WHEREAS, History provides several proven and easy-to-implement ideas that have been
effectively utilized to stimulate investment in water infrastructure. Among these ideas are those
recommended in a white paper issued by the National Association of Water Companies (NAWC)
which NARUC cited in recent policy positions issued to President Obama’s Transition Team,
key Members of Congress and the EPA Administrator regarding the economic stimulus package;
and
WHEREAS, The policy positions set forth in the white paper by NAWC include:
• Investment Tax Credits: A 10% investment tax credit on all investments in water and
wastewater infrastructure for the next three years;
• Public Utility Dividend Reinvestment: A five year deferral of tax on dividends for all
public utility dividends that are reinvested in infrastructure replacement;
• Tax Exempt Financing: Lifting the cap on Private Activity Bonds for all water and
wastewater investments;
• Accelerated Depreciation/Extend Elective Expensing: A 50% increase, or more, in
depreciation rates for infrastructure replaced over the next three years; and
• State Revolving Loan Funding: An increased funding of these programs and access
to all providers of water and wastewater services, regardless of ownership; and
WHEREAS, Individually, any of these proposals will infuse needed capital into water and
wastewater systems; and
WHEREAS, Taken together, they would be a large step towards meeting the trillion-dollar
investment needed over the next twenty years to assure build-out and maintenance of critical
water infrastructures; and
WHEREAS, NARUC had taken a formal position that the Administration should propose, and
Congress should incorporate, all five mechanisms into any economic stimulus package to assure
Americans continue to receive high quality water and wastewater services; and
WHEREAS, It is imperative that the benefits of clean water be available to all consumers
regardless of whether supplied by government or private-sector providers and that investorowned
utilities not be discriminated against; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Directors of the National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners, convened at its 2009 Summer Committee Meetings in Seattle, Washington,
instructs its General Counsel to continue to advocate for implementation of these policies by the
Administration and Congress.
__________________________________________________________
Sponsored by the Committee on Water
Adopted by the NARUC Board of Directors July 22, 2009
EPA: Will Revise Rules For Power-Plant Wastewater Discharges
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200909151106dowjonesdjonline000378&title=epa-will-revise-rules-for-power-plant-wastewater-discharges
By Siobhan Hughes, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday said that it plans to upgrade rules requiring coal-fired power plants to clean up wastewater before the fluid is discharged into rivers and streams, a move that would require investments in treatment systems.
The action would mark the first time since 1982 that the EPA has updated the guidelines. The agency is already facing a potential lawsuit over what environmentalists say is the agency's failure to limit the spread of toxins into waterways.
The decision comes as efforts to clean up the air by reducing power-plant emissions appear to have created new problems in the form of contaminated wastewater. Air-pollution controls such as scrubbers work by scrubbing the power-plant exhaust with water, which if left untreated can send contaminants into waterways, the EPA said.
The EPA did not set a deadline for action. The agency said that it plans to incorporate the new standards into wastewater-discharge permits once the rule is finalized.
-By Siobhan Hughes, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6654; Siobhan.Hughes@ dowjones.com
Demand Safe Drinking Water in Schools
Urge U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to address the problem of toxic drinking water in the nation's schools
Sponsored by: The Child Health Site
Over the last decade, the drinking water at thousands of schools across the country has been found to contain unsafe levels of lead, pesticides and dozens of other toxins that put the nation's students at risk. Contaminants have surfaced at public and private schools in all 50 states, but the problem has gone largely unmonitored by the federal government, even as the number of water safety violations has multiplied.
Urge U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson to address the widespread problem of toxic drinking water in the nation's schools. Sign the petition below and tell a friend.
In recent years, students at a Worthington, Minn., elementary school and a 6-year old girl in Seattle experienced severe stomach aches and nausea after drinking water tainted with lead and copper. Below are the findings from a database analysis showing federal drinking water violations from 1998 to 2008 in schools with their own water supplies:
• Water in about 100 school districts and 2,250 schools breached federal safety standards.
• Those schools and districts racked up more than 5,550 separate violations. In 2008, the EPA recorded 577 violations, up from 59 in 1998 - an increase that officials attribute mainly to tougher rules.
• California, which has the most schools of any state, also recorded the most violations with 612, followed by Ohio (451), Maine (417), Connecticut (318) and Indiana (289).
• Nearly half the violators in California were repeat offenders. One elementary school in Tulare County, in the farm country of the Central Valley, broke safe-water laws 20 times.
• The most frequently cited contaminant was coliform bacteria, followed by lead and copper, arsenic and nitrates.
Urge U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson to address the widespread problem of toxic drinking water in the nation's schools. Sign the petition below and tell a friend.
Formal Letter being sent to the EPA by the The Child Health Site:
Dear U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson,
I urge you to address the widespread problem of toxic drinking water in the nation's schools. The EPA is responsible for overseeing the safety of our nation's drinking water systems, but it has not taken concrete actions towards a reliable national strategy for monitoring schools' water.
The current process that requires local schools to test and report problems to the state, and then to the local government, is not adequate and prevents the EPA from reliably identifying the worst offenders, carrying out enforcement, and removing unsafe water from our schools. Scientists say the current testing requirements also fail to detect dangerous toxins such as lead, which can cause damage to major organs and may retard children's learning abilities.
It is very important for the EPA to act quickly to address any report of pollution in the water our children drink, as supplies at thousands of schools have been found to contain unsafe levels of lead, pesticides, and dozens of other toxics. This problem must be fixed so that it our schools will never have contaminated water again, and parents can rest assured that their children will be safe. Please act now!
If you are interested in signing the electronic petition, please visit here:
http://www.thehungersite.com/clickToGive/campaign.faces?siteId=5&campaign=safewater
Testimony of
Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Before the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
United States House of Representatives
October 15, 2009
(PDF 7 Pages)
"Data available to EPA shows that, in many parts of the country, the level of significant non-compliance with permitting requirements is unacceptably high and the level of enforcement activity is unacceptably low. For example, one out of every four of the largest Clean Water Act dischargers had significant violations in 2008. Many of these violations were serious effluent violations or failure to comply with enforcement orders.
The government’s enforcement response to these violations is uneven across the country. For example, a violation in one state results in the assessment of mandatory minimum penalties, while in another state, no enforcement action is taken for the same violation. This situation creates a competitive disadvantage for states that are enforcing the law. We need to change this. Strong and fair compliance and enforcement across the country is vital to establishing a level playing field for industrial facilities, preventing some regions from attempting to achieve an economic advantage over others. And most importantly, having clean water is not a luxury. Rather, we need to make sure that all citizens, regardless of the state that they live in,should be able to drink safe water and swim and play in clean lakes, rivers and bays.
We need to address these key problems and that’s why I am happy to announce EPA’s new Clean Water Act enforcement plan.
EPA’s Enforcement Office, led by Cynthia Giles, has recommended to me – and I have decided to act on – three crucial steps to strengthen federal and state Clean Water Act enforcement to better protect water quality.
First, we need to develop more innovative approaches to target enforcement to the most serious violations and the most significant sources. We need to ensure protective permits and appropriate civil and criminal enforcement for factories and large wastewater treatment plants that unlawfully discharge pollutants to waterways. We also need to reshape our enforcement program to be more effective in tackling violations from the many dispersed sources that continue to be serious threats to our waters and a major reason too many of our waters do not meet water quality standards. Some of the biggest threats are posed by concentrated animal feeding operations and by contaminated stormwater that flows from industrial facilities, construction sites, and urban streets into our waters.
Second, we need to strengthen our oversight of state permitting and enforcement programs. Many states have strong water quality protection programs and take enforcement to assure compliance. But we’ve seen great variability among the states in enforcement performance. EPA must clearly
articulate the acceptable “bar” for state clean water programs and consistently hold states accountable. In situations where states are not issuing protective permits or taking enforcement to achieve compliance, EPA needs to act to strengthen state programs and to pursue federal enforcement actions as necessary.
Third, we are and will continue to take immediate steps to improve transparency and accountability. We have a responsibility to “tell it like it is” to the American public.
We have already published the data and information that EPA has on Clean Water Act compliance and enforcement across the country on our website. We will continue this practice as new information becomes available. We also are working to accelerate the development of 21st century information technology tools to help us gather information more efficiently and to make it easier for the public to access and understand that information. For example, I am directing my staff to quickly develop a proposed rule requiring electronic reporting from regulated facilities, to replace the current paper based system. Electronic reporting could save regulated facilities, EPA and the states millions of dollars each year. At the same time, providing that information to the public shines a spotlight on facility performance.
