[HN Gopher] Groundwater depletion in India may triple due to cli...
___________________________________________________________________
Groundwater depletion in India may triple due to climate warming,
study finds
Author : myshpa
Score : 69 points
Date : 2023-09-02 14:32 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (news.umich.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (news.umich.edu)
| [deleted]
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| India's current development strategy is unsustainable. There is
| large scale migration to a handful of major cities while the
| interior of the country gets hollowed out. There are so many
| cities with millions of residents and their population is only
| increasing.
|
| The worst part is that we don't even know what the population
| distribution is like now because the census hasn't taken place
| since 2011.
|
| India needs far more cities and it needs to distribute its
| population across a wider geographical region.
| adrianN wrote:
| Concentrating the population in a few areas is actually pretty
| good for the environment. It leaves room for nature and
| infrastructure becomes cheaper to build and more efficient to
| run.
| immibis wrote:
| Yes - economies of scale. Even if water has to be brought in
| from a distance, it's better than if some of the population
| actually extended out to that distance and got their water
| locally from the same location.
| newsclues wrote:
| Sustainability doesn't scale very well.
|
| Distributed sustainable communities seem like a better
| balance than a massive metropolitan city that destroys not
| only its local habitat but many far away ones for the raw
| materials to build and sustain the city.
| p_j_w wrote:
| All of those people are you to live somewhere and that is
| going to require building and gathering raw materials. This
| is true no matter where they live. Those raw materials are
| getting used.
|
| Given that people in cities live in smaller homes without
| yards, drive less, and are also more likely to not own a
| car, it's gonna take some evidence to prove your hunch
| here.
| myshpa wrote:
| The environmental impact is still number_of_individuals *
| mean_consumption.
|
| Urban areas often use more resources and generate more waste
| due to higher levels of economic activity. This contributes
| to a bigger environmental footprint.
|
| Cities can also shift some of their environmental impact to
| rural areas or other states or countries where things like
| food production, resource extraction and waste disposal
| happen.
|
| So, the true environmental cost of cities is often higher
| than it appears, especially when you consider the carbon
| emissions from transporting goods and waste.
| ImPostingOnHN wrote:
| _> The environmental impact is still number_of_individuals
| * mean_consumption._
|
| you're basically just defining the mean here, this misses
| the point that cities are more efficient, making their mean
| consumption per capital lower
| myshpa wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37364865
| ImPostingOnHN wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37364515
| myshpa wrote:
| > you're basically just defining the mean here
|
| No, I'm not.
|
| The environmental impact of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and
| Los Angeles, California, will differ significantly, even
| if they have similar populations and technology levels.
| When it comes to meat consumption alone, citizens of
| Addis Ababa consume approximately 5-10 kg per year, while
| in the USA, it's about 125 kg per year.
|
| The difference in consumption, or affluence, is the
| critical parameter here.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_meat_c
| ons...
| lwansbrough wrote:
| This is pretty much entirely wrong and backwards. Cheers.
| myshpa wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%3D_PAT
|
| I = (PAT) is the mathematical notation of a formula put
| forward to describe the impact of human activity on the
| environment. I = P x A x T
|
| The expression equates human impact on the environment to
| a function of three factors: population (P), affluence
| (A) and technology (T).
|
| The variable A in the I=PAT equation stands for
| affluence. It represents the average consumption of each
| person in the population
| skymast wrote:
| [dead]
| sadfev wrote:
| No Groundwater is depleting due to out of control and growing
| population. And those people are demanding higher quality of
| life.
|
| India is severely undeveloped and polluted due to its population
| bomb explosion.
|
| Climate scare-mongering doesn't solve the root problem.
| p1mrx wrote:
| So everybody's making plans to desalinate seawater with carbon-
| free energy, right?
| deepGem wrote:
| I live in Bangalore, one of the cities which is primed for water
| depletion. In fact, there are areas where there is no drinking
| water supply at all and water is ferried by trucks (locally
| called water tankers). Now these trucks ferry water from God
| knows where but most likely a fresh water source or a borewell.
| Most of the neighbourhoods in my city are fed by these borewells
| some going as deep as 1000ft. Some neighbourhoods don't find
| water even at those depths and they have to depend on these water
| trucks.
|
| Now I'm not talking about a few hundred or thousand people I am
| talking about hundreds of thousands of people who live like this.
| The prime IT areas are all water depleted already.
|
| There is this notion amongst us Indians that things will improve
| somehow and we will get by. What they don't realise is that the
| politicians won't give a damn, when water depletion hits critical
| levels. In fact these water trucks are run mostly by politicians
| and their local goons.
|
| The ground reality in a city like Bangalore at the very
| fundamental liveable parameters is horrible and getting worse day
| by day. This year rains have been below average so we are staring
| at a water shortage next year even in areas that get fresh water
| from the regular water supply.
| sateesh wrote:
| What is all the more tragic is, Bangalore gets ample rainfall
| and stricter implementation of rain water harvesting is one
| remedial solution. Though local authorities mandate compulsory
| rainwater harvesting for newer residential construction the
| implementation is quite lackluster in practice. During house
| construction people spend fortune on interior decoration, but
| loathe to spend money towards water conservation and harvesting
| efforts.
| throw_pm23 wrote:
| The main problem is the overall density on the subcontinent of
| 481 ppl/km2. (Compare with the density in Europe of 34
| ppl/km2.)
|
| You can't have the quality of life of the latter at population
| densities of the former.
