This article explores the critical water scarcity facing India, emphasising the urgent need for effective water management.
How much water do we need? How much water should we use as individuals?
Highlighting the roles of agricultural and domestic sectors in water consumption, it introduces strategies for reducing water footprints and discusses both the supply and demand sides of water conservation.
Agriculture
It is the largest consumer of fresh water resources globally. In India, it is estimated to consume 75–85 per cent. Therefore, it is obvious that water conservation efforts must be focused on this sector for significant gains. Here, crop choice is important. Rice, wheat, and sugarcane form the bulk of our agricultural output, and these are all water intensive. For example, rice consumes as much as 3,500 litres of water for every kilogramme of grain produced. Appropriate crop choices can not only limit the need for water but can also promote the cultivation of more nutritious crops and thus go beyond ‘food security’ towards ‘nutrition security.’ Irrigation practices need rapid transformation. Flood irrigation is the most widely prevalent practice, although sprinkler and drip irrigation are found to not only save great amounts of water but also improve yields. Several government schemes are in place to promote these and must be pursued. A 2018 report by NABARD and ICRIER introduces the concept of water productivity in agriculture. The authors define physical water productivity as the ratio of agricultural output to the amount of water consumed (from all available sources of water like rainfall and irrigation). Irrigation water productivity and economic water productivity are related terms. The report tabulates the water productivity of various countries in Asia and the Pacific. The figure for India is 3; that for China is 14; for Bangladesh it is 4; for Indonesia it is 8; for Singapore it is a whopping 1493; and for Australia it is 65. It is therefore obvious that we must do with less water in agriculture. This will not only foster water security but also protect farmers from the vagaries of monsoons.
Demand domestic
Domestic demand for water also offers scope for re-evaluation and rationalization. One needs to assess the water requirement of an individual or a household per day in different settings. The Central Ground Water Authority has estimated the requirement for communities with a population of more than 1,00,000 together with a full flushing system at 150 to 200 litres per head per day. Now this (8 to 10 large buckets per head per day) seems rather generous, even exaggerated, considering the water stress in most parts of our country. It should be possible to do with much less. The breakdown given by some others is roughly as follows: drinking 5 litres; cooking 5; bathing 55 (3 plus buckets is excessive); utensils washing 10; house washing 10; flushing of WC 35. Surely there is much scope for using water more judiciously. The norms need to be tighter.
Water footprint
In the context of water, its conservation, preservation, and rational use, it is useful to bring in the concept of water footprint (similar to carbon footprint). Individuals, communities, and products, including the food we consume, have a water footprint associated with them. Simply put, the water footprint of an article represents the quantity of water that goes into producing one unit of that product across the entire cycle of production and delivery of that article. Some figures are revealing: As per waterfootprint.org, the water footprint of a 150-gram soyburger produced in the Netherlands is about 160 litres. A beef burger from the same country takes up, on average, about 1000 litres. As reported elsewhere, a Kilogram of chocolate has a water footprint of 17,196 litres, whereas a kilogram of cabbage has a footprint of 237 litres per kg, cucumber 353 litres per kg, maize 1222per kg, and rice 2497 litres per kg. One pound (450 g) of plastic requires 83 litres of water to make; one A4 sheet of paper takes up 5 litres. Similarly, each item of daily use—the clothes we wear and the shoes on our feet—has a water footprint associated with it. Power generation and the extraction and refining of crude oil require copious amounts of water. While food, clothing, etc. are a matter of personal choice, it is good to remember the water footprint of our choices; can we embrace products and processes with a lower water footprint? For example, every time we reuse, repurpose, or recycle a waste plastic item, we are not only reducing the waste management load; we are also saving a substantial amount of water. If we had used one less A4 sheet of paper today, we could say we had saved 5 litres of water. Food waste is, in any case, shameful. When we consider the water footprint of the various ingredients that went into making our food, it becomes more so.
Beyond products and processes, communities and countries too have a water footprint based on the life preferences of their people. The water footprint of an average global citizen is reportedly about 1385 cubic metres (13,85,000 litres) per year. For an Indian, it is about 1085; for a USA citizen, it is an unusually high 2840; for a UK citizen, it is about 1700. It seems that reviewing and reforming our lifestyles can greatly cut our water footprint and improve water security.
Supply of water
Yet we must talk about the supply side of the water equation too. In recent years, rainfall has become less predictable, more uneven, and inadequate on account of climate change impacts. Given that most parts of our country are largely dependent on rainfall to supply, replenish, and rejuvenate natural water sources like rivers, lakes, and ponds, the impact of scanty rainfall gives rise to water scarcity all around.
While serious efforts are underway across the globe to cut emissions, reduce global warming, and heal the planet, these efforts will take time to bear fruit and restore environmental balance and rainfall patterns. In the meantime, water supply can be augmented through water desalination, as is being done in several coastal cities, notably Chennai. However, desalination comes with significant environmental costs. The desalination plants use much power and therefore raise GHG emissions; the process releases toxic waste, which is damaging; the salt removed from water is pushed back into the sea, raising the salt levels and impacting marine life. Large dams and other water capture-and-store mechanisms have been in use for several decades and have indeed been helpful in bringing water (and therefore livelihood and prosperity) to several arid areas. However, these too have environmental costs. Experts therefore suggest smaller, decentralised water capture measures like rainwater harvesting and pond and lake rejuvenation.
Augmenting the water supply is complex and time-consuming. In the meantime, let us manage the demand side by embracing a low-water footprint lifestyle.
Water footprint of an article represents the quantity of water that goes into producing one unit of that product across the entire cycle of production and delivery of that article.