"
Source: http://www.epa.gov/ocir/hearings/testimony/111_2009_2010/2009_1015_lpj.pdf
H.R. 3202, GAO Report, plus selected text from H.R. 3202:
H.R. 3202: Water Protection and Reinvestment Act of 2009
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3202
Full Text http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3202ih.txt.pdf
(Amended): http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3202
for more info see this post: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43300393
Below is the GAO Report to Congress for H.R. 3202
GAO
May 2009
Report to Congressional Requesters
CLEAN WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
A Variety of Issues Need to Be Considered When Designing a Clean Water Trust Fund
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/Clean%20Water%20Trust%20GAO%20Report%20to%20Congressional%20Requesters.pdf
"More than 220 million people in the United States are served by wastewater systems that are composed primarily of a network of sewer pipes and treatment plants that carry and treat wastewater before it is discharged into surface water. Many of these systems were constructed more than 50 years ago and are reaching the end of their useful lives. In addition to the deterioration in the condition of this infrastructure, some of these systems also lack the capacity to adequately treat increasingly large volumes of wastewater, particularly during periods of wet weather. As a result, these systems are releasing large quantities of untreated wastewater into surface waters, which can pose a threat to human and aquatic health. For example, according to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, wastewater systems annually discharge over 850 billion gallons of untreated sewage into U.S. surface waters. Although federal, state, and local governments invest billions of dollars annually in wastewater infrastructure—a total of about $40 billion in 2006—EPA and others have estimated that current spending levels may not be adequate to cover the costs of maintaining and replacing pipes, treatment plants, and other parts of this infrastructure. According to EPA’s estimates, a potential gap of about $150 billion to $400 billion between projected future infrastructure needs and current levels of spending could occur over the infrastructure, EPA and other groups have asserted that the environmental and public health gains made under the Clean Water Act2 during the last three decades could be at risk.
A variety of approaches have been proposed to help bridge a potential gap between projected future infrastructure needs and current levels of spending. For example, one approach would be to increase federal funding for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program, which is the largest source of federal assistance for wastewater infrastructure. About $689 million was appropriated in both fiscal years 2008 and 2009 for the CWSRF program, and an additional $4 billion was appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.3 Under the CWSRF program, EPA provides capitalization grants to the states, which in turn use these funds to make loans to local communities or utilities for various water quality projects. As loans are repaid, the funds are cycled back into the state-level programs to fund additional projects. New funding for the CWSRF program is dependent on federal appropriations. In addition, EPA has promoted its sustainable infrastructure initiative for water infrastructure management, called the Four Pillars, to help meet infrastructure needs. Among other things, the Four Pillars calls for wastewater and drinking water utilities to charge rates for the service they provide that are high enough to enable them to fund future capital needs in addition to their routine operations and maintenance. Still another approach that has been considered to bridge a potential gap between projected future infrastructure needs and current spending levels is to establish a clean water trust fund. In general, federal trust funds collect revenue and distribute funds that have been set aside for specific purposes. A clean water trust fund would provide a dedicated source of funding for wastewater infrastructure that would be similar to some of the trust funds that Congress has established for other infrastructure and environmental programs, such as highway infrastructure construction and coastal wetlands restoration. Some of the revenue for federal trust funds is generated through federal excise taxes on specific products and services.4
In this context, you asked us to provide information on the issues that would need to be addressed if Congress decided to establish a clean water trust fund to help meet the potential gap between projected future wastewater infrastructure needs and current spending levels. Specifically, this report (1) describes stakeholders’ views on the issues that would need to be addressed in designing and establishing a clean water trust fund and (2) identifies and describes potential options that Congress could consider that could generate revenues of $10 billion annually to support a clean water trust fund."
Selected Text from H.R. 3202:
Page 16
12 SEC. 202. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
10 ‘‘(C) to disseminate information to rural,
11 small, and tribal municipalities and municipali12
ties that meet the affordability criteria estab13
lished under section 603(i)(2) by the State in
14 which the municipality is located with respect to
15 planning, design, construction, and operation of
16 publicly owned treatment works and decentral17
ized wastewater treatment systems.’’.
Page 17
21 ‘‘(12) the State will not provide financial assist22
ance using amounts from the fund for any project
23 that will provide substantial direct benefits to new
24 communities, lots, or subdivisions, other than a
25 project to construct an advanced decentralized
26 wastewater system;
Page 18
9 ‘‘(14) the State will allocate funds for high pri10
ority projects in accordance with section 607.’’.
11 (b) ADVANCED DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER SYS12
TEM DEFINED.—Section 502 is amended by adding at the
13 end the following:
14 ‘‘(25) ADVANCED DECENTRALIZED WASTE15
WATER SYSTEM.—The term ‘advanced decentralized
16 wastewater system’ means a system for treating do17
mestic sewage that is located at or near a site at
18 which the sewage is generated, provides more effec19
tive treatment than a conventional septic system,
20 and includes a plan and funding mechanism for
21 long-term maintenance.’’.
Page 19
14 ‘‘(2) for implementation of measures to increase
15 the security of publicly owned treatment works, in16
cluding vulnerability assessment updates and safer
17 alternatives for treatment chemicals;
23 ‘‘(5) for implementation of measures to man24
age, reduce, treat, capture, or reuse municipal storm
25 water, agricultural storm water, and return flows
26 from irrigated agriculture;
Page 20
1 ‘‘(6) for repair or replacement of decentralized
2 wastewater treatment systems that treat domestic
3 sewage;
Page 21
1 ‘‘(B) to provide for public notification of a
2 spill, overflow, or other discharge or release of
3 pollution into waters of the United States or
4 from point sources into areas in which there is
5 a potential risk of public exposure.’’.
Page 24
19 ‘‘(A) ESTABLISHMENT.—On or before Sep20
tember 30, 2010, and after providing notice
21 and an opportunity for public comment, a State
22 shall establish affordability criteria to assist in
23 identifying municipalities that would experience
24 a significant hardship raising the revenue nec25
essary to finance a project or activity eligible
Page 28
4 ‘‘(3) WEIGHT GIVEN TO APPLICATIONS.—After
5 determining project priorities under paragraph (2), a
6 State shall give greater weight to an application for
7 assistance if the application contains such informa8
tion as the State determines to be necessary and in9
cludes—
10 ‘‘(A) approaches other than a traditional
11 wastewater approach that treat or minimize
12 sewage or urban storm water discharges
13 using—
14 ‘‘(i) decentralized or distributed storm
15 water controls;
16 ‘‘(ii) decentralized wastewater treat17
ment;
18 ‘‘(iii) low-impact development tech19
nologies and nonstructural approaches;
20 ‘‘(iv) stream buffers;
21 ‘‘(v) wetland restoration and enhance22
ment;
23 ‘‘(vi) actions to minimize the quantity
24 of and direct connections to impervious
25 surfaces;
VerDate Nov
1 ‘‘(vii) soil and vegetation, or other
2 permeable materials; or
3 ‘‘(viii) actions that increase efficient
4 water use, water conservation, or water
5 reuse;
Page 42
13 (a) GRANT PROGRAM.—The Administrator shall
14 carry out a competitive grant program to support efforts
15 by publicly owned treatment works and community water
16 systems to take actions to increase energy efficiency, re17
duce greenhouse gas emissions, and mitigate the impacts
18 of climate change.
19 (b) ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES.—In order to carry out the
20 program under subsection (b), the Administrator shall
21 award grants to publicly owned treatment works and com22
munity water systems for the following:
23 (1) Facility or process modifications that reduce
24 the use of energy or water, or both.
1 (2) The installation of small renewable energy
2 generators, including methane capture, wind tur3
bines, and micro water turbines.
4 (3) Sustainable practices that minimize the ad5
verse environmental impacts of climate change on
6 water quality and quantity.
7 (4) Projects that increase the ability of publicly
8 owned treatment works or community water systems
9 to withstand the impacts of climate change.
10 (c) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the
11 costs for which a grant is made under this section shall
12 be 65 percent.
13 (d) MAXIMUM GRANT AMOUNT.—The Administrator
14 shall not make a grant under this section to a grantee
15 that exceeds $2,000,000 per fiscal year.
