Water Journal : Current Feb 2017
technical paper Water Security www.awa.asn.au 1 ISSN 2206 Volume 1 No http://dx.doi.org/10.21139/wej.2 ABSTRACT Water scarcity is an increasingly important and widespread issue in a world of changing climate. Neo- Malthusians argue that it will lead to increased conflict between states. Resource optimists, who view water as far too important to fight over, have refuted this viewpoint and argue that people will always find alternative solutions before conflict occurs. This paper aims to demonstrate that the truth sits somewhere in between: although conflict over water alone is highly unlikely, shared water resources may exacerbate an existing conflict in water-scarce regions. If there is ample social capital between the states, this exacerbating factor significantly decreases -- in fact, the higher the social capital between the states, the less likely it is that water will aggravate existing tensions. This is true in the case of Israel and Jordan. During a period of declining water resources, when water had the potential to exacerbate existing issues, the high level of social capital between the two countries enabled the establishment of a clear dispute management process that has reduced the risk of violent confrontation. INTRODUCTION Water scarcity is an existential threat to state survival, one which environmental scientists contend will worsen significantly. As water scarcity1 increases, exacerbated tensions and potential recourse to violence become far more likely. Previous research in the field presents a neo-Malthusian, alarmist argument, which assumes war is likely over scarce water resources. With the benefit of recent literature, this paper provides full consideration of the countering resource optimist argument, ensuring that the conclusions are significant, based on current environmental trends and academic debate. In analysing current literature, it is apparent that war over water resources alone is extremely unlikely, with the 'water wars' theory being nothing short of alarmist. Conflict2 data confirms this contention, with no interstate conflicts occurring over water resources alone in water- barren regions in the last 4,000 years. However, despite conflict over water alone being unlikely, water issues can still exacerbate existing issues. Water availability can be used to quell existing areas of contention, rather than acting as an antagonising facto r. Further, it considers whether social capital is a factor in this. Social capital is shown to be used to link communities and promote cooperation, particularly in water management. This theory is tested on a shared water basin case study between Israel and Jordan, in the context of social capital factors, focusing on elements of tr reciprocity, and how wate have ceased to act as an influence in existing con is used to determine w capital could be a fact the likelihood of wate exacerbating existing NEO-MALTHU VS. RESOUR OPTIMISM I SCARCITY CONFLICT There is a sign exploring con The two pred field relate to resource op They p the effec influenc espous where that t reso Res as th W 1. NEO-MALTHUSIANISM VS. RESOURCE OPTIMISM -- A SOCIAL CAPITAL APPROACH WATER SCARCITY AND INTERSTATE CONFLICT A Kosovac technical paper www.awa.asn.au 5 Water-Sensitive Urban Design gardens. The parameter impervious area treated (%) in Table 1 represents roof impervious area, where runoff is captured in the rainwater tanks. The total impervious area of this sewershed is 4.128km2 and the total roof area was estimated as 0.99km2 , which represents 24% of the total impervious area. The total roof area of 0.99km2 was based on an average roof size of 264m2 for the 3,750 households in the sewershed. Using this total roof area, the annual rainfall of 681.2mm and a runoff coefficient of around 0.85, the total volume of runoff captured by the rainwater tanks can be estimated as 573ML, which is assumed to flow over the previous area. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The outcomes of the sewer modelling with the different rainwater tank parameters during 2010 are presented in Figures 3 and 4. For the results presented in both these figures, the number of households is taken as 100% and a comparison with the base case (which is the current condition without implementing rainwater tanks) is also presented. In these figures, the reduction in overflow volume when compared to the base case (in %) is also shown on the secondary x-axis. As mentioned earlier, the overflow volume for the base case was 23 ML. Figure 3 presents the annual overflow volume for the four different drain times (T). In these model runs, the rainwater tanks are assumed to be continuously flowing (i.e. with a drain delay of 0 hours). As seen in this figure, the drain time of 48 hours resulted in the maximum reduction in sewer overflow when compared to the base case. For the 500L, 1,000L, 1,200L and 1,500L rainwater tanks, the reduction in SSO volumes was by 13.8%, 23.6%, 24.1% and 27.2% respectively (for the drain time of 48 hours). In the continuo draining process, the outlet orifice pipe is assumed to be open during rainfall events and the stormwater is continuously routed to the pervious area. Therefore, rainwater tanks lea reduction in surface runoff since it releases the stored water through outlet orifice pipe. Thus, for a fixe size, the increase in drain time in the SSO volume reduction. Hen our case, a drain tim maximum Figur volum and 3 drain sinc red se ta a 19.8 17.57 17.45 16.73 19.65 17.9 17.72 17.2 23 19.71 18.5 18.26 18.15 20.53 20.27 20.23 0 5 10 15 20 25 Base Case (without Rainwater tank) 500L 1000L 1200L An nual Ov erflo w Volum ex 103 m3 Tank Size (Litre) Drain time (48 hours) Drain time (36 hours) Drain time (24 hours) Drain time (12 hours) SSO volume reduction (T=48 hours) SSO volume reduction (T=3 SSO volume reduction (T=24 hours) SSO volume reduction (T=12 hours) Figure 3. Annual SSO volume reduction for different tank sizes and drain times. technical paper W www.awa.asn.au 4 Water-Sensitive Urban Design In SWMM, flow through the underdrain from a rainwater tank is governed by the submerged orifice equation, as shown in Eq. (1) (Walsh et al., 2014). C represents the drain coefficient, D is the height of stored water, Hd is the drain offset and n is the drain exponent. q=C(D--Hd)n (1) The drain coefficient (C) can be estimated by integrating Eq. (1) and is presented in Eq. (2). As can be seen, C is a function of two variables, namely