Urgent Evoke

A crash course in changing the world.

Have questions? Need help? Ideas to share? Looking for collaborators? Discuss the Water Crisis mission here.

Views: 279

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The iodine is a good idea, but the tablets to go bad after a year, and could get used up before then. A supply of tablets would have to be flooding in, and i don't think many countries have the ability and want to do that. I couldn't be done just by a charity organization because they couldn't keep up the cost of constantly flying over to airdrop the tablets. We should instead just build factories, have some of the citizens labor there, and sell them the tablets, to buy with the money we give them. Then take surplus and sell it to other countries, making a profit that allows the business to sustain itself.

Kevin McGonigal said:
Statistics recetly released by the UN show that contaminated drinking water causes more deaths in the world today than those deaths brought about by endemic warfare. I have no trouble believing this. Illneses like ch***ra and typhoid fever are only a water treatment failure away and that's in the Western World where the infrastructure ordinarily provides protection from water borne pathogens. But even in the Western World, before the deadly effect of water borne pathogens was understood, untold numbers died from simple ignorance of microbes and their efect on human health. In much of the developing world, even where the people understand the connection between contamination and sickness, the countries' resources never allowed such water purification plants to be built and to be honest, many of these countries, for whatever reason, are not going to construct such systems any time soon. But there is a cheap and easily applied , if only temporary, solution. IODINE. Water purification tablets made from an inexpensive chemical, iodine, can be readily and cheaply manufactured. They are easy to store and use. People can be given these tablets which can be easily be carried anywhere. Some campers reading this site may already be employing them. When people become familiar with them, and use them regularily, they can greatly reduce the mortality from contaminated water. In time, water purification plants may be built everywhere but people need protection now and iodine based water purification tablets offer that protection right now.
i agree with Matthew that for developing countries (like the one im from, SOUTH AFRICA) the water crises is an everyday problem. People in the rural areas especially do not have taps, there is no system of sanitisin water and if there is there one it is most likel ineffective and archaic.
This is a very relevant topic especially:
"More than 1 in 6 people in the world don't have access to safe drinking water.
1 out of every 4 deaths under the age of 5 worldwide is due to a water-related disease.
Nearly 80% of illnesses in developing countries are linked to poor water and sanitation conditions."...
http://thewaterproject.org/

the most effective methods of bringing safe water to those who need it has been through th edigging of wells. This can be achieved through the co-operatiion of the community since government officials are known to abuse funds put aside for providing effective water systems (with clean water) to the community>

Ch***ra has been known to be treated using (ORT) Oral Rehydration Therapy...homemade recepies include the following...mixing 1 tsp salt, 8 tsp sugar, 5 cups drinking water
Mix until salt and sugar dissolve. Store in a cool place for up to 24 hours. The good nnews is that because your intestines are not functioning well THE SALT SOLUTION DOES NOT MAKE YOU MORE THIRSTY...so there is enough water for everyone!!!
Attachments:
I cant agree more. There must be a better way of getting peoples attention than throwing flyers into the river.

Josh Giesbrecht said:
The water crisis globally is a Big Thing, so it's very good to see Evoke tackling it. But the story this week makes me a bit uncomfortable.

Dumping thousands of flyers into the river to warn people that it's dangerous? Even if they're biodegradable, I can't see how that wouldn't cause environmental havok.

Even weirder was the claim that it's inevitable that people will need personal water purification systems someday. To me, that's echoing the mistrust of public water systems that I see happening in North American culture - the mentality that tapwater isn't good enough, isn't safe enough. That leads to us paying private companies to bottle up "safer" water (which is usually just tapwater from another area anyway). Then we flll up our landfills (or our expensive-to-run recycling plants) with plastic water bottles that we never needed in the first place. Totally needless waste.

Also I'm not really sure why a commercial purification product is needed for a temporary problem with an existing, working water infrastructure. Just tell people to boil their water. Small-scale purification systems are a vital solution in parts of the world that do not have large-scale water infrastructure, so I'm not devaluing the research or production of those solutions, but if you only need to hold out for a week or two until the infrastructure gets repaired, it's overkill.
Assuming water is available from wells as you describe the issue is purification. Two best methods of purification are distillation and filtration. Chemical methods are fancy-cool but unreliable - you can run out of chemicals or handle them improperly. Filtration is commonly used in water treatment and simple septic systems are well-understood and readily built. Just add drainage tiles and a holding tank at the end of the leach field, and supplement the leach field with sand and charcoal to provide adequate filtration. Distillation is readily applied also - preheat using solar heating on a black coiled pipe feeding to a solar heated evaporation pan and capture the vapor on a cool surface (probably from the well water as a heat exchanger).
The best water system is a government-owned not-for-profit system. Commercial imperatives have not worked, once, ever, in the history of our planet - ancient or modern - in running sanitation and water supply systems. It was tried at the birth of the aquaduct as it is tried now. Its bad business, its bad planning - its just plain bad. Basic services are things that are supportable by other governments. If we want to help developing countries, teaching them to never rely on commerce for basic services is the first step.
Christian: I am not sure what it is you are saying. You seem to be saying that the aqueducts were flawed because they were a private commercial venture. If that is what you meant to say that would be incorrect in the case of Ancient Rome. The Romans brought public baths and fountains with them wherever they conquered, fed by government constructed and maintained aqueducts so actually they demonstrate that public funding of drinking water has worked well since the time of the aqueduct. The problem, however, is that some goverments are so inept and corrupt that they will not or cannot construct the infrastructure to tap into a secure water source and then distribute it over a wide area. Such infrastructure is actually pretty new. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, circa 500 AD, most of the Western World lacked a safe secure water system until the latter part of the 19th Century, and that was limited to urban areas. What many parts of the developing world need is a system that is locally controlled and readily operated with a minimum of engineering, one that they can sustain without depending on a government that may, or may not, be capable of providing abundant, clean water with dependable regularity.

Christian McCrea said:
The best water system is a government-owned not-for-profit system. Commercial imperatives have not worked, once, ever, in the history of our planet - ancient or modern - in running sanitation and water supply systems. It was tried at the birth of the aquaduct as it is tried now. Its bad business, its bad planning - its just plain bad. Basic services are things that are supportable by other governments. If we want to help developing countries, teaching them to never rely on commerce for basic services is the first step.
I will pit the history of privately owned water systems against the history of publically owned water systems any day. "Local ownership" is fine as long as it actually is that, and I agree that corrupt governments stop this from happening, you have no disagreement there. But the record for solving that with private ownership of water is - lets be generous - shoockingly poor. Infrastructure that can solidify