Geez you coves, you don't know the bassic fundamentals of Therma-dah-namics.

*The gravitas of the hydrological cycle is not where we reside and not in the centre of our desert Island. It's in the surface of the world's oceans. And WE have created red zones and dead zones in those oceans that in turn create micro climates off our coasts. These microclimates actively suck all the moisture from our heartlands by the simplest of laws - the second law of thermodynamics(2LT). As an example, Sydney's deep ocean sewer outfalls have created a dead zone that is registered with the UN. And as the Tassie Premier touts his new pet vote-getter, Global Warming, he has one of the biggest pollution plumes in Australia off Hobart. Australia, If you don't want water shortages and politicians driving you insane with efforts to make water THEIR bully cash cow, 'STOP PISSIN IN THE POND'. All sewage must be recycled to stop drought. You don't need to pipe it back to dams. Nature does that for us by evaporation and RAINFALL. And get free of the Global warming guilt trip - GW ain't happening: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

* There are many shortages and many threats to our future but water shortage is insignificant in comparison to population overload. The world will be pushing 10 billion souls by 2050 and I can assure you all reading this that we will have run out of personal space and individual DIGNITY before we run out of water. A resulting glut of violence is already showing up every day in newsreports: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/stroll-rage-slow-street-crosser-bashed/2006/08/16/1155407873473.html.
If we want to end up as lemmings, just keep listening to Howard's economic rationalism and Costello's Melbo-centric domination aspirations. If you want any kind of future, Australia needs to use value-added PBR Uranium exports to fund an unmanned SPACE program aimed at generating ET solar power and investigating safe orbital habitats.

But first we need to demolish the Howard government and put in place a leader who will raise EDUCATION and not immigration-obsequia as the premier force in Australian Politics and in our Society.

Online Opinion should just change its name to Theendoftheworldisnigh.com.au . Every second post here is some apocalyptic prediction from the Singer crowd. This sort of thing has been getting written since the 60's and they've been wrong any time. How many more do we have to sit through?

While we have "breath" it is never too late.

PART ONE:

Valid comments from TLTR, Wildcat and everyone else.

The thing that I see here is the relationship water has to other issues, which also cover the agenda of "basic need".

Ie: The developed worlds needs Vs the undeveloped worlds needs and, the impact that has on sustainable development.

I thought the example given about the way countries with large populations, have more children .... to help cope with basic human necessities - including the "responsiblity" of their parents is a good one here.

This is because through the question of "what do we do"... we discover that education for all the world's children is primary if we are to comprehend the needs to sustain ourselves and our children through future generations on this planet. This is because it has been proven... children with education appear to partner later in life... and have less children when they decide to have a family. This is because they choose to save, and have more opportunity to support their families with an education.

I also believe "wholesale" in recycled water!

Having seen first hand, the poor health conditions, in places like Vietnam, and Africa.... I realise;

a) how over the top we are in the developed world about (any form of) organic matter and

b) it is true that millions of people in India - on the fringe suburbs of Calcutta (and other places) are "market gardening" with semi-purified redirected channels of sewerage waters. Some of these channels are only three to five miles long... before the waters are utilised in the gardens for subsistant living.

In fact... this move... to rechannel the waters... was initiated with with the assistance of NGO's and the UN and has meant the difference for life and death for millions of struggling no income and low income families.

I feel we have all the economic trade markets locked in the developed world, while the expanding developing and under-developed worlds struggle to grow food to eat.

While we have "breath" it is never too late.

PART TWO:

We then get to blame these countries for the over-population and the quanity of sustainable resource use...?

Is the core problem not in "sharing".

I wonder what it will take to enhance our chances to change these aspects.

Do we need to revisit the "The Marshall Plan" of ... WWII?. I note here that the principals of this plan... (so war never happened again) benefited the American economy aside from helping to put Europe back on its feet.

See Google Search : http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=Marshall+Plan&spell=1

The 2005 World Summit - back tracked badly on these issues, as representing powerful countries badgered the lime-lite over small Island Nations, Africa and Asia, where people with far less, are genuinely "engaged" at civic ground levels, to make a difference.

It seems now... the peasant communities everywhere could truely use some of this (once pro-active) knowledge.

www.miacat.com

“Nonetheless, feeding the world’s growing population will largely depend on irrigation, but increased competition for water will severely limit its availability for this purpose, which in turn would seriously constrain food production. Due in part to rapid population growth and urbanisation in developing countries, water use for households, industry, and agriculture is expected to increase by at least 50 per cent in the next 20 years.”

Mark Rosegrant, you recognise that a rapidly growing population is the driving force behind ever-more stressed water resources. But you make no suggestion that we should be doing anything other than just accept this continued rapid growth.

“However, a crisis is not inevitable. Achieving sustainable water use and ensuring adequate supplies of and access to water for food production is possible.”

Achieving a sustainable water use is not possible if we just sit back and accept that populations will continue to rapidly increase. Not only this, but any advances in water-use efficiency will facilitate population increase, which will take us further away from sustainability, and further away from being able to keep water-provision up to the people in the slightly longer term.

As I have said, in what must be approaching a thousand times on this forum, we cannot only address one side of the equation if we are genuinely striving for sustainability. As well as striving to improve supply and efficient usage, we MUST also address the continuously increasing demand.

As unpalatable as it may seem, strong measures to stabilise and then reduce population are absolutely imperative.

Yes Ludwig, but what do you suggest about the populations?

Besides war and famine.... there has been the stipulation in countries like Vietnam, India, China of one and two child households.... and this has its own transference of critical human rights abuses which includes gender abuses too (of preference to boys), as well as what happens in the area of disabilities.

That's why educaton and providing basic needs keeps cropping up as a major strategy in population ?control?....

If I had my way there would be SEX EDUCATION everywhere... not just against AIDS - condoms etc. For me it is a moral issue of human kind... one trapped or fretted as a economic one because of the "individualisms" that appears statistically when
higher incomes are evident, as there appears to be less children in these families... in all cultures.

It irritates me when I see or imagine (which I do) the number of children concieved after just one nite out. Sex - pro-creation - unplanned is wreakless don't you think? I think it is to do with emotional literacy.... loneliness.... self - something....

At least in the villages of the under-developed world, the idea of family has something to do with "why" have a family - and that there is a whole contribution as family to family... though not everywhere.

Part of my own reluctance to having a family was/is about war, famine and the state of displaced children. I decided to work in areas of sustainable development (in this life) rather than have a family... because with my background... I was not so sure I could provide well for a family, given I am also a migrant.

You hit the nail on the head Ludwig... but with so much doom everywhere and especially at present... how do we stay pro-active on these extremely complex issues?