Monitoring my water intake for the day wasn't hard, just a few cups of water there, a shower, dinner and some driving. I didn't think I consumed very much water when I kept track of it on Friday. When I used the water footprint calculator I was shocked to see how much water went into everything I did. Food, driving, our "yard" (I used KW lawn), everything else that I do in my day-to-day life. I found out I use approximately 900 cubic meters of water a year, which is 650 gallons a day and 234,349 gallons per year. This is actually a lot less than most of the people in the U.S. who use approximately 2,060 gallons a day. This could be because I drive a diesel car that has a great mpg, I don't eat much meat at school, and I try to keep my water usage to a minimum with regards to laundry, showers, etc.
When using the National Water Footprint Explorer I was surprised to compare some of the countries in the region to the U.S. I assumed the U.S. used more water per day than those other countries, but I didn't realize exactly how much more. In the U.S. we use 2,060 gallons a day as stated earlier; Egyptian citizens use 977 gallons per day. Egypt is one of the lowest water-usage countries in the region, while the United Arab Emirates uses more per day than the United States, coming in at 2,271 gallons per day. The majority of other countries in the region fall between Egypt and the UAE.
The most interesting fact is the amount imported versus the amount from in-state. The U.S. imports only 20% of it's water while the countries in the Middle East import at least 66%, excluding Egypt which only imports 29% of its water used. In the case of Jordan, 86% of water is imported and only 14% is in-state water. In my opinion this is the source of most strife and insecurity with regards to water usage. States that rely on imported water are at the mercy of the international market and price fluctuations. International relations between states with mostly state-dervived water, such as the U.S., and states who import most of the water they consume, such as Jordan, could be greatly impacted by "water politics". This is something I just made up, a term for states relations when one impacts virtual water to the other. In my opinion, this is something that could change the relations between countries during agreement/treaty talks.
Socially I think it's important to discuss how people in water poor countries regard water and the price for water rich products. These products are more expensive in water poor countries, even though they could be very affordable in water rich countries. I don't think this is an equally important topic, but still one to be pointed out.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Local Politics?
In class we talked about Mohamed Bouazizi and Khaled Saeed, who sparked revolution on a national scale with their individual actions. There are examples of people inciting change all over the world, but these are the two in our region that really stand out. We usually think about how our voice doesn't reach the "right" people when we're trying to change things - but who are those "right" people? In my opinion we have the responsibility to change what we feel is not right, and we have the voice to do it; in this way, politics are local as well as activism.
Individuals are the basis of every organization and state, and sometimes those in power forget about the individuals below them. This is when people start to really incite the change, not quietly when things start to go wrong, but loudly and with passion when things can no longer carry on the way they are. People don't change with just their individual voice, it takes others standing with them.
The argument against this is that there are a few people in a nation or region that really hold the reins, who control what happens. I think this true, that there are families, companies, organizations, etc. that really do the day-to-day running of things. I'm not saying that things are always controlled by individuals, I'm arguing that those individuals only come to the surface and thwart power when they are at the end of their rope. And getting things changed, no matter how spaced apart those changes are, is how people show their individual power.
Nations can interact with each other in a certain way for years and years, but when the people in one nation stand up and incite a revolution, the nations start interacting with others in a very different way. In this order individuals are changing things on a global scale, whether they realize the impact their actions have or not.
Individuals are the basis of every organization and state, and sometimes those in power forget about the individuals below them. This is when people start to really incite the change, not quietly when things start to go wrong, but loudly and with passion when things can no longer carry on the way they are. People don't change with just their individual voice, it takes others standing with them.
The argument against this is that there are a few people in a nation or region that really hold the reins, who control what happens. I think this true, that there are families, companies, organizations, etc. that really do the day-to-day running of things. I'm not saying that things are always controlled by individuals, I'm arguing that those individuals only come to the surface and thwart power when they are at the end of their rope. And getting things changed, no matter how spaced apart those changes are, is how people show their individual power.
Nations can interact with each other in a certain way for years and years, but when the people in one nation stand up and incite a revolution, the nations start interacting with others in a very different way. In this order individuals are changing things on a global scale, whether they realize the impact their actions have or not.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)