Page 48
3 SEC. 406. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND TECHNOLOGY
4 DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the
6 date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall es7
tablish a national water infrastructure research, develop8
ment, and demonstration program to develop, dem9
onstrate, and transfer innovative or improved technologies
10 and methods for the treatment, control, transport, and
11 reuse of drinking water and wastewater. These tech12
nologies and methods may include—
13 (1) reducing energy consumption in water and
14 wastewater infrastructure;
15 (2) recovering energy and nutrient resources
16 from wastewater;
17 (3) reducing water consumption and returning
18 water for ecosystem use;
19 (4) on-site technologies to generate renewable
20 energy at a publicly owned treatment works, commu21
nity water system, or other municipal water or
22 wastewater facility;
23 (5) measures to control, manage, reduce, treat,
24 infiltrate, or reuse municipal stormwater;
VerDate Nov 24 2008 21:59 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3202.IH H3202 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
49
•HR 3202 IH
1 (6) decentralized or distributed stormwater and
2 wastewater controls and treatment;
3 (7) low impact development technologies and
4 non-structural approaches to treat drinking water,
5 wastewater, and stormwater;
6 (8) reducing the costs of compliance with the
7 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
8 1251 et seq.) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (42
9 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), while retaining or enhancing
10 environmental benefits;
11 (9) improving control and treatment of
12 stormwater and nonpoint sources of pollution;
13 (10) mitigating and adapting to climate change;
14 (11) dual systems that re-use stormwater and
15 wastewater for non-potable water resource needs;
16 (12) development of a new generation of water
17 monitoring reporting and notification techniques;
18 and
19 (13) controlling, limiting, treating, or pre20
venting pharmaceutical and personal care products
21 from being in or entering waters of the United
22 States.
23 (b) CONSULTATION.—In administering the program
24 under this section, the Administrator shall annually hold
VerDate Nov 24 2008 21:59 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3202.IH H3202 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
50
•HR 3202 IH
1 a national meeting to bring together major stakeholders,
2 including representatives from the following:
3 (1) The public.
4 (2) States, local governments, and organizations
5 representing States or local governments.
6 (3) The National Science Foundation, the Na7
tional Academy of Science, the National Academy of
8 Engineering, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Na9
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the
10 Department of Agriculture, the United States Geo11
logical Survey, the White House Office of Science
12 and Technology Policy, the Department of Energy,
13 and the Council on Environmental Quality.
14 (4) Universities, colleges, and other institutions
15 of higher education.
16 (5) Other public nonprofit entities with exper17
tise in research and development of technologies for
18 the treatment, control, transport, and re-use of
19 drinking water, stormwater, and wastewater.
20 (c) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS OR GRANTS.—In
21 carrying out the program under this section, the Adminis22
trator may enter into cooperative agreements or make
23 grants or, both, to develop improved technologies and
24 methods under subsection (a) with or to nonprofit and
25 governmental entities having demonstrated expertise in re-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 21:59 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3202.IH H3202 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
51
•HR 3202 IH
1 search and development of the treatment, control, trans2
port, and re-use of drinking water, stormwater, and waste3
water, including the following entities:
4 (1) The Water Environment Research Founda5
tion.
6 (2) The Water Research Foundation.
7 (3) Public nonprofit entities, including those
8 whose members or subscribers include drinking
9 water, stormwater, and wastewater utilities and local
10 governments.
11 (4) Universities, colleges, and other institutions
12 of higher education.
13 (5) Local governments, including publicly
14 owned treatment works and community water sys15
tems.
16 (6) The National Science Foundation.
17 (7) The National Institutes for Water Re18
sources.
19 (d) DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.—The Adminis20
trator is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements
21 with entities described in subsection (c) and for-profit en22
tities to demonstrate the viability and effectiveness of a
23 new technology for the treatment, control, transport, and
24 re-use of drinking water, stormwater, or wastewater
Page 53
10 SEC. 407. REGIONAL WATER RESEARCH CENTERS.
11 (a) REGIONAL CENTERS.—
12 (1) GRANTS.—The Administrator, in collabora13
tion with the Director of the National Science Foun14
dation, shall make grants to nonprofit institutions of
15 higher learning to establish and operate one univer16
sity water research center in each of such 21 hydro17
regions as the Administrator, in consultation with
18 the United States Geological Survey, may establish.
19 The Administrator, in consultation with the United
20 States Geological Survey, may adjust the boundaries
21 of such regions to assure that none of the
22 conterminous regions are either larger or smaller
23 than another by more than two fold.
24 (2) DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL WATER RE25
SEARCH CENTER.—The Administrator, in collabora-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 21:59 Jul 15, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3202.IH H3202 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
54
•HR 3202 IH
1 tion with the Director, shall designate one of the 21
2 university water research centers as the ‘‘National
3 Water Research Center’’.
4 (3) MISSION.—
5 (A) IN GENERAL.—The mission of the cen6
ters shall be to conduct and coordinate strategic
7 research, education, and outreach for sustain8
able management of water resources in every
9 hydro-climatic region of the United States.
10 (B) NATIONAL WATER RESEARCH CEN11
TER.—In addition to its mission under subpara12
graph (A), the mission of the National Water
13 Research Center shall be to gather, archive, and
14 publish data from the regional centers and to
15 integrate the regional findings into a national
16 research strategy.
jayberwanger,
After reviewing your post history I decided to provide a public post to you. The management of Spooz, stock symbol SPZI is the same management that operates 141 Capital, stock symbol ONCP. 141 Capital several months ago indicated a desire to change its business strategy and has been working on this new strategy ever since. The contact information for Spooz as found in the above I-box and the contact information found at www.spooz.com to my knowledge is no longer valid as Spooz appears to be a non functioning entity. None of the Secretary Of State filings in the US or the UK filing are current. (See below) If there is any hope for Spooz, it appears to be entirely contingent on 141 Capital ever executing the change in business strategy, and even then the outcome for Spooz may be doubtful in my opinion.
Of course, if you are an eternal optimist and believe in miracles, then anything can and will happen... (IMO: Don't hold your breath while waiting).
If you are interested in attempting to contact management, then the only suggestion that I can offer to you is the contact information found for 141 Capital. From the 141 Capital website, the contact information is as follows:
http://www.141capital.net/
141 Capital, Inc.
1585 Ellinwood Street
Suite 214
Des Plaines, Il 60016
312-778-8241
contact: info@141capital.com
Best of luck.
fun
--------------------------------
Illinois: http://www.ilsos.gov/corporatellc/
SOS Filings:
CORP MST 64919911 SPOOZ, INC.
Status REVOKED
CORP MST 66217329 SPOOZ TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Status NOT GOOD STANDING
Nevada: https://esos.state.nv.us/SOSServices/AnonymousAccess/CorpSearch/CorpSearch.aspx
SOS Filings:
SPOOZ, INC. C13049-2004 Default Domestic Corporation
SPOOZ TECHNOLOGIES, INC. C11977-2004 Default Domestic Corporation
SPOOZ TRADING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. E0395022005-7 Default Domestic Corporation
UK:
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/fb0c889faac48bc3b44712ffdeb283e6/wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo
SPOOZ EUROPE LTD
71 HOLGATE ROAD
YORK
NORTH YORKSHIRE
YO24 4AA
Company No. 03218752
Status: Dissolved 01/09/2009
Date of Incorporation: 01/07/1996
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
7220 - Software consultancy & supply
Accounting Reference Date: 30/06
Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/06/2007 (TOTAL EXEMPTION FULL)
Next Accounts Due:
Last Return Made Up To: 01/07/2007
Next Return Due:
Last Members List: 01/07/2006
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
07/03/2008 UNWIN TECHNOLOGY LIMITED
But of course this one is active and current....
------
UNWIN LIMITED
2ND FLOOR
MIDDLESEX 29-45 HIGH STREET
EDGWARE
UNITED KINGDOM
HA8 7UU
Company No. 06734346
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 27/10/2008
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
None Supplied
Accounting Reference Date: 31/10
Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due: 27/07/2010
Last Return Made Up To:
Next Return Due: 24/11/2009
Previous Names:
No previous name information has been recorded over the last 20 years.
A JOINT STUDY
CBO/JCT
Subsidizing Infrastructure
Investment with Tax-Preferred Bonds
October 2009
Unless otherwise indicated, all years in this report are federal fiscal years.
Numbers in the text and tables of this report may not add up to totals because of rounding.
In this analysis, investment in infrastructure is defined as capital spending on transportation,
utilities (such as water and power supply), environmental projects, and schools. In addition,
because they account for a significant share of the tax-exempt debt issued, health care facilities
and hospitals are also treated as infrastructure.
Under this study’s definition, capital spending consists of investment in physical capital, such
as structures and facilities, rather than intangible capital, which is formed by spending on educational
programs or on research and development.
