Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Civil and Environmental Engineering Professional Skills Assessment

The following activity is designed to prompt expression of your knowledge of and ability to apply engineering professional skills. Its purpose is to determine how well your engineering program has taught you these skills. By participating, you are giving your consent to have your posts used for academic research purposes. When your posts are evaluated by the program assessment committee, your names will be removed.  To post a comment: 1)  click on the Sign In button in the upper right hand corner of the blog page, then sign in using your gmail account and password (If you don’t have a gmail account, sign up for one – it only takes a couple minutes); 2) scroll down to the bottom of the page and click on the word “comments,” which appears right below the list of sources.

Time line: You will have 2 weeks to complete the on-line discussion as a team. Use this blog to capture your thoughts, perspectives, ideas, and revisions as you work together on this problem. This activity is discussion-based, meaning you will participate through a collaborative exchange and critique of each other’s ideas and work. The goal is to challenge and support one another as a team to tap your collective resources and experiences to dig more deeply into the issue(s) raised in the scenario. Since the idea is that everyone in the discussion will refine his/her ideas through the discussion that develops, you should try to respond well before the activity ends so that the discussion has time to mature. It is important to make your initial posts and subsequent responses in a timely manner. You are expected to make multiple posts during each stage of this on-going discussion. The timeline below suggests how to pace your discussion. This is just a suggestion. Feel free to pace the discussion as you see fit.

Tuesday Week 1 Initial Posts: All participants post initial responses to these instructions (see below) and the scenario.
Thursday Week 1 Response Posts: Participants respond by tying together information and perspectives on important points and possible approaches. Participants identify gaps in information and seek to fill those gaps.
Tuesday Week 2 Refine Posts: Participants work toward agreement on what is most important, determine what they still need to find out, & evaluate one or more approaches from the previous week’s discussion.
Thursday Week 2 Polish Final Posts: Participants come to an agreement on what is most important, and propose one or more approaches to address the issue/s.

Discussion Instructions
Imagine that you are a team of engineers working together for a company or organization to address the issue raised in the scenario.  Discuss what your team would need to take into consideration to begin to address the issue.  You do not need to suggest specific technical solutions, but identify the most important factors and suggest one or more viable approaches.

Suggestions for discussion topics
·         Identify the primary and secondary problems raised in the scenario.
·         Who are the major stakeholders and what are their perspectives?
·         What outside resources (people, literature/references, and technologies) could be engaged in developing viable approaches?
·         Identify related contemporary issues.
·         Brainstorm a number of feasible approaches to address the issue.
·         Consider the following contexts: economic, environmental, cultural/societal, and global. What impacts would the approaches you brainstormed have on these contexts?
·         Come to agreement on one or more viable approaches and state the rationale.