the drain time (T) and the depth (D) of the stored water. Drain time (T) is the time required to drain out a depth D of stored water in the rainwater tank. In SWMM, D is in units of inches and T is in hours (Walsh et al., 2014). Therefore, for calculating C using the values of D in mm (as provided in Table 1), Eq. (2) has to be modified to that presented in Eq. (3). The values of C presented in Table 1 are calculated using Eq. (3) with the values of D and T in mm and hours respectively (as presented in Table 1). Since drain times (T) have an impact on the underdrain flow, four different drain times (of 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours) have been used in this study. The drain times were proposed to not exceed 48 hours due to the risk of mosquito breeding. The standard range of drain time for storage-based LID strategies is 24 to 48 hours The drain expon 0.5, assuming an orifice (Wa 2010). Drain zero, assum bottom of th The stor (as well a is routed Table 1. Rainwater tank parameters used in PCSWMM Volume (L) - 500L Height (D) (mm) - 500 Drain Coefficient T=36 Hours C= 6.26 (C) (mm0.5 /hr) T=24 Hours C= 9.39 T=12 Hours C=18 Drain Exponent (n) - 0 Drain Offset Height (Hd) (mm) - Drain Delay (hours) - 0 Impervious Area Treated (%) - 24/11/2010 11:36 28/11/2010 15:36 2/12/2010 19:36 6/12/2010 23:36 11/12/2010 3:36 Flo w( m3 /s ec) Measured sewer flow Average Dry Weather Flow Rainf RDII RDII November Rainfall Event December Rainfall Event Figure 2. The RDII flows in the sewer pipe during intense rainfall. (3) (2) technical paper Water Treatment Water e-Journal www.awa.asn.au 1 IMPROVING THE HEALTH AND WELLBEING OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE LIVING IN DISCRETE COMMUNITIES BY PROVIDING SAFE AND EFFECTIVE WATER AND SEWERAGE SERVICES W Henderson, P Byleveld, J Standen, S Leask NEW SOUTH WALES ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES WATER AND SEWERAGE PROGRAM ABSTRACT The New South Wales Aboriginal Communities Water and Sewerage Program aims to improve the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal people living in discrete communities by providing safe and effective water and sewerage services, which are equivalent to the standard expected in the wider community. The Program is a joint initiative of the NSW Aboriginal Land Council and the NSW Government. More than $200 million is being invested over 25 years for routine operation, maintenance, monitoring, repairs and replacement of infrastructure. INTRODUCTION Aboriginal people are disadvantaged in health outcomes. The Health of Aboriginal People of NSW: Report of the Chief Health Officer found a significant disparity between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people across most population health indicators (NSW Health 2012). The Closing the Gap Prime Minister's Report stated that 'Although there has been some improvement in education and health outcomes for Indigenous Australians in many areas progress has been far too slow' (Commonwealth of Australia 2015). Access to clean water is essential to health (WHO 2010). The New South Wales Aboriginal Communities Water and Sewerage Program aims to bring about sustainable improvements by committing to operation, maintenance and monitoring of water and sewerage services in discrete Aboriginal communities. Before the commencement of the Program in 2008, Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs) were responsible for the water and sewerage infrastructure on their community land. Most had small populations, could not generate sufficient income for routine operations and lacked technical skills to sustain services. These arrangements presented a number of difficulties, especially for very small communities that are a long way from service providers. There was no systematic process to address operation and maintenance. In some Aboriginal communities, water and sewerage services did not meet general NSW community standards. Inadequate water supply and sewerage systems were identified as a major factor in the poor health status of some Aboriginal communities (NAHSWP 1989). Where water sources were found to be unsafe , often there was no option other than to issue a boil water alert to communities. The Program was established in 2008 with the signing of an agreement between the NSW Aboriginal Land Council and the NSW Government. Several NSW Government agencies and other organisations have a vital role in the Program. The NSW Government agencies include Aboriginal Affairs NSW, NSW Aboriginal Housing Office, NSW Department of Primary Industries Water (DPI Water), NSW Health, Treasury NSW and NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet. Other key organisations include individual local government councils (water utilities), Local Aboriginal Land Councils, contracted service providers and industry bodies for local Government (Local Government NSW) and water utilities (NSW Water Directorate). ISSN 2206-1991 Volume 1 No 4 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.21139/wej.2016.036 Submit your technical paper for the Water e-Journal, the Association's online repository of water-related papers. Visit the Association's website and look under the Publications tab or email email@example.com for more information. To read the full article, visit the Water e-Journal at bit.ly/water_ejournal have the prospect of hampering development in the North. This article will examine the current water law and policy frameworks that exist in the North and scrutinise their impact on development and investment. The article concludes that the current state of flux of some of these frameworks is creating investor uncertainty. This must be addressed as a first step before any real progress can occur with respect to reducing barriers to northern development. Dr Madeleine Hartley is a solicitor at Kingfisher Law. Madeleine is an expert in urban and regional water issues, having completed her doctorate in law at the University of Western Australia with field work in Western Australia, New South Wales and Colorado; and complementary environmental, Indigenous and dispute resolution law studies in Canada. She advises corporations, farmers and growers of food and fibre in some of the most remote and distant parts of Australia on irrigation policy; acquiring, selling and trading water licences; and reviewing adverse licensing decisions, water related contracts and insurance matters.
Water Journal November 2016
Current May 2017