The paper was written by Nathan Musick of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and
the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). Within CBO, Elizabeth Cove Delisle,
Mark Hadley, and Susan Yang provided useful comments, as did Thomas Woodward
(formerly of CBO). Cynthia Belmonte of the Department of the Treasury provided data
and analysis of nonprofit bond issuance. Dennis Zimmerman of the American Tax Policy
Institute and Matt Fabian of Municipal Market Advisors reviewed the draft. (The assistance of
external reviewers implies no responsibility for the final product, which rests solely with CBO
and JCT.)
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10667/10-26-TaxPreferredBonds.pdf
Water: The Ultimate Commodity
by: Hard Assets Investor November 24, 2008 | about: CGW / CWT / FIW / PHO / PIO / WTR
http://seekingalpha.com/article/107743-water-the-ultimate-commodity
We all need water to live. As useful as oil, copper and corn may be, we could get by without them for a while. But water? Water is a necessity. And for some, this makes it the ultimate commodity.
People invest in commodities for a lot of reasons: for diversification; as a way to play growth in the developing world; because they think demand growth will outstrip supply.
By those metrics, water may be the ultimate commodity investment. Demand for water is steady and never-ending, meaning water investments should not be correlated with broader economic developments. Meanwhile, history shows that as economies develop, citizens will demand more and more water to support richer lifestyles, making water an interesting play on countries like China and India. And finally, the world is in a silent water crisis, with rising demand set against limited supply; a classic commodities squeeze.
Water Crisis
The world currently faces a water crisis of both supply and demand.
We're taught to think that there's plenty of water: 75% of the Earth's surface is covered with it. The problem is, most of that water is useless: 97% is seawater, 2.5% is frozen in the ice caps and just 0.5% is fresh and available for use. Worse, much of what remains is contaminated, polluted or otherwise degraded, and not fit for consumption.
On the demand side, water needs are growing ... fast. The world's population growth provides an underlying pressure on demand, while growth in the developing world accelerates that demand curve dramatically.
Meeting this global crisis from a fixed supply will involve massive expenditure, and it will be the companies that clean, support, supply, reuse and save water that will benefit from this flow of capital.
Supply
As if the problem of a fixed supply were not enough, there are three further major supply problems affecting the world's water situation.
First, the distribution of existing water resources around the world is horribly uneven: 60% of the world's fresh water is located in just nine countries. And unlike many commodities, water isn't portable; it simply doesn't make economic sense to transport water from (say) Canada to (say) China; water, even if its value rises tenfold, is simply too voluminous.
Second, where water is actually available, it is often not available in a suitable form. It may, for instance, be either too hot or too old, or, perhaps, too dirty or too salty. Increasingly, it's also too polluted; in the U.S., the gasoline additive MTBE has rendered a significant percentage of wells unfit for human consumption.
Third, in developed countries, where water is generally available as needed, the infrastructure supplying it is old and decaying. Estimates of how much a country like the U.S. must spend upgrading its water infrastructure over the next 20 years measure in the billions.
Demand
Population growth and economic growth are the two biggest drivers of demand. On the one hand, as population numbers increase, so does the demand for potable water. On the other, as economies grow, so does the demand for water for use in both agriculture and industry: the richer people get, the higher they live on the water food chain. The U.S., for instance, is the world leader in water consumption per capita, largely because we live such a rich, luxurious lifestyle.
Water: The Business Activities
While the case for investing in water, as a theme, is compelling, the question remains of how actually to go about making such an investment.
Unfortunately, unlike many other strategic commodities, water is not yet traded on any exchange. Indirect investment, therefore, remains the only option available to investors; that is, investment in those companies in a position to provide solutions to the water crisis. Estimated by some already to be worth $450 billion a year[1], the water and water treatment industry is predicted to grow to some $650 billion in the next 20 years.[2]
The current major investment options are:
Utilities
The job of water utilities is to deliver the actual water to the consumer. Most water in the world is delivered through utilities.
In the U.S., there are a number of large such companies; for example, California Water Services Group (NYSE: CWT) and Aqua America (NYSE: WTR), and myriad small ones. Continued consolidation and rising water values are the key to profits in these markets.
Historically speaking, water utilities have provided consistently strong returns, and these companies remain respected as steady, low P/E and high-yield stocks.
In addition to the current crisis, the further privatization of public water utilities globally will also offer established utilities the opportunity for water utilities to grow their businesses.
Water Treatment
The greatest innovations in the water industry are to be found in the field of water treatment. The three most important technologies are:
Wastewater treatment (whether industrial or domestic) - a market worth more than $200 billion a year - with such players as the French companies Veolia and Suez and the U.S.-based Nalco.
Filtration and chemical treatment, with pure-plays like Calgon Carbon and the involvement of such large entities as ITT and General Electric.
Desalination, an arena in which, again, General Electric plays, together with others such as Dow Chemical and Singapore's Hyflux.
Each of these sectors has a key role to play in solving the water crisis, and each will benefit from efforts to solve the crisis.
Infrastructure
Currently a $50 billion sector, infrastructure companies make their business from manufacturing and supplying equipment - for example, valves, pumps and pipes - and servicing the water utilities - for example, digging wells and irrigation canals. In addition, there are companies that both make and supply the systems to actually monitor, measure and meter water use ... increasingly important as the value of water grows.
Once again, ITT and General Electric are to be found in this space, but so too are a number of smaller specialized companies based both in the U.S. and Europe, such as Badger Meter - a leading provider of residential water meters.
Investing In Water
Companies active in the business of water can be categorized not only by activity, but also by their structure.
The behavior of the small, specialized, often technology-based, companies can be akin to that of any other technology stocks. In contrast, companies like Suez and Veolia are essentially just huge utilities, and behave according. Finally, large conglomerates like General Electric are also major players in the market.
Although there has been considerable consolidation, across its breadth the industry remains highly fragmented, with some very large players and a slew of midsize and smaller players. As a result, and with the large role that conglomerates play, developing a coherent water-themed investment strategy is challenging.
There are now, however, several water-sector tracking indexes available to help address just this issue: the ISE Water Index ((HHO)), the Palisades Water Indices ((PIIWI and ZWI)) and the S&P Global Water Index ((SPGTAQUA)). Backtested data on each of these stocks shows water has been a strong-performing theme already; moreover, water stocks have had only a weak correlation to the S&P 500, and have been negatively correlated with other commodities, making them a strong diversification option for new portfolios.
These indexes are currently "investable" through four different exchange-traded funds, or ETFs: First Trust ISE Water (FIW), Powershares Global Water (PIO), Powershares Water Resources (PHO) and Claymore S&P Global Water (CGW).
Conclusion
Water is the most important commodity in the world, and it is a commodity "in crisis." As the world's population grows, and as the emerging markets develop, ever more water is needed and commensurately less is readily available. For companies that find, extract, clean, supply, reuse and save water, business opportunities are, therefore, set only to multiply. Consequently, for investors, water as a theme, commodity and a sector provides a unique and exciting investment opportunity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] "The Global Water Market: A Slow Business With Pockets of Action." Global Water Intelligence. Issue 10, Oct 2007. 30 Sept 2007 <http://www.globalwaterintel.com/index.php?page=articleView&articleId=2396>
[2] Water and Waste Water Markets Worldwide Increase to Over 650 Billion US $ by 2025. More High Tech. Helmut Kaiser Consultancy. 12 Jul 2007. 30 Sept 2007 http://www.prlog.org/10023705-water-and-waste-water-markets-worldwide-increase-to-over-650-billion-us-by-2025-more-high-tech.html
Outstanding Source for Important News Regarding Water:
Rural Water Washington (News & Public Statements)
http://www.ruralwater.org/
Here are the headlines from just the week of November 2:
To read the entire article, click on the above link for Rural Water Washington, then
click on the selected article.
--------------------------------------------------
Chemical Security Update – The House could vote as soon as next week on new comprehensive security regulatory legislative for water and wastewater systems: HR 2868 and HR 3258. Under a compromise announced by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee last week, EPA would oversee security at drinking water and wastewater facilities. The compromise resolves the issue by authorizing the EPA to have oversight over drinking water and wastewater facilities.
