this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
361 points (98.7% liked)

World News

39373 readers
2984 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ms_lane 67 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Nestle: Just as planned

edit: On the bright side, Solar Stills will probably work a lot faster in the future.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 month ago

I know you are joking, but for people that don't know: Solar Stills are total scams. They might work in a pinch as a survival tool, but for long term it's a non starter.

They have many issues, for example in places that don't have a lot of water and thus would be the most needed, they simply don't work. If there isn't a lot of water in the air, there isn't any to extract. Even in perfect conditions these things produce very little water, in most conditions you'd be lucky to get a couple of drops. Second issue is the water isn't clean, there is so much stuff floating in the air, you can't drink the water that comes out without filtering / boiling first. If that step is required you might as well go with ground or surface water sources. And if there isn't any ground or surface water sources, there won't be any water in the air most likely. Third issue is you are creating a hot and humid environment, which is an excellent breeding ground for all sorts of nasties. Think legionnaires disease and all sort of other bacteria and fungi. Within days it becomes a serious health hazard. Last issue is the materials used are almost by definition cheap and exposed to hard uv a lot of the time. This makes them degrade quickly and fall apart. Leaving plastic waste and chemicals leaking into the water it produces, until it just falls apart.

There have been so many crowd funding campaigns for clean water from the air over the past decades. Maybe some of them are simply naive and well meaning, but almost all are plain old scams. Feeding off the desire of people to help other people, only to fill their own pockets.

And furthermore, the problem with access to clean water is capitalism. There is plenty of water available, we have the means to extract it from the ground, surface and sea. We can process it, clean it, recycle it. Use trucks or pipes to transport it to places that don't have it. The only issue is, that costs money and the people living where the water is needed don't have a lot of money. So bringing water to these places simply doesn't generate a profit and thus doesn't get done. It isn't some kind of huge technical issue, there are many rich places in the desert that have plenty of water. Think oil states in the Middle East, or places in the US like Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico etc. Capitalism is the issue, not technology.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

America would rather invade Canada for water than tell private corporations they need to be regulated more.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

The Guardian also has an excellent article today on companies like Nestlé and Danone emptying out aquifers.

‘It’s not drought - it’s looting’: the Spanish villages where people are forced to buy back their own drinking water | Life and style | The Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/nov/23/spanish-villages-people-forced-to-buy-back-own-drinking-water-drought-flood

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (30 children)
[–] Duamerthrax 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, yes, but many regions that are going to have water supply issues aren't near the animal ag farms. Closing a dairy farm in New Hampshire isn't going to help things in central Africa. The bigger culprit is Climate Change bringing dry air flows to areas that previously had more humidity and precipitation.

[–] x00z 4 points 1 month ago

Closing a dairy farm does actually help. It means less CO2 in the air, less climate change, and thus less dry air in central Africa.

For the water itself you are correct, but animal farms are very much a reason of climate change.

load more comments (29 replies)
[–] Death_Equity 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Dont worry, there will be a considerable drop in demand due to artificial circumstances. So I wouldn't worry if you survive what is to come.

[–] andallthat 12 points 1 month ago

Plus, you know that a human body is like 70% water? If you're one of those billionaire vampires you are going to be just fine.

[–] aleq 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Also not an issue if you're in the rich part of the world, or just one that has a lot of water. Fortunately I don't think water is gonna be what makes Russia invade, don't know what their supply looks like but I can't imagine it's not enough.

[–] Death_Equity 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Russia has the largest freshwater lake by volume, Lake Baikal, so they aren't likely to invade anyone because of their drinking water needs. Especially because Ukraine has been instrumental in reducing their need of fresh water.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's a big lake but a bigger country. I don't think Russia will be the first to have big water issues. Rather, I would look to Mexico City, Panama, Arizona, Nevada, California.

[–] Death_Equity 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There definitely will be other areas with far greater issues.

Russia has a current population of around 143.8m people. One quarter of the Earth's freshwater is in Russia. Lake Baikal has a total volume of 6 quadrillion, which is 20% of Earth's freshwater.

The average Russian household uses 64 gallons of water per day. So Russia, with only Lake Baikal, has enough access to freshwater for over 10,000 years if no water is added to the lake and the population doesn't change.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lake Baikal is out by Mongolia and the majority of Russians live in the west of the country.

[–] Death_Equity 1 points 1 month ago

Russia has previously unlocked pipeline technology and aren't all that concerned with ecological impacts of their actions.

If they had to tap Lake Baikal to supply the population, it wouldn't be unimaginable.

[–] Luvs2Spuj 20 points 1 month ago

But I need it to cool my AI powered rule 34 service.

[–] TheEighthDoctor 18 points 1 month ago

I guess, "do not become addicted to water"

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It's kind of a funny thing to say, because as the tagline itself mentions demand isn't (totally) fixed. It also doesn't give the source of that exact statement, annoyingly.

What's actually going to happen is that people some places are going to have scarcity and have to cut back or import more at a cost. Either gradually, the way it seems to be shaping up where I live, or suddenly, like whenever California's aquifers finally bite it.

[–] CleoTheWizard 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah I mean I wonder how much water would be saved in water scarce places if people just stop having lawns for no reason.

People can put actual effort into their homes exterior and invest in native grasses and plants that way. Save a lot of water and end our troubles with toxic runoff

[–] lemmyseikai 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Or we can grow water intensive plants in states that have water instead of making almonds in California.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I don't use almond milk mostly for that reason. (Oat is also just better)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

We can stop watering golf courses in the middle of the fucking desert

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Goodmorningsunshine 5 points 1 month ago

Good thing we'll only ramp that up in the name of capitalism

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Good thing I mostly drink coffee, milk and juices

;)

[–] hakunawazo 2 points 1 month ago
[–] FlyingSquid 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, the Danes are about to get super rich. Guess they were right to keep hold of Greenland.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Much like Canada though, I don't think they have resources to defend their water

[–] T00l_shed 9 points 1 month ago

Trumps claim that canada will solve the US water crisis worries me.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

And so the water wars have begun.

Mass migration, armies at the border, and superpowers killing whether they can't profit from.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

More likely obligate vegan diets. The economic forces will drive the price of water heavy foods like meat and dairy up so high the masses will stop consuming them.

[–] Cornpop 1 points 1 month ago

It’s not like vegetables require a ton of water to grow as well though right… right?

[–] roguetrick 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's farming that's causing the demand, not municipal water supplies.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I meant mass migration bcs of famine (no local, ever more expensive foreign food bcs they dont have local alterative), but I guess eventually water for drinking too.

[–] robojeb 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why don't they use Brawndo it's got what plants crave.

[–] pousserapiere 3 points 1 month ago

It's got ... Roll hands ... Electrolytes

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

If water consumption doesnt increase from the average of the last 2030 years, we will run out of water in the year 5075

There is nothing to worry about /s

[–] Gammelfisch 2 points 1 month ago

Detroit will make a come back! The city has plenty of water. Salt Lake City is finished and the Mormons can keep the soon to be dry dump.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

There's not really a water problem, there's only expensive desalination. Since water is a government controlled resource, we'll just have to spend money on building new desalination plants.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I'm so glad I have a deep well in a place that will never run dry.

load more comments
view more: next ›