Water contamination footprint- A paper by Chetan Pandit

Guest post by Mr. Chetan Pandit who works for the Central Water Commission, Government of India

This blog is a condensed version of the paper published in the 3rd Round Table on Sustainable Consumption and Production, organized by the Ministry of Environment and Forests jointly with UNEP, at New Delhi on 11-12 Feb 2010. The views expressed in this article are author’s personal views, and are not to be taken as the views of his employers.

In any discussion about Sustainable Development (SD) the quantity of consumption is invariably the main concern. Perhaps this stems from the original definition of SD as the “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs", which invokes the spectre of insufficient quantities of resources at some time in the future. This concern is invalid for water, because water is a dynamic and renewable resource. Every hydrologic year brings a fresh packet of water. There is no way to use in this year, the rainfall that is yet to occur in the next year, or next decade. Moreover, any unused water will flow away to the oceans. The storages capacities, whether in surface storages or in aquifer, are adequate for one year only, at the most a little carry over for the next year. With many basins already reaching “water stressed” status, the problem at hand is how to supply the needs of this year, and there is no question of storing the water for future generations. Thus, in the context of water, quantity of water used should not be the primary concern for SD.The primary concern for SD for water should be preserving the quality of water. Industries and large cities disposing off untreated or partially treated waste water in the river, have already rendered the water in many rivers unfit for use. Case studies of pollution in Yamuna downstream of Delhi; Ganga downstream of Kanpur; Gomti near Lucknow; Noyyal near Tirupur, etc. have been widely documented and need not be repeated here. The point is, the pollution renders the water in these rivers useless.
The next level of concern for water pollution, is pollution of the reservoirs. The implications of this perhaps did not come to notice forcefully earlier, because the prominent rivers affected by pollution, the Ganga and Yamuna, have no reservoirs on them, and the pollutants simply passed through the rivers and into Bay of Bengal. As the peninsular rivers with reservoirs reach “polluted” status, the problem of reservoir pollution is coming to the fore.
Pollutants accumulated in a river get flushed once a year, when a flood passes through during monsoon. But some of the pollutants reaching a reservoir settle down in the reservoir area. Thus, reservoirs on polluted rivers can accumulate pollutants.

And the most worrisome is the pollution of aquifer. Pollutants in the rivers, in the reservoirs, agro chemicals used in the farms, and pollutants in the solid wastes of the city, they all inevitably leach in to the aquifer. And there is no flushing for aquifers. Pollutants stay in the aquifer for a very long time that can run in to decades. The depth to GW table in the aquifer should be less important. More important is, whether the aquifer is clean, or is it polluted.
All this is basic environmental science, and is known. But the obsession with quantity continues. Most civil society organizations think that the water quality in rivers can be improved by having more flow in the rivers, which in turn can be achieved by abstracting less water from the rivers, by adopting water saving practices. This does not work. By definition, a water stressed area is that where the quantity of water available is insufficient even after taking into account all possible water saving practices. Therefore, dilution can not be a strategy for pollution reduction.

For conservation of quality, the stress presently in on removing the pollutants from the waste water, before it enters the hydrologic cycle. That is important. But reducing the use of polluting agents in the first place is also important, and has not yet received the attention it deserves. Towards this objective,

“Water Contamination Footprint”

Likewise, “Water Contamination Footprint” would be the contamination caused by a certain activity, or in the manufacture of a certain product. Application of this concept could bring to notice facts that are presently not noticed. Some examples :

• Conscious of their “water foot print”, most hotels prominently display “Save Water” appeals, and offer the guests the option of not necessarily having the linen changed every day. But they replace the soap every day, after just one use. The unused cake of soap is disposed off as solid waste, from where it eventually leaches into the aquifer. Awareness about the “Water Contamination Footprint” could result in reduction in the quantity of soap reaching the water bodies.
• Conscious of their “water foot print”, and also “energy foot print”, washing machine manufacturers try to design their machines to use less water, and less electricity. Awareness about the “Water Contamination Footprint” could result in they paying attention to how much detergent awash cycle needs, and reducing the same.
• Water footprint of different food products is known. But it would be interesting to compare their “Water Contamination Footprint”. The outcome may not be the one that looks obvious. i.e. a food product that uses less water may not necessarily use less chemicals. That depends on the diseases it is prone to, the pesticides and fertilizer requirement per unit production, etc.
• In mass awareness campaigns about water, the focus is on reducing the quantity of water use. There is now a good level of awareness amongst public on how to reduce quantity of water used in daily chores. Awareness about the “Water Contamination Footprint” could result in a significant reduction in use of cleaning agents, pesticides/ germicides, cosmetics, dyes and colors, lubricants, . . . and many other such products that pollute the water.

The concept of a “Water Contamination Footprint” is not yet in use. It should. The earlier the better.