Appropriations Update (link)
--------------------------------------------------
FY2010 EPA Appropriations Bill New SRF Appropriations and Authorizations: $2,100,000,000 for the CWA SRF and $1,387,000,000 for the SDWA SRF. The bill directs that not less than 20 percent of the SRF funds shall be used to address green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative activities. And not less than 30 percent of SRFs funds shall be used to provide additional subsidy in the form of forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans, or grants (or any combination of these), except for the CWA funds appropriation this section shall only apply to the portion that exceeds $1,000,000,000
--------------------------------------------------
Two Parts per Billion… Columbia Missouri Interaction with EPA’ Dinsinfection Byproducts Rules – quoted from the local paper, “the permissible level for THMs in a water supply is 80 parts per billion; the THM levels in the city water supply in 2007 rose to 82.3 parts per billion (more).” The city is introducing chloramines to their water for treatment – which is witnessing a growing grassroots opposition campaign (to chloramines), “chloramine itself has been associated with severe respiratory toxicity and skin sensitivity (more).” In recent weeks, some Senators have expressed a renewed interest in reform of the way EPA is implementing the SDWA for systems experiencing incidental violations of disinfection byproducts and naturally occurring contaminants’ standards. Some of these Senators have historically expressed concern and consternation over EPA’s implementation for these rules (see comments to EPA on the agency’s DBPs and Variances policies).
--------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Apartment Complex Legionnaire's Outbreak Blames on Water (more).
--------------------------------------------------
Climate Change and Rural Water – the following are comments from David Saddler (AZ rural water) Rural Water’s representative on the EPA National Drinking Water Advisory Committee (NDWAC) regarding the panel’s recent agenda of looking at climate change and its impacts on water supplies (read em).
--------------------------------------------------
Drinking Water and Wastewater Utilities will Spend $448 to $944 Billion Between Now and 2050 to Adapt with Climate Change - according to a recent report by the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (more)
--------------------------------------------------
New AWWA Web Blog Announced – highlighting AWWA’s DC staff lively conversation and blog about legislation, regulation and policies (link). Additionally, it features photos of the handsome and sartorial tasteful AWWA DC staff.
--------------------------------------------------
USGS’s Latest Water Use Report - continues to show that the two largest water users are power generation (49%) and agricultural irrigation (31%), with drinking water being the third largest use (11%) (more from AWWA).
--------------------------------------------------
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
COST ESTIMATE
May 22, 2009
S. 1005
Water Infrastructure Financing Act
As ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
on May 14, 2009
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10242/s1005.pdf
Note, the above CBO Cost Estimate was ordered for Senate Bill 1005
US Tracks, bill # S. 1005: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1005
Note: This bill appears to be dead in committee, however language and data collected from one bill is
often transferred into another bill. Below is related pending legislation.
Related Legislation: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1005&tab=related
H.R. 895: Water Quality Investment Act of 2009
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-895
H.R. 89: Goleta Water Distribution System Conveyance Act
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-89
H.R. 3202: Water Protection and Reinvestment Act of 2009
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3202
S. 854: Clean Water Affordability Act
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-854
S. 1371: Clean Renewable Water Supply Bond Act of 2009
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1371
Of the above water bills presently in committee and under consideration, H.R. 3202: Water Protection and Reinvestment Act of 2009
has the highest number of sponsors, currently at 22. What is also interesting regarding H.R. 3202 is that while it was still in
draft only form and yet to be introduced formerly as a bill, The Wall Street Journal ran an article about the pending legislation
on July 15, 2009. I provided a post on the matter found here: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39562694
See below for the majority of the information found in that prior post:
Taxes Sought to Fix Aged Infrastructure
The Wall Street Journal
PG A4
U.S. NEWS JULY 15, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124761944347442547.html#mod=todays_us_page_one
By JAKE SHERMAN
WASHINGTON—A bipartisan group of lawmakers is proposing to raise about $10 billion a year to fix aging water and sewer systems by taxing the biggest users.
The legislation, which has sparked significant opposition from industry, is expected to be unveiled Wednesday at a news conference on Capitol Hill.
The bill calls for a 0.15% tax on any corporation earning a profit of more than $4 million a year. Manufacturers of any water-based beverages, excluding alcohol, would see a four-cent tax per container. Soaps, detergents, toiletries, toilet tissue, water softeners and cooking oils would face a 3% tax on wholesale prices. Pharmaceuticals would be taxed at 0.5% of the wholesale price.
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D., Ore.), the main sponsor of the Water Protection and Reinvestment Act, said he believed the bill was necessary to repair an aging system used by all Americans. The taxes, he said, would target some of the biggest users of water and companies that have the biggest stake in the efficiency of the system. He called the fees modest and fair.
The federal government has paid an average of $2.3 billion each year since 2000 to help maintain the water system. A spokeswoman for Mr. Blumenauer said the trust fund created under the bill would bring in about $10 billion a year.
Concerns about the safety and integrity of water systems is a perennial concern, particularly in older cities. Recent water-main breaks in New York City have disrupted traffic and transit.
A U.S. Chamber of Commerce representative, Janet Kavinoky, said: "Anytime there's a broad base of general taxes being used to fund infrastructure, the chamber is going to take a close look at how that affects our members."
The chamber also has concerns that a federal subsidy for infrastructure repair could send a signal to local municipalities that they don't need to charge the real cost of providing water.
Representatives of the industries that would be hardest hit by the proposed fees said they feel unfairly targeted.
Joe Doss, president and chief executive of the International Bottled Water Association, said the proposal singled out one product category, while other water users wouldn't see tax increases.
Kevin Keane, senior vice president of the American Beverage Association, said beverage companies would almost certainly raise their prices to help compensate for the tax. This is just another example of "raising taxes on the middle class," Mr. Keane said. [It] would just add to the burden of taxpayers at a time they are already facing economic struggles," he said.
A representative from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America said they have not yet developed an opinion on the legislation.
Mr. Blumenauer is set to testify on the legislation Wednesday in front of a panel of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Write to Jake Sherman at Jacob.Sherman@wsj.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water Protection and Reinvestment Act -From what I can determine, the bill is to be introduced today at 2 pm.
At the present, I'm unable to locate the exact bill number. In summary, as the WSJ article explained, if you
use water you will be taxed in order to create a trust fund. There has been roughly a 78% drop in government
expenditures on water and sewage since 1978, and the shortfall in what is required to maintain an adequate
system and what we presently have is estimated to be in the billions. Below is a quick dd summary of the bill.
What was interesting to me, is that the Wall Street Journal felt that the bill which has yet to be introduced
was so important to provide an article on page A4 and actually dedicated space to it.
Below is some dd:
Gov Track US. Track legislation:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billsearch.xpd?PostFormID=billsearch&session=111&q=Water+Protection+and+Reinvestment+Act&sponsor=400033&cosponsor=&chamber=&status=&sort=
Clean Water Resotration Act (S. 787)
Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act (S. 937)
Clean Water Network
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/
The Water Protection and Reinvestment Act of 2009:
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org//issues/sewage/sewagenews/displaycontent.cfm?ContentID=799&ContentTypeID=1&PageFormat=DisplayContent&ConfigID=127
Clean Water Trust Factsheet from Rep. Blumenauer's Office
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/Clean%20Water%20Trust%20Factsheet%20from%20Blumenauer's%20Office.pdf
Clean Water Trust GAO Report
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/Clean%20Water%20Trust%20GAO%20Report%20to%20Congressional%20Requesters.pdf
CWN position on the Clean Water Trust Fund
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/CWNpositionstatementCWTF.doc
Dereth Glance's T&I Subcommittee Testimony on Clean Water Trust
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/Dereth%20Glance%20Testimony.doc
Water Protection and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Draft Copy)
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/Water%20Protection%20and%20Reinvestment%20Act%20Text.pdf
Opinions on compromise Clean Water Restoration Act
CWRA Opinions
http://www.cleanwaternetwork.org/files/CWRA%20Opinion%20Pieces.doc
EPA’s Reanalysis Of Perchlorate Data To Show New Methodology, New Numbers
http://www.amwa.net/cs/news/mmb
AMWA is an association of the largest publicly owned drinking water systems in the U.S. AMWA is a voice on critical national issues involving legislation, regulation and security, and provides resources for utility management and leadership
July 13, 2009
http://www.amwa.net/galleries/mmb/MMB%207-13-09.pdf
The National Association of Clean Water Agencies
NACWA represents the interests of the nation's public wastewater agencies and organizations dedicated to protecting public health and the environment.
http://www.nacwa.org/
NACWA on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/NACWA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressman Blumenaer's website:
http://www.blumenauer.house.gov/
Water infrastructure also requires investment
http://blumenauer.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=347&Itemid=215#water
"Congressman Blumenauer has advocated increased spending on wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. He has been the keynote speaker to a number of water infrastructure organizations. In May, he addressed the National Clean Water Policy Forum, put on by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA). In September, he addressed NACWA’s Clean Water America Awards Gala, celebrating the 35th anniversary of the Clean Water Act and expressing support for a trust fund. In October, he spoke at a press conference to release a report written by the organization Food and Waterwatch highlighting the need for investment in water infrastructure and particularly a Clean Water Trust Fund. He has also convened a broad spectrum of stakeholders, experts, and organizations involved in wastewater and drinking water, water resources, and financing to focus on financing options for increased spending on water infrastructure.