Water Shortages
How do you fit 140 liters of water into a small cup? Fill it with coffee. The amount of water used to brew coffee is only a tiny fraction of that needed to grow the beans, convert them to a usable form and get them into your cup. That is why it takes 140 liters of fresh water to make just a single cup of coffee. Other common foodstuffs require even more. A hamburger, for instance, requires 2,400 liters of water, counting the water that goes to irrigating the wheat and producing the cattle feed.
The World Bank reports that 80 countries now have water shortages that threaten health and economies while 40 percent of the world — more than 2 billion people — have no access to clean water or sanitation. Only a few per cent of the world’s supplies of water are suitable for human use, and they are under increasing stress – from population growth, climate change and pollution. Unless the world can find better ways of managing water, the chances of producing enough food for a rapidly growing population – forecast to reach at least 9 billion people by 2050 – are small.
Population growth alone does not account for increased water demand. Since 1900, there has been a six-fold increase in water use for only a two-fold increase in population size. This reflects greater water usage associated with rising standards of living (e.g., diets containing less grain and more meat). It also reflects potentially unsustainable levels of irrigated agriculture.
Meanwhile many countries suffer accelerating desertification. Water quality is deteriorating in many areas of the developing world as population increases and salinity caused by industrial farming and over-extraction rises. About 95 percent of the world's cities still dump raw sewage into their waters.
There are several principal manifestations of the water crisis.
  • Inadequate access to safe drinking water for about 884 million people
  • Inadequate access to water for sanitation and waste disposal for 2.5 billion people
  • Groundwater over drafting (excessive use) leading to diminished agricultural yield
  • Overuse and pollution of water resources harming biodiversity
  • Regional conflicts over scarce water resources sometimes resulting in warfare
·         1 billion people live without clean drinking water
More than a dozen nations receive most of their water from rivers that cross borders of neighboring countries viewed as hostile. These include Botswana, Bulgaria, Cambodia, the Congo, Gambia, the Sudan, and Syria, all of whom receive 75 percent or more of their fresh water from the river flow of often hostile upstream neighbors.
In the United States, the Ogallala aquifer, the world’s third-largest, has fallen several meters in recent years, causing fertile regions to dry out and forcing farmers to revert to more basic crops, which generate less income. At current rates, the aquifer will dry up in 20 to 30 years.
More frequently water is being likened to another resource that quickened global tensions when its supplies were threatened. A story in The Financial Times of London began: "Water, like energy in the late 1970s, will probably become the most critical natural resource issue facing most parts of the world by the start of the next century." This analogy is also reflected in the oft-repeated observation that water will likely replace oil as a future cause of war between nations.
Facts List
·         2.6 billion people lack adequate sanitation
·         1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases.
·         3 900 children die every day from water borne diseases
·         Daily per capita use of water by liter in residential areas: North America & Japan - 350; Europe – 200; sub-Saharan Africa -10 to 20
·         Quantity of water by liter needed to produce 1 kg of:
o   wheat: 1 000 L
o   rice: 1 400 L
o   beef: 13 000 L
Sources
Global Water Shortage Looms In New Century. (2011). Arizona Water Center Website http://ag.arizona.edu/AZWATER/awr/dec99/Feature2.htm
Water Scarcity: We must wring more from each precious drop. (October 14, 2010).The Financial Times.
The World Water Council. http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/index.php?id=25
Progress in Drinking-water and Sanitation: special focus on sanitation. (July 17, 2008) WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. 
Updated Numbers: WHO-UNICEF JMP Report 2008. http://www.unicef.org/media/media_44093.html.

108 comments:

  1. we will get started at 3:15

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Consider the discussion questions as you interact on this blog

    ReplyDelete
  5. The primary problem raised in this article seems to be that too much water is being used, and that is causing water shortages and water quality issues now, and even more in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It seems as if the primary problem is that globally there is not enough water for the population and it just so happens that the most water shortage is in third world countries.

    A secondary problem is that countries that do have a supply of water are not using it adequately.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Some of the primary problems that come to mind when thinking of water use is the water use laws in the united states, that focus on water right holder and do not currently promote the saving of water.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree that there is an excess of water usage. On the stance of a engineering student, I think it is important that sustainability practices are being used.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Global demand for water is increasing while supplies are decreasing and innovative solutions to meeting demand should be a priority.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The primary problem discussed in the article is the scarcity of water for a rapidly growing population. A growing population has induced increasing water demand. Other than access to water supply, other secondary problems include access to clean, safe drinking water, desertification, and tensions caused by hostile neighboring countries competing for water.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Is the issue that we are using the water adequately, or is the issue that we are trying to support a population larger than what can be sustained. I agree that places like the united states do use more water than is absolutely necessary, but a lot of water use is probably due to agriculture, and that is to support the population of today.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Another secondary problem that comes to mind is that water supply isn't distributed globally equally. Some areas of the world are very poor with water, where as other areas such as the united states is rich with water (in areas) and water usage isn't a live or death situation in the US.

    ReplyDelete
  13. From the facts posted about water shortages it seems that the inadequate access to water are in locations that don't necessarily have the means to get safe water. This is where we need to work together globally.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I believe the primary issue at hand is the shortage of water that will arise in the next 40 years. The secondary problems include a lack of water to drink, water to produce food, and sanitation.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Each region faces their own challenges and each will need specific solutions.

    If you follow the adage: Reduce, reuse, recycle, reduce is first.

    Anyone want to reuse wastewater?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Is the issue that we are using the water adequately, or is the issue that we are trying to support a population larger than what can be sustained.

    I think they go hand in hand, each needs to be addressed simultaneously.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think both are issues. First we are not using the water adequately. We waste a lot more than many other countries.I also believe we are trying to sustain a population that is far too great.

    ReplyDelete
  18. There are inherent factors such as how water is geologically distributed to places around the world but there are also social and political factors in play such as who gets to decide who gets what and how much. I think that's a main issue.

    ReplyDelete
  19. answering za comment, a large portion of water demand is agricultural, in western water law if you are able to gain water rights you are alloted a volume of water per year. If you don't fully utilize that volume of water, the next year it is given to another water rights holder. So instead of giving away their water rights, farmers will flood their field, etc. Our current system doesn't benefit water savings.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Who will be in charge of making everyone start reducing their water usage?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I agree here with Gordon here, we need to reduce our consumption. It will depend on each region but for our purposes here in the U.S. we waste far to much water and if we were to be more sustainable with our water usage we could prevent problems that will arise in the future due to our over consumption of water today.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Due to the abundance of water in the united states compared to other countries, it is easy to be careless with our water supply. As justin pointed out, our laws do not support water conservation. More sustainable practices and laws are needed in our country to provide enough clean water for future generations.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The article states that 95% of cities in the world still dump raw sewage into thier waters.

    From an engineering standpoint, I believe creating treatment would free up some supply.

    ReplyDelete
  24. gordon, of those 95%, would that stop them from using that water from other day to day things. I would think that a city that dumps their raw sewage into their water, does not practice the greatest sanitation.

    ReplyDelete
  25. That is the problem, either water consumption would have to be government regulated, or people would have to take it upon themselves to step up and be more responsible with their water usage. In a class I took, we discussed ways to get people around the world to be more sustainable. Most people won't take it upon themselves to reduce their use (some will), so we have to put a penalty or a price on water. Just like how in cities it is cheap to take the bus in rather than driving, or large companies having a certain amount of CO2 they can emit or they can purchase more. We have to give people incentives to care about water usage. I care a whole lot more when I am paying more for something...

    ReplyDelete
  26. Focus could be shifted towards improving sewage discharge water quality, in the article it states that 95% of cities still dump raw sewage into receiving waters. We could increase the usable fresh water quantity by treating more water. Once again how are you going to impose water quality limits over the world?

    ReplyDelete
  27. From an engineering point of view, you need to make sure that the demand is less than the capacity. On the capacity side, the water sources are limited. On the demand side, we have a population that is complex to regulate. It seems to me, however, that the demand side is easier to manipulate.

    ReplyDelete
  28. That is a very good point Zach, water is more abundant here so we don't care as much. In my last post I said we need to give people incentives to care about their water consumption, whether its tax breaks or paying less for water we have to give people a reason to care about what they use.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I agree with Megan. At some point, there must be incentives to save water or people will not take the time to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Especially countries that waste water as much as we do, paying more for water would definitely effect the amount used. But then we have to adjust focus on families that may already be struggling to pay for bills such as water. Is it right to make water less accessible to those families?

    ReplyDelete
  31. That is a very good point Genesis. We can't manipulate what we have and what water there is going to be. We need to manipulate the demand some way. There eventually will be a cap on population naturally due to our resources.

    ReplyDelete
  32. So rather than punishing for using water, with something like a higher price, there should be a reward for using less.

    ReplyDelete
  33. For those countries who dump raw sewage, the people use it anyway and their the statistic who don't have adequate safe water and are sick or dead.

    I think treating sewage should be the main priority. It affects anyone and borders/wars don't matter to it.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think one of the easiest solutions is to increase the cost of water. People won't easily change their water use habits unless it directly effects them....their wallets or purses

    ReplyDelete
  35. I see your point Zach. Families who have money won't be as concerned but rather probably just annoyed they are paying more where as families already struggling will further struggle to pay bills. Perhaps other incentives like tax breaks for the amount of water you use...Those who use less get a tax break and if you use to much you pay. Just ideas because what really drives our country in money and that seems to get people's attention.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Let alone not having enough water to use, what little water some countries do have it is not clean. These are separate issues that must be resolved independently. The topic article talks about hostility amongst countries to receive water opposed to the safety of it. I would be drinking unclean water too if that is the only supply I had. What I am trying to say is that the main issue is supply and not the sanitation of water at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Agreed Justin. Zach made a very good point about how it will probably only effect those already struggling financially and families who are well off financially probably won't really reduce their use but just pay the bill and be annoyed. b Being realistic, there needs to be some sort of incentive though to make people care.

