Should private companies own our most precious resource? Should fresh water be a traded commodity?

Water - the new oil and even more scarce.




I think this is where the line must be drawn on what we label and trade as a "commodity".
Water belongs to all of us and is essential for life. It's a complex issue, but it is a
subject that will surely become a big issue. In fact it is past time to begin to have
this public debate, as this practice has already begun without ANY serious public debate
or agreement.


Newsweek reports that Sitka, Alaska is looking at selling 3 billion of gallons of water for bottling in Mumbai India shipped via tanker. This will mark one of the first major water transfers of this sort, making water a globally traded commodity. It also brings up some interesting questions around climate change and how it will affect population centers. It is said that water always travels uphill towards money, if this deal goes through we will determine if it will also cross oceans...cont'd


http://blog.longnow.org/2011/01/14/water-becomes-a-global-commodity/


Newsweek

...Everyone agrees that we are in the midst of a global freshwater crisis. Around the world, rivers, lakes, and aquifers are dwindling faster than Mother Nature can possibly replenish them; industrial and household chemicals are rapidly polluting what’s left. Meanwhile, global population is ticking skyward. Goldman Sachs estimates that global water consumption is doubling every 20 years, and the United Nations expects demand to outstrip supply by more than 30 percent come 2040.

Proponents of privatization say markets are the best way to solve that problem: only the invisible hand can bring supply and demand into harmony, and only market pricing will drive water use down enough to make a dent in water scarcity. But the benefits of the market come at a price. By definition, a commodity is sold to the highest bidder, not the customer with the most compelling moral claim. As the crisis worsens, companies like True Alaska that own the rights to vast stores of water (and have the capacity to move it in bulk) won’t necessarily weigh the needs of wealthy water-guzzling companies like Coca-Cola or Nestlé against those of water-starved communities in Phoenix or Ghana; privately owned water utilities will charge what the market can bear, and spend as little as they can get away with on maintenance and environmental protection. Other commodities are subject to the same laws, of course. But with energy, or food, customers have options: they can switch from oil to natural gas, or eat more chicken and less beef. There is no substitute for water, not even Coca-Cola. And, of course, those other things don’t just fall from the sky on whoever happens to be lucky enough to be living below. “Markets don’t care about the environment,” says Olson. “And they don’t care about human rights. They care about profit.”...cont'd


http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/10/08/the-race-to-buy-up-the-world-s-water.html




http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/10/08/the-race-to-buy-up-the-world-s-water.html

Water: The Ultimate Commodity
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/06/Water.asp#axzz1bG3Efr00

If necessary, an all-out war should be fought to prevent it.

(and it may come to that -- thanks to your friends and neighbors who "tend to vote their portfolio")

If it might be cheaper,I might agree.

It's bad enough when the organisations employed to store & pipe
water are "privatised" rather than run by the government/state
for the benefit of the community but the concept of exporting it
for profit is just obscene.

And just don't start me on the "rights" of the Coca-Cola type
of "industries" ...

:grr: