Today, 790 million people live without access to clean water (CDC). How did it happen that in the twenty-first century more than twice the population of the United States still lives without access to a basic necessity for sustaining life? It is no surprise that the second leading cause of death in low-income countries is diarrheal diseases, directly caused by a lack of access to clean water and sanitation (WHO). In America, we flush our excrement daily with gallons of water cleaner than millions of people will see in their lives.
Let’s set aside for a moment the massive geopolitical changes that need to occur in response to this water crisis (we can get back to those later) and first focus on the mechanics of solving this problem. There are three key components that need to be introduced simultaneously in order for localized (eg town by town) clean water systems to have an effect. Those are the source, distribution, and sanitation. According to Laurie Williams, a professor at Fort Lewis College and leader of their Village Aid Project, If implemented correctly the three systems work together and have been seen to dramatically decrease water-quality related diseases and deaths in the surrounding area.
The source can be a naturally clean spring or well, or it can be a water filtration or desalination machine put on the sea or in a nearby river or stream. Dr. Williams said that they have ended up running pipes over 25 km to reach a clean source. Distribution typically looks like a pipe system that runs underground from the source to a holding tank, and then through a network of pipes to spigots throughout the village. According to the World Health Organization, “Sanitation refers to the provision of facilities and services for the safe management of human excreta,” (WHO).
Now that we know what needs to be implemented mechanically, it is time to get back to those geopolitical changes I mentioned earlier. Right now, the countries with the most money and power are also the ones least directly affected by the water crisis, perhaps illustrated no more clearly than by the golf courses that we insist on setting up and maintaining in the middle of the desert. According to NPR journalist Frank Deford, “each course each day in Palm Springs consumes as much water as an American family of four uses in four years.” There needs to be a shift of perspective away from the “us and them” mentality that allows politicians to justify ignoring the needs of those in faraway “shit hole countries.” Even from a purely self-centered standpoint, the effect of millions of people not having access to clean water and sanitation leads to them picking up and moving in hopes of finding better conditions. This is a contributing factor to the massive northwards immigrations that some people are fighting so desperately against. If we just spend a nominal amount of money on water systems instead of our military, we will see an immediate decrease in the flow of people away from the less developed nations.
And we shouldn’t need that incentive! Refusing to help people who do not have access to drinking water that has a high likelihood of killing them is not morally defensible. Sure, a strict libertarian might say that we are in no way obligated to help people who cannot help themselves, but by that logic, we shouldn’t have medicare for old people in America or free public education for those who cannot educate themselves. To look at it in the manner of John Rawls, you would say from behind the veil of ignorance that of course, we should spend a small amount of our government budget to help those in need, because what if you were one of them? You wouldn’t want to die of diarrhea.
I am proposing a system that will make it even easier for our nation to step in and lend a hand. I am developing a cost-effective desalination machine that can be easily set up and operated by the locals and would cost very little to manufacture in America and send overseas. There is now even less of an excuse for us not to do everything we can to solve this imminent water crisis. As I mentioned above, this is only part of the solution, but once a clean water source is established, it is much easier to develop the other two integral parts to a complete water solution.
Let’s set aside for a moment the massive geopolitical changes that need to occur in response to this water crisis (we can get back to those later) and first focus on the mechanics of solving this problem. There are three key components that need to be introduced simultaneously in order for localized (eg town by town) clean water systems to have an effect. Those are the source, distribution, and sanitation. According to Laurie Williams, a professor at Fort Lewis College and leader of their Village Aid Project, If implemented correctly the three systems work together and have been seen to dramatically decrease water-quality related diseases and deaths in the surrounding area.
The source can be a naturally clean spring or well, or it can be a water filtration or desalination machine put on the sea or in a nearby river or stream. Dr. Williams said that they have ended up running pipes over 25 km to reach a clean source. Distribution typically looks like a pipe system that runs underground from the source to a holding tank, and then through a network of pipes to spigots throughout the village. According to the World Health Organization, “Sanitation refers to the provision of facilities and services for the safe management of human excreta,” (WHO).
Now that we know what needs to be implemented mechanically, it is time to get back to those geopolitical changes I mentioned earlier. Right now, the countries with the most money and power are also the ones least directly affected by the water crisis, perhaps illustrated no more clearly than by the golf courses that we insist on setting up and maintaining in the middle of the desert. According to NPR journalist Frank Deford, “each course each day in Palm Springs consumes as much water as an American family of four uses in four years.” There needs to be a shift of perspective away from the “us and them” mentality that allows politicians to justify ignoring the needs of those in faraway “shit hole countries.” Even from a purely self-centered standpoint, the effect of millions of people not having access to clean water and sanitation leads to them picking up and moving in hopes of finding better conditions. This is a contributing factor to the massive northwards immigrations that some people are fighting so desperately against. If we just spend a nominal amount of money on water systems instead of our military, we will see an immediate decrease in the flow of people away from the less developed nations.
And we shouldn’t need that incentive! Refusing to help people who do not have access to drinking water that has a high likelihood of killing them is not morally defensible. Sure, a strict libertarian might say that we are in no way obligated to help people who cannot help themselves, but by that logic, we shouldn’t have medicare for old people in America or free public education for those who cannot educate themselves. To look at it in the manner of John Rawls, you would say from behind the veil of ignorance that of course, we should spend a small amount of our government budget to help those in need, because what if you were one of them? You wouldn’t want to die of diarrhea.
I am proposing a system that will make it even easier for our nation to step in and lend a hand. I am developing a cost-effective desalination machine that can be easily set up and operated by the locals and would cost very little to manufacture in America and send overseas. There is now even less of an excuse for us not to do everything we can to solve this imminent water crisis. As I mentioned above, this is only part of the solution, but once a clean water source is established, it is much easier to develop the other two integral parts to a complete water solution.