    ReplyDelete
  38. talking out some of the stakeholders...did you know that 49% of water use in the US is from thermoelectric power generation. Agricultural withdrawals only account for 2% of the total water use

    ReplyDelete
  39. Just because we save water here in the US, however, it doesn't mean that it will get directed towards the poorer countries and to those who need it. There must be a system in place that ensures that what we save translates to a difference in others' lives.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Justin, people will just pay the higher price and not reduce. Most water in the US is agricultural, then industrial with municipalities being the smallest. If I rememeber correctly from water resources, municipalities only consume 8% of the water in the US.

    Moreover, I think the issue is more of a world problem than a US problem. Developing nations don't have the infastructure or resources to deal with water shortage.

    Should a greater effort be made to help?

    ReplyDelete
  41. **correction aquaculture only accounts for 2%....irrigation accounts for about 31%

    ReplyDelete
  42. The population is taking its toll on our resources, like water usage for agriculture to produce food. However, Justin makes a good point that it is not necessarily the population using all the water but rather improper usage that accounts for wasted water consumption. I know that this energy is produced for our growing population but the US should try and harvest energy other ways that impact the world and our water supply as much.

    ReplyDelete
  43. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3098/

    This website every five years publishes a pdf with water usage comparisons, it could be helpful for our group to see graphically where the water is being used and why, so we can make decisions where we want to reduce usage.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Genesis I agree. We can reduce water supply here, but it won't matter to other places that have not had any to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I see that argument that just because we have water and we reduce our usage that it won't necessarily help other countries. But I still think it is important we reduce our usage to help ourselves. But I definitely agree that developing countries don't have the resources to access clean water and something should be done to fix that issue as well. But what should we do?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Going with za comment earlier, incentives other than cost increases could include, incentives for farmers to switch to more efficient irrigation systems compared to flood irrigation. Low flow toilets and other appliances are becoming more popular..

    ReplyDelete
  47. But if we reduce our water here but tax right offs and charging more money so people have the incentive to use less. Money that is earned from that can be put towards helping developing countries gain the technology they need to access clean water.

    ReplyDelete
  48. As Justin And Megan are pointing out, in the US, I think a focus on new technologies to reduce water consumption to be a prioirty

    ReplyDelete
  49. Is there a simple technology currently in existence to improve water quality in developing countries?

    ReplyDelete
  50. For the major users of water such as North america, Japan, and europe, it seems that the best way to be more sustainable is to create a type of reward for using less water. While in the lower developed countries it seems that water treatment will allow for greater access to clean water. So where should our focus be? It seems that we should create a sustainable practice around ourselves and then try to help out other countries.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Another issues that comes to mind is that fresh water supply is a function of season. In some areas it is necessary to "save" water for growing seasons and summer with the use of snowpack/glaciers, and reservoirs. We could focus on increasing water storage?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Genesis, Its been shown that if you put water in clear jugs of glass in the hot desert sun, bacteria can be significantly reduced by UV light.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I have a friend from UCSD who participates in an Engineering Brigade team that travel to Honduras, Costa Rica, and other South American countries to help improve water quality, educate, and train. Could this be done in a bigger scale? Could we give incentives to professional engineers and social workers to get together and improve water quality in other countries?

    ReplyDelete
  54. I agree with you Zach and Justin, cost increases may be out of the question but still tax right offs or paying money more using to much water is an effective way to get people to use less water. Those other options are good but how do you get farmers to just switch to more efficient irrigation systems or people to by fixtures like toilets that use less water? People need incentives to do things that will cost them money. Sure it will save them money over time but that upfront cost is hard for people to come up with.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Za, I agree. Sustainable here and at leasts help with sewage problems in developing nations.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I think that is a great idea Genesis. I think there are enough people who genuinely care and would offer up their services and knowledge to help people. Funding may be an issue though.

