When
you run that tap or flush that toilet, you may be able to estimate how many
gallons you’re using, but how many kilowatts are going down the drain? The
question is not far-fetched when you consider that, by most estimates, 3% of the
nation’s energy resources are tied up to water. And that 3% is based on a narrow
focus: the water-use cycle of collection, treatment, and delivery. When the
water cycle is adjusted to include consumer usage, you get a total energy demand
amount of almost 20%. And that’s not even counting agriculture, which—in a state
like California—accounts for up 75% of total water usage, thereby directly and
significantly impacting the state’s energy consumption.
The complicated
relationship between energy and water does not stop at supply and demand. In a
cruel ying-yang tug or war, water and energy push and pull each other in a
never-ending cycle of supply and demand: Water delivery systems result in
greenhouse gas emissions, which in turn can aggravate already fragile
environments and disrupt local water supplies. Decreasing water supplies require
more extensive water collection and distribution systems, thereby exponentially
increasing energy usage.
Global climate
change is an important player, both as an influence on water supply, and as a
byproduct of water treatment and delivery. In return, as recent scientific
studies continue to show, climate change is responsible for the disruption of
water supplies across the globe.
While all
water conservation efforts should be applauded, it’s not enough to throw in a
couple of low-flow toilets and call it a day. What we need is a broader
effort that focuses on the interdependency of all our resources. As I’ve said
before, any discussion of climate change, sustainability, or “going green” must
include water: our diminishing supply, our increasing demands, and the impact
our water needs has on the environment, and vice versa. Water efficiency must
stand shoulder-to-shoulder with energy efficiency in the national
dialogue.