The figures are alarming: 80% of freshwater on the planet are already infected or at risk of contamination. From this threat are affected about 3.4 billion people, nearly half the world's population. And the situation is likely to worsen in coming years, because of the damage caused by climate change and the growing population.
alarm throws a scientific paper published in the journal Nature and signed by a team of researchers led by Charles Vorosmarty the City University of New York and Peter McIntyre University of Wisconsin. The study is important because it can be seen that for the first time brings together all our knowledge under a single global model for the safety of water and loss of biodiversity, "according Gary Jones, director of Co-operative dell'eWater Research Centre in Canberra, Australia.
The picture that emerges from the study of Nature is to a planet where water resources are exploited in a total unbalanced. Currently the water supply, drinking water and no, mostly derived from a work of engineering. Dams, drainage and reserves are the way humans solve problems of scarcity and pollution of groundwater. The technological solution has two drawbacks, however. The first is the cost to keep that balance in the situation would cost, according to the authors of the study, around 800 billion dollars a year by 2015.
The second is that these costs are insostenibili per chi non fa parte del “club” delle nazioni industrializzate ricche o emergenti, queste ultime rappresentate dai paesi BRIC (Brasile, Russia, India, Cina). Complessivamente non più di un miliardo di persone. Ragion per cui Vorosmarty e MacIntyre suggeriscono di puntare sulla lotta al cambiamento climatico piuttosto che sulla continua manipolazione della natura da parte dell’uomo, che rischia solo di mettere l’ ambiente ulteriormente sotto pressione.
E in Italia, quanto è grave la situazione? C’è rischio anche da noi di stress da sfruttamento idrico, dato il quadro di sprechi, e scarso rispetto dell’equilibrio ambientale? “Il modello di gestione idrica urbana must be revamped, "Katie answered Women, Office of Scientific Legambiente . The association has complained in the White Paper of 2007 on emergency water and other subsequent reports, the situation in our country. 60% of water intended for agricultural use and 42% loss from the sieve tubes (with peaks of 70% in Cosenza) of a distribution network that would add a completely new low-cost too much water (52 cents per meter cube, half the European average), which inevitably leads to waste.
"For over a decade, supports women, with the eyes of experts around the world, is increasingly clear that the model of water management in our cities - based on the cycle: sampling distribution, use, sewerage, sewage treatment plant, and re-entering the final - is not sustainable, because it involves excessive use of water resources of the highest quality. Why, for example, to download a toilet you use water? This results in an enormous loss without reducing pollution. But the study
Nature is not likely to be the usual excuse of environmentalists for doing nothing? "I would not say, continues Katie. The challenges of managing water resources can not be reduced to the simple and demagogic question: let everything flows as well as nature ... creates this model would be as untenable as unthinkable to today's society. On the contrary those who deal with Environmentalism Scientific offers a new approach to an even more complicated than we have proposed and imposed so far and that is just as unsustainable as the first. The way out, however, is to overcome the first approach that we must add the required water (industrial, agricultural, civil) and then desperately tries to satisfy them. " A good tip for the planet to which Italy certainly no exception.
taken from ilfattoquotidiano.it
0 comments:
Post a Comment