    ReplyDelete
  57. We could also focus on growing crops that require less water, in areas that are scarce on water

    ReplyDelete
  58. I think that is a great and very reasonable idea Justin. Increasing water storage would help where water is plentiful the issue still arises about where water can not be harvested as easily.

    ReplyDelete
  59. genesis has a good idea of increasing education, and getting this idea of water use and demand out there

    ReplyDelete
  60. Without some sort of government intervention within our own country, water use will not change until it is too late. Just as there was a cash for clunkers program for cars, the government should be able to run a program to help farmers purchase the more sustainable equipment. This burden would then fall on to the entire countries shoulders, but in the long run, everyone in our country will benefit from a larger access to water so that we are not draining all of our sources.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I agree Justin. Sustainable agricultural practices should include growing crops that require less water. I think it is eye opening to hear how much water is consumed for the production of beef. That alone would reduce water usage if we ate less beef. There are definitely different ways of getting iron and other nutritional values that we get from beef.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I know that engineers without borders has helped a developing country by installing one small water pump. This was not a large project for the engineering students, but helped that developing town in ways we can't imagine. I think this example shows the huge scale on which we are discussing. It will be hard to dial in on what our focus should be. Should we start emphasizing sustainable practices here? Should we use our own profits to helped the undeveloped and potentially save lives?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Crop companies have been working on developing more sustainable agriculture since the green revolution (1950's-1990's). Todays crops require too much fertilizer and pesticides based on fossil fuels, and they also require too much water. More drought resistant crops have been a focus for years, and scientists are having very little success developing them.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Problems also arise when talking about the west coast of the U.S., Almost all of the southwestern states including California,Arizona,Nevada all use a significant amount of water from the Colorado River. The Colorado used to flow all the way to the gulf of Mexico, currently the U.S. has to use wastewater effluent and other flows to supplement the discharge to Mexico. Is the water we share with other countries fair?

    ReplyDelete
  65. I definitely agree Zach. Financial incentives will make people consume less. It needs to fall on our country's shoulders as a whole not just one group. Cash for Clunkers was a great example of incentives that are offered to get people to change their habits and make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Here's a quote from the Food and Argiculture Organization (FAO):
    Investments in infrastructure have not kept up with the rate of urbanization, while water and waste services show significant underinvestment. The central problem is therefore the management of urban water and waste. Piped water coverage is declining in many settings, and the poor people get the worst services, yet paying the highest water prices.

    Few urban authorities in developing countries have found a sustainable solution to urban sanitation, and utilities cannot afford to extend sewers to the slums, nor can they treat the volume of sewage already collected. Solid waste disposal is a growing threat to health and the environment.

    found here:

    http://www.unwater.org/worldwaterday/faqs.html

    ReplyDelete
  67. It is hard to focus our efforts Kelsey. We definitely need to make a change and difference here in the US first to be able to make a difference in the world I believe.

    ReplyDelete
  68. There seems to be a paradox, though, with the issue of wanting to improve water quality while increasing water supply for each person. By improving water quality in developing nations, wouldn't that cause a further increase in population and thus, less water per person. I'm not trying to suggest we don't help out but is this an irrational view?

    ReplyDelete
  69. za you make a good point. The farmers do not want to use unsustainable practices, but sometimes that is just the cheapest way for them to make a living. If the burden of sustainable agricultural products rests on the nation then we can all benefit from a longer water supply.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Megan, I agree. Our focus needs to start close to home before we can try to change the way water is used around the world.

    ReplyDelete
  71. So our optional solutions so far:
    1.increase cost of water
    2.grow more efficient crops
    3.increase education
    4.incentives for farmers
    5.increase water storage

    ReplyDelete
  72. I also think along with incentives, education would help our country change the way we do things. Ignorance is part of our water crisis here in the US I believe. People don't respect and understand what we have here. If we could educate people, we can empower people and get them to make changes. Education could help here as well as get people to help make changes in other countries and help them gain technology to access clean water.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I also agree that we must focus on our front first before moving in around the world.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Genesis, It is a good point, but is it right to limit their access to clean water as a type of population control. This is why I think we need to focus here in the US before we can try to help other countries with their own water treatment and sustainable practices

    ReplyDelete
  75. Justin,

    Sewage treatment is an option also

    ReplyDelete
  76. I see what you are saying Genesis. Helping out other countries gain access to clean drinking water is important. I think if our country as well as other major countries consume less water that the little bit of clean water consumed by developing nations, we would still be better off than we are now.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I think we need to discuss more about other stakeholder other than the agricultural uses..What do you guys think about 49% of the U.S. water uses coming from Thermoelectric power generation? Should we invest in more hydroelectric dams? That would increase storage and sustainable power generation, but at the price of the environment.