In March, Congressman Blumenauer offered a successful amendment to the Water Quality Financing Act (which reauthorized the Clean Water State Revolving Funds) to prioritize funding towards existing water infrastructure needs. In October, the House passed Blumenauer’s resolution recognizing the 35th Anniversary of the Clean Water Act and committing Congress to, among other things, working towards “a sustainable, long-term solution to address the Nation's decaying water infrastructure.”
There are 72,000 miles of sewer and water pipe that are over 80 years old.
The EPA estimates that the funding gap for water infrastructure is $400 billion, but even so, the federal contribution to clean water spending shrank from 78% of total spending in 1978 to 3% today."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is somewhat unrelated to the topic of the water bill being introduced, but interesting...
EPA Announces WaterSense Certification System
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/specs/homes_certification.htm
EPA is pleased to announce the release of the WaterSense new home certification system, a vital step for building the infrastructure necessary for the upcoming WaterSense New Homes program.
Look for the Label
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/pubs/label.htm
The WaterSense label appeared first on professional certification programs for landscape irrigation professionals. These WaterSense labeled programs verify professional proficiency in water-efficient irrigation system design, installation/maintenance, and auditing. The program will allow homeowners to ask for professionals who partner with the WaterSense program.
WaterSense will also make the label available for water-efficient products in the home, beginning with toilets. As defined by EPA's WaterSense specification, high-efficiency toilets (HETs) use less than 1.3 gallons per flush. Find the most up-to-date list of labeled products and programs
This certification system includes the general procedures for builders to apply for the WaterSense label once the final new homes specification is released later this year and the process and requirements for parties involved in training, home inspection, certification, and issuance of the WaterSense label.
EPA invites organizations qualified and interested in administering the program for WaterSense to apply. For more information on the requirements and application process for program administrators, or to find out more about the WaterSense new home certification system, please visit the WaterSense Web site. If you have any questions, please contact the WaterSense Helpline at (866) WTR-SENS (987-7367) or watersense@epa.gov.
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/specs/homes_certification.htm
Certification System for WaterSense Labeled New Homes
EPA requires all products bearing the WaterSense label to be independently certified. This certification provides consumers with confidence in both the water efficiency and performance of WaterSense labeled products.
The Certification System for WaterSense Labeled New Homes is meant to supplement the WaterSense Program Guidelines and specifically outlines the process for certification and labeling of new homes in compliance with the Water-Efficient Single-Family New Home Specification, including the general procedures for builder application and receipt of the certificate containing the WaterSense label for new homes. The certification system also describes the general application procedures and requirements for those parties involved in training, home inspection, certification, and issuance of the WaterSense label.
To ensure that WaterSense labeled new homes meet specific efficiency and performance criteria, EPA has released its final WaterSense new home certification system (PDF) (26 pp, 153K, About PDF).
Program Administrator
EPA has opened up the application process for all program administrators interested in providing services for WaterSense. Any program administrator meeting the final application and approval criteria may apply at any time.
To apply, please submit an application letter to the WaterSense Helpline, as described in the WaterSense new home certification system (PDF) (26 pp, 153K, About PDF).
Technical Information
Are you a home builder or other party interested in finding out more about the development of the final WaterSense new home certification system? To learn more about the certification process, including the proposed draft certification system, public comments on the draft requirements, and EPA's response to the public comments, please see:
•Final WaterSense New Home Certification System (PDF) (26 pp, 153K, About PDF)
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/final_certification_system508.pdf
•Response to Comments on the Draft New Home Certification System (PDF) (10 pp, 55K, About PDF)
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/new_home_comment_response508.pdf
•Comments on the December 2008 Draft Inspection and
Certification Systems for New Homes (PDF) (32 pp, 157K, About PDF)
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/home_comments_certificationsystem508.pdf
•Draft WaterSense New Home Certification System (PDF) (22 pp, 131K, About PDF)
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/home_certification_system508.pdf
Partners:
http://www.epa.gov/watersense/partners/partners.htm
"Drinking water is a good example of a good that has inelastic characteristics in that people will pay anything for... "
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_elasticity_of_demand
I've indicated before how I start the day by reading the WSJ and today of course was no different. Just another article found both in print and online about Billions of dollars (measured in USD) being allocated to the worldwide water problem. What people forget of course about water is that, "Drinking water is a good example of a good that has inelastic characteristics in that people will pay anything for... " source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_elasticity_of_demand
So, sit back and relax and know that you are sitting on blue gold, assuming that you are invested in water of course (excuse the pun lol).
Just how long will it take before your investment in water starts to pay off? I don't know. However at some point, people will eventually figure
out just how important it is and when they do, you will be happy that you were one of the few that figured it out first.
Below is a pict-o-gram of me reading the WSJ:
The following picture depicts what RCCH will do to those who doubt that water is the next blue gold.
(The cat representing RCCH and the dog representing the doubters):
fun
U.S. NEWS
NOVEMBER 5, 2009.California Passes Water Deal
Bills Would Buttress Supply Amid Drought; $11.1 Billion in Bonds to Be Put to Vote
By JIM CARLTON
The California Legislature passed the most sweeping water deal in nearly a half century, potentially setting the stage for billions of dollars in new dams and handing Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger a major political victory on one of the state's most intractable issues.
In a series of bills that cleared the Legislature in largely bipartisan votes early Wednesday after all-night sessions, California's water supply would be buttressed through steps such as mandatory monitoring of groundwater reserves and expanded conservation. A new agency will unify efforts to improve the way water from California's wet north is channeled to the arid south via the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
Associated Press
A firefighter protects a house in a Los Angeles suburb in August. California's three-year drought is increasing fire risks.
The Legislature also signed off on a plan to ask the state's voters next November to pass $11.1 billion in bonds to help finance new infrastructure and water ecosystem restoration, especially in places like the delta.
The deal caps years of wrangling over how to stretch California's water supplies amid a growing population and frequent droughts. California is currently grappling with a three-year drought, which has resulted in severe water cutbacks across the nation's most populous state. Mr. Schwarzenegger, who said he would sign the bills, began the water-overhaul process three years ago. In early October, he threatened to veto hundreds of unrelated bills unless lawmakers agreed to keep working on a deal.
"Without clean, reliable water, we cannot build, we cannot farm, we cannot grow and we cannot prosper," Mr. Schwarzenegger said. "That is why I am so proud that the legislature, Democrats and Republicans, came together and tackled one of the most complicated issues in our state's history."
The water package was controversial in part because of a provision in the bond deal to use about $3 billion for new storage projects, which could include dams. Democrats who dominate the statehouse have largely opposed new dams, while Republicans led by Mr. Schwarzenegger have supported them. The deal to include money for possible dams was one of the compromises in the package.
Another compromise came on the issue of mandatory monitoring of the state's groundwater supplies, which are often tapped during times of drought. Many Democrats wanted the monitoring, which has been optional, done by the state, if local agencies failed to do it. But some Republicans insisted the monitoring be handled locally to help allay fears among some water agencies of too much state intrusion. Under the deal, local agencies will do the monitoring.
State Sen. Fran Pavley, a Democrat who backed state monitoring, called the deal "a first step" and praised the overall package. "With California in the midst of a water crisis, it was imperative that we as lawmakers take action to protect the deteriorating delta ecosystem and ensure a reliable supply of water to our farms, our homes and our businesses," she said.
Some opponents of the package were already expressing their displeasure with the deal Wednesday. "We now have taxpayers who will be on the hook for the cost for new dams, which are 19th-century solutions to the problems with water," said Jim Metropolus, a Sierra Club lobbyist.
Write to Jim Carlton at jim.carlton@wsj.com
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A3
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125735167330328327.html#mod=todays_us_page_one
U.S. NEWS
NOVEMBER 5, 2009.California Passes Water Deal
Bills Would Buttress Supply Amid Drought; $11.1 Billion in Bonds to Be Put to Vote
By JIM CARLTON
The California Legislature passed the most sweeping water deal in nearly a half century, potentially setting the stage for billions of dollars in new dams and handing Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger a major political victory on one of the state's most intractable issues.