| atleastoptimal wrote:
| South Korea has a higher population density and a high
| quality of life. Infrastructure, climate, and natural
| resources play a big factor
| throw_pm23 wrote:
| Yes, but they are still 50M overall. They maintain that
| quality of life by supplying the rest of the world with
| much of its cars, electronics, phones, and other crap
| (including pop music and movies). You can't do it at a size
| 30 times as large, or you'd need an entire solar system as
| your market.
| atleastoptimal wrote:
| You're implying that humanity net overall has a fixed
| output and the only way a country can do well for itself
| is at the expense of others. Technological,
| infrastructure and agricultural improvements, and more
| efficient use of resources make the whole "pie" bigger
| for everyone, and don't require being a top 10 economy
| relying on a resource rich 3rd world.
| ipnon wrote:
| The geography of South Korea seems to help. Typhoons
| collect into snow on the rocky mountains, that melt
| throughout the year into clearly defined rivers without
| much penetration into soil. There is an ecological buffer
| that some parts of India don't have to maintain levels of
| drinking water throughout the year.
| adrianN wrote:
| It is my understand that once an aquifer is depleted, there is
| no going back. The relevant strata collapse and become unable
| to carry water. So there is probably no way the situation can
| improve.
| anonuser123456 wrote:
| For some aquifers this is true, but not all.
| mortureb wrote:
| Honestly India already has a solution for this that is not
| being implemented fast enough. The monsoons every year provide
| more than enough water to supply India for years every season,
| most of it just ends up in the oceans. India has to massively
| invest in catchment. There is some of this happening but it
| needs to be on a much larger scale.
| xhkkffbf wrote:
| Yes, I've seen some good articles about how just some basic
| terraforming can make a huge difference of how much ends up
| in the aquifer. A bit more could really help.
| no_wizard wrote:
| Though monsoon patterns may change with climate change too.
| There are some forecasts that have India much much drier by
| 2040 where the water is needed most[0]
|
| [0]: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/06/19/ind
| ia-c...
| anshumankmr wrote:
| I live in Indiranagar and this is a sad reality of life here.
|
| These issues remind of this scene in Margin Call where two
| character talk about the impending 2008 crisis https://www.yout
| ube.com/watch?v=UOYi4NzxlhE&ab_channel=Movie....
|
| There are many major issues in India's growth story, and I feel
| the music is gonna stop really soon.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| All you can do is make sure you have a seat when the music
| stops. Nobody is coming to save us.
| srameshc wrote:
| There was already rampant misuse of ground water and no
| politician seems to be bothered
|
| https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/03/06/india-g...
| jeffbee wrote:
| Much of the region is watered by glacier melt that will abruptly
| cease in the near future. This is a discontinuity not mentioned
| in the article.
| llsf wrote:
| Groundwater depletion would create major disruption (as unrests
| and wars). This is literally a vital issue. Every country should
| take it seriously as matter of national security.
| esafak wrote:
| Scientists have been talking about the dangers of global
| warming for decades. I don't know what else is left to say??
| llsf wrote:
| I still think that the impact is not fully grasped. And it
| might be due to human nature, to only believe what we can see
| and measure.
|
| If we tell, "you might get +2 degree Celsius in 2050". Most
| people cannot relate. Even if we say "+2 degrees is what
| happened 10,000 years ago, and made earth suitable for human
| growth (settling, agriculture, etc.)" We have been in that
| sweet spot (holocene) for 10,000 years, in a mere century we
| are going to depart from that sweet spot and make earth not
| suitable for human growth.
|
| http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/bronze/jpg/climate.jpg
|
| "..the CO2 concentration in the air has stayed the same for
| the 10.000 years that preceed 1750, and have never gotten
| over the 1750 value (280 ppmv, and today we are at 350) fort
| the 400.000 years that preceed 1750.
|
| Actually, for these 400.000 years that preceed 1750, the
| atmospheric CO2 concentration has oscillated between 200 and
| 280 ppmv (graph below)." Source: Petit & al, Nature, June
| 1999
|
| We are impacting the climate in a way that would take decades
| to appreciate the impacts. And the inertia is such that paper
| straws, or EVs are not going to make a dent. Every country
| should see it as a national security issue.
|
| We are at war and we do not know it. Every country should
| switch to war economy, and focus on the sustainability of its
| own economy. With a postulate that fossil fuel is going to
| end (effectively because we extract faster the fossil fuel is
| naturally produced), and that the whole economy would have to
| do without it. It requires to rethink the entire economy as
| everything is either made of, or made by fossil fuels.
| billfor wrote:
| It may triple due to a lot of things, which can include climate.
| The economist has article on urban development which makes me
| think at least part of the problem is population growth, in
| particular the 3rd picture showing the population growth.
| https://www.economist.com/asia/2023/08/14/how-to-fix-indias-...
| 0xDEF wrote:
| There is also something about the Indian government subsidizing
| extremely ineffective outdated farming practices that waste a lot
| of water.
| tuatoru wrote:
| Yes, electricity for water pumping is subsidised, and the water
| itself is not taxed.
|
| Imposing even tiny charges on water consumption by farmers
| would incentivize them to use water more efficiently. India
| could easily learn water efficient practices from Israeli
| farmers.
| pvaldes wrote:
| neither arid India nor the north of China had enough water. China
| may hope to achieve some strategic control over the big Baikal
| Lake's reservoir in a near future probably.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-02 23:01 UTC)