    ReplyDelete
  78. We need to start here in the US and lead by example. I think we have all agreed change needs to happen here for us to help others.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Efficient desalination would solve everyone's problem.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Specifically, how do we go about implementing our viable options listed? Are they realistic? What can we throw out?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Justin I see your point. We have discussed the issues how to reduce our consumption with the public and farmers but we definitely need to focus on power generation or the consumption of water used in large corporations.

    ReplyDelete
  82. To increase desalination, we need more power generation.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Gordon, I think the problem is more than just clean water, but the amount of water being used as well. Desalination will not stop farmers from using too much water, draining our resources.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I believe change starts at home. However, I hate seeing statistics on child deaths and such. Any option at home should include incentives to develop the worst areas of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  85. So if we want to stay close to home we still have the differences of water supply in Arizona and the Pacific Northwest. Should we even go closer to home about sustainability within our own state and solve those water supply problems first?

    ReplyDelete
  86. Should we give back all the water we stole from Mexico?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Can we all agree that increasing water use and demand education is one of the keys to success?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Its hard to say where we start. Pullman is draining its aquifer, so do we start that local? By implementing a national program to help farmers be more sustainable, we will help with our region, even very locally.

    ReplyDelete
  89. That's a good point, Kelsey. However, we must keep in mind that this is a global issue. Although our solutions may be focused here at home, it is to ultimately help the whole world.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Like I have been saying education on water consumption and incentives. Those two things will help our country consume less water.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Zach has another good point, draining ancient confined aquifer water isn't sustainable. The recharge rate of those aquifers is very slow.

    ReplyDelete
  92. I agree Genesis, our goal is to help the entire world but to do that we need to start here at home. Like Kelsey said on a more local scale, expanding through out the US and then to a global scale.

    ReplyDelete
  93. While I do agree that education is key, how do we implement a campaign to educate people about effective water consumption? If we go with this solution, how do we measure if it's making a difference to the water supply?

    ReplyDelete
  94. I think we hit on the local points(U.S.) but this is a world issue. What about solutions to developing countries?

    ReplyDelete
  95. Yes my thoughts exactly Genesis. How can we measure a difference? This will take time that is for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I think education programs in the United States are a waste of money. U.S. citizens are a me on demand culture. Water just needs to flow. Incentives would be better spent on technologies for industry and agriculture

    ReplyDelete
  97. I think we have all agreed change needs to start here at home and expand world wide. As for changes at home we have the ideas of:
    (1) Financial incentives (tax breaks, paying)
    (2) grow more efficient crops
    (3) increase education
    (4) incentives for farmers
    (50 increase water storage

    As for world wide...

    ReplyDelete
  98. My solution: Incentive on new technologies inthe US and investment to infrastructure in the developing world.

    ReplyDelete
  99. If industry and agriculture take up a lot of the fresh water supply then I agree that some of the education funds should go towards sustainable practices that people are actually willing to invest in.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Gordon's ideas are good. I agree.

    ReplyDelete
  101. I agree with Gordons Statement about "Incentive on new technologies inthe US and investment to infrastructure in the developing world."

    ReplyDelete
  102. i agree with our conclusion, it is a difficult subject. It is a very complex problem and will require a worldwide effort.

    ReplyDelete
  103. So do we have a final solution?

    ReplyDelete
  104. It will take a worldwide effort. We are lucky to have the capabilities to start reducing water usage so we need to take the initiative.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Although this is a very complex problem, I think we all agree that taking the initiative to change the way we fundamentally use water here in our home front could make a big difference in the trend of water usage around the world. Raising awareness, giving incentives for water conservation, and innovation in energy efficiency are all general solutions that could help solve the problem.

    ReplyDelete