In a series of bills that cleared the Legislature in largely bipartisan votes early Wednesday after all-night sessions, California's water supply would be buttressed through steps such as mandatory monitoring of groundwater reserves and expanded conservation. A new agency will unify efforts to improve the way water from California's wet north is channeled to the arid south via the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
Associated Press
A firefighter protects a house in a Los Angeles suburb in August. California's three-year drought is increasing fire risks.
The Legislature also signed off on a plan to ask the state's voters next November to pass $11.1 billion in bonds to help finance new infrastructure and water ecosystem restoration, especially in places like the delta.
The deal caps years of wrangling over how to stretch California's water supplies amid a growing population and frequent droughts. California is currently grappling with a three-year drought, which has resulted in severe water cutbacks across the nation's most populous state. Mr. Schwarzenegger, who said he would sign the bills, began the water-overhaul process three years ago. In early October, he threatened to veto hundreds of unrelated bills unless lawmakers agreed to keep working on a deal.
"Without clean, reliable water, we cannot build, we cannot farm, we cannot grow and we cannot prosper," Mr. Schwarzenegger said. "That is why I am so proud that the legislature, Democrats and Republicans, came together and tackled one of the most complicated issues in our state's history."
The water package was controversial in part because of a provision in the bond deal to use about $3 billion for new storage projects, which could include dams. Democrats who dominate the statehouse have largely opposed new dams, while Republicans led by Mr. Schwarzenegger have supported them. The deal to include money for possible dams was one of the compromises in the package.
Another compromise came on the issue of mandatory monitoring of the state's groundwater supplies, which are often tapped during times of drought. Many Democrats wanted the monitoring, which has been optional, done by the state, if local agencies failed to do it. But some Republicans insisted the monitoring be handled locally to help allay fears among some water agencies of too much state intrusion. Under the deal, local agencies will do the monitoring.
State Sen. Fran Pavley, a Democrat who backed state monitoring, called the deal "a first step" and praised the overall package. "With California in the midst of a water crisis, it was imperative that we as lawmakers take action to protect the deteriorating delta ecosystem and ensure a reliable supply of water to our farms, our homes and our businesses," she said.
Some opponents of the package were already expressing their displeasure with the deal Wednesday. "We now have taxpayers who will be on the hook for the cost for new dams, which are 19th-century solutions to the problems with water," said Jim Metropolus, a Sierra Club lobbyist.
Write to Jim Carlton at jim.carlton@wsj.com
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A3
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125735167330328327.html#mod=todays_us_page_one
H2bid, An International Clearinghouse For Water utility Contract Opportunities
http://www.h2bid.biz/
water-technology.net
http://www.water-technology.net/projects/
Domestic Large Cap Water Utilities
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/914conameu.html
Commentary: The upcoming UN Copenhagen Climate Change Conference also includes the topic of water. The reason provided is that climate change is impacting rainfall, and thus certain regions of the world are receiving either too much or too little rainfall. The regions that have been receiving very little rainfall, will be a focus at the UN conference, and stand to gain billions (as measured in USD) in assistance for wastewater treatment and potable water infrastructure systems. The following links show a recent progression of activity leading up to the Copenhagen conference, followed by additional links for an article on All Africa, and the UN Capital Development Fund, UN Millennium Development Goals. The UN Millenium Development Goals, or MDG's has a number of "partner" links to various UN organizations and The World Bank's water program.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UN - COPENHAGEN -CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
José Manuel Durão Barroso
President of the European Commission
"The Road to Copenhagen
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/greenweek/sources/file/day04/closingsession.pdf
The fifth chapter - the Environment - shows that Ukraine has reconfirmed its commitments under Espoo, Aarus and other relevant multilateral environmental
agreements
----------------------------------------------------------------
7th ETAP Forum on Eco-innovation
Adapting to Climate Change
through Eco-Innovation
Copenhagen
23-24 November 2009
Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoinnovation2009/2nd_forum/
Adapting to Climate Change through Eco-Innovation
Urgent action is required at all levels across Europe to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
The 7th ETAP Forum on eco-innovation will take place in Copenhagen on the eve of the crucial COP 15 global negotiations on climate change.
----------------------------------------------------------------
After Bangkok: The road to Copenhagen
Next stops
Major Economies Forum: London, Oct 18-19
ECOFIN Council: Oct 20
ENV Council: Oct 21
Technology Conference: New Delhi, Oct 22-23
EU Summit: Oct 29-30
Ministerial meeting: Barcelona, Oct 30-31
UN negotiations: Barcelona, Nov 2-7
Leaders’Summit: Nov 14??
Ministerial Pre-COP: Copenhagen, Nov 16-17
UN Climate Conference: Copenhagen, Dec 7-18
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/pdf/bangkok_sum_presentation.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED NATIONS
CLIMATE CHANGE
CONFERENCE
DEC 7-DEC 18
2009
COP15
COPENHAGEN
http://en.cop15.dk/
Site MAP
http://en.cop15.dk/frontpage/sitemap
Additional:
Water and Climate Change
Adaptation Promising solutions, strategies and conditions for success
Brussel, June 2009
Ger Bergkamp
Director General
International Policy II
5th World Water Forum (Istanbul, 2009)
–
Thematic process
Regional priorities, hotspots, sector views
High-Level Panel
Political Process
Ministerial Roundtable – ‘Call for Action’
Parliamentarians, Mayors commitment
Follow-up dialogues
Bonn, Brussels,….
World Water Week (Stockholm August 2009),
WCC-III (Sept. 2009)
COP-15 (Copenhagen, Dec 2009)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/greenweek/sources/file/day03/Pres-Bergkamp.pdf
=========================================================================================================================
Kenyan adaptation estimated to cost billions
Spread it: http://www.equitygroups.com/pinksheets/rcch/messages/153726.html
Kenyan adaptation estimated to cost billions
Water scarcity is the main driver behind an ambitious government scheme. The price tag is of an order that demands donor financing.
Morten Andersen
18/09/2009 20:10
The government of Kenya hopes to take advantage of the UN conference on climate change this December to attract international financing for an ambitious
scheme.
”In Copenhagen, Kenya will be expecting an equitable and effective global climate deal that will apply the principle that the polluter pays,” Environment
Minister John Michuki tells All Africa.
Among other consequences of climate change, Kenya has seen declining rainfall, which in turn has led to lower resources for hydropower and scarcity of water
for agriculture and consumption.
”In Nairobi, the effect of climate change has been felt by people who dig bore holes because they now have to sink the holes as far as 600 meters to one
kilometer to hit the water table,” says John Nyaoro, director for water resources at the Water Ministry.
The ministries for environment and for wildlife are currently working on the details of an investment program to cost ”at least Sh80 billion (109 billion US
dollars) every year over the next twenty years” to mitigate and adapt to climate change. According to All Africa, investments on this scale can only take
place if private investments and donor financing are attracted.
http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2132
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United Nations Capital Development Fund, (Hyperlink is showing a list of countries sorted alphabetically).
http://www.uncdf.org/english/evaluations/documents.php?sort=alt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millennium Development Goals
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/
2009 Millennium Development Goals Report
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG_Report_2009_ENG.pdf
With regard to water:
"About 70 per cent of water withdrawn worldwide is for agriculture; in
some regions, it is more than 80 per cent. When more than 75 per cent of
river flows are diverted for agricultural, industrial and municipal purposes,
there is simply not enough water to meet both human demands and
environmental flow needs. Physical water scarcity — characterized by
severe environmental degradation, declining groundwater, and water
allocations that favour some groups over others — is approaching when
this figure reaches 60 per cent, indicating that the world is facing an
impending water crisis.
In some regions, the stress on water resources is severe. Water
withdrawals are highest in arid and semi-arid lands, where they are
needed mostly for irrigation, and lowest in tropical countries. In Northern
Africa, an average of 78 per cent of renewable water resources are being
withdrawn annually; in Western Asia, almost half. In contrast, Latin
America only uses 2 per cent of its renewable water resources each year.
Page 46
From 1990 to 2006, 1.1 billion people in the developing
world gained access to toilets, latrines and other forms
of improved sanitation. An additional 1.4 billion people
will require such facilities if the 2015 target is to be
met.
In 2006, 2.5 billion people worldwide were still
unserved. The greatest challenge is in Southern Asia,
where 580 million people are without improved
sanitation. From 2006 to 2015, the region will have to
more than double the number of people currently using
an improved facility. Sub-Saharan Africa also faces
Defecating in open, often publicly accessible spaces is the last recourse
for people without any form of sanitation. The practice not only
jeopardizes one’s own health and that of his or her family, but those who
live nearby — even if they themselves use improved facilities. In addition,
seeking private areas in which to defecate can put the safety of girls and
women at risk.
Eighteen per cent of the world’s population — 1.2 billion people — practise
open defecation. The vast majority of them (87 per cent) live in rural
areas. In developing regions, more than one in three rural dwellers
defecates in the open. The one exception is Eastern Asia, where the
practice is less common in rural than in urban areas.
Page 47
The world is well on its way to meeting the
drinking water target, though some countries
still face enormous challenges
The world is ahead of schedule in meeting the 2015 drinking water target.
Yet a number of countries face an uphill battle: 884 million people
worldwide still rely on unimproved water sources for their drinking,
cooking, bathing and other domestic activities. Of these, 84 per cent (746
million people) live in rural areas.
Page 48
Worldwide, only 27 per cent of the rural population enjoyed the convenience and substantial health benefits of having water
piped into their homes or onto their premises in 2006. Fifty per cent of rural dwellers relied on other improved drinking
water sources, such as public taps, hand pumps, improved dug wells or springs (a small proportion of this population relied
on rainwater). And nearly one quarter (24 per cent) of the rural population obtained their drinking water from ‘unimproved’
sources: surface water such as lakes, rivers, dams or from unprotected dug wells or springs. But even using an improved
water source is no guarantee that the water is safe: when tested, the drinking water obtained from many improved sources
has not met the microbiological standards set by WHO.
A person living in an urban area of the developing world is more than twice as likely to have a piped drinking water supply on
premises than a person living in a rural area. Disparities are especially evident in Latin America and the Caribbean, the region
with the second lowest coverage of improved drinking water in rural areas. Only 73 per cent of rural populations in that
region use an improved water source, compared to 97 per cent of urban dwellers.
TARGET
By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement
in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers
Page 49
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Bank supports water management and extends water services through lending operations, sharing and applying knowledge,
and our global programs. Our work is guided by our water strategies.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTWAT/0,,menuPK:4602384~pagePK:149018~piPK:149093~theSitePK:4602123,00.html
The World Bank administers several global partnership programs in the water sector. These programs share best practices across regions and have a strong
focus on capacity building. Some mobilize practical expertise and implement innovative approaches at critical stages of the Bank's project preparation and
implementation cycle, while others work directly with client governments and other stakeholders.
Current Programs
The Water and Sanitation Program is an international partnership, administered by the World Bank, of leading development agencies concerned with improving
sector policies, practices, and capacities to serve poor people. The Water Partnership Program is a Multi-Donor Trust Fund with the goal of enhancing the
World Bank’s efforts in reducing poverty through two overarching objectives:
a) the sponsorship and mainstreaming of pragmatic and principled approaches for water resources management and development; and
b) the improvement of the quality and effectiveness of water service delivery.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTWAT/0,,contentMDK:21650511~menuPK:4602429~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:4602123,00.html
Water is one of the earth’s most abundant resources—covering about 70 percent of the earth’s surface. However, accessible freshwater makes up less than 1 percent of the earth’s water. As shown in figure 1, about 97 percent of the water on the planet is in the oceans and too salty to drink or to use to grow crops. Another 2 percent is locked away in glaciers and icecaps, virtually inaccessible for human use. pg 12
If the anticipated water shortages actually occur, they could have severe economic, environmental and social impacts. The nationwide economic costs of water shortages are not known because the costs of shortages are difficult to measure. However, Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has identified eight water shortages from drought or heat waves, each resulting in $1 billion or more in monetary losses over the past 20 years. For example, the largest shortage resulted in an estimated $40 billion in damages to the economies of the Central and Eastern United States in the summer of 1988. pg 8
Source: GAO http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-514
Freshwater Supply: States' View of How Federal Agencies Could Help Them Meet the Challenges of Expected Shortages
GAO-03-514 July 9, 2003
Highlights Page (PDF) http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d03514high.pdf
Full Report (PDF, 118 pages) http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03514.pdf
Accessible Text http://www.gao.gov/htext/d03514.html
Summary
The widespread drought conditions of 2002 focused attention on a critical national challenge: ensuring a sufficient freshwater supply to sustain quality of life and economic growth. States have primary responsibility for managing the allocation and use of water resources, but multiple federal agencies also play a role. For example, Interior's Bureau of Reclamation operates numerous water storage facilities, and the U.S. Geological Survey collects important surface and ground-water information. GAO was asked to determine the current conditions and future trends for U.S. water availability and use, the likelihood of shortages and their potential consequences, and states' views on how federal activities could better support state water management efforts to meet future demands. For this review, GAO conducted a web-based survey of water managers in the 50 states and received responses from 47 states; California, Michigan, and New Mexico did not participate.
National water availability and use has not been comprehensively assessed in 25 years, but current trends indicate that demands on the nation's supplies are growing. In particular, the nation's capacity for storing surface-water is limited and ground-water is being depleted. At the same time, growing population and pressures to keep water instream for fisheries and the environment place new demands on the freshwater supply. The potential effects of climate change also create uncertainty about future water availability and use. State water managers expect freshwater shortages in the near future, and the consequences may be severe. Even under normal conditions, water managers in 36 states anticipate shortages in localities, regions, or statewide in the next 10 years. Drought conditions will exacerbate shortage impacts. When water shortages occur, economic impacts to sectors such as agriculture can be in the billions of dollars. Water shortages also harm the environment. For example, diminished flows reduced the Florida Everglades to half its original size. Finally, water shortages cause social discord when users compete for limited supplies. State water managers ranked federal actions that could best help states meet their water resource needs. They preferred: (1) financial assistance to increase storage and distribution capacity; (2) water data from more locations; (3) more flexibility in complying with or administering federal environmental laws; (4) better coordinated federal participation in water-management agreements; and (5) more consultation with states on federal or tribal use of water rights. Federal officials identified agency activities that support state preferences. While not making recommendations, GAO encourages federal officials to review the results of our state survey and consider opportunities to better support state water management efforts. We provided copies of this report to the seven departments and agencies discussed within. They concurred with our findings and provided technical clarifications, which we incorporated as appropriate
INVESTMENTS IN DRINKING WATER SUPPLY
PROJECTS AND RELATED RESOURCES ACTIVITIES
REPORT TO CONGRESS
FISCAL YEAR 2006
http://www.ehproject.org/PDF/ehkm/usaid-water_fy2006.pdf
"OVERVIEW
Water is an essential component to human health, food security, economic growth, national and regional political security, and environmental sustainability. However, poor management of water resources, growing world population and increasing demand because of rising prosperity in some regions are causing serious water shortages. More than 1.2 billion people worldwide, and one in every four people in the developing world, currently lack access to a safe water supply; two in every five people have no access to improved sanitation;4 and approximately 450 million people in more than 30 countries face serious shortages of freshwater.5 By 2025, this number is expected to increase to 2.8 billion people in more than 48 countries; 40 of these countries will be either in the Middle East, North Africa, or in sub-Saharan Africa. Competition between some nations in the Middle East for scarce water resources is already emerging as an important issue in regional economic development and political stability. Globally, this competition is being driven by the growing demand for scarce local and regional water resources. This demand tripled during the past century alone and is doubling every twenty years - strongly suggesting that a continued strong commitment to, and substantial investment in, efforts to vigorously address the need for water security and sustainability with equity are required."
3 Currency noted throughout this report is US dollars
4 Defined as a connection to a public sewer or septic system, or access to a pour-flush latrine, simple pit latrine, or ventilated improved pit latrine.
5 See Appendix for improved drinking water and improved sanitation coverage globally
Since the water and wastewater program began, USAID directed over $3 billion to water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Approximately 22 million people benefited from improved water and wastewater systems"
U.S. Agency for International Development
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20523
Tel: (202) 712-0000
Fax: (202) 216-3564
www.usaid.gov
USAID's Global Health Bureau supports field health programs, advances research and innovation in selected areas relevant to overall Agency health objectives, and transfers new technologies to the field through its own staff work, coordination with other donors, and a portfolio of grants and with an annual budget in fiscal year 2007 of nearly $4.15 billion. Global health issues have global consequences that not only affect the people of developing nations but also directly affect the interests of American citizens
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/#
Thank you for the chart MKA. Looks like (at least for now) that with the GDP data and other info released today, the market bottom test on the low is over. Maybe back into a sidewadys pattern for a bit.
By the way, do you have any sauce and meatballs to go with that pile of spaghetti strings:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43020475
LOL
fun
MKA, can you take a look at AA? Thanks!
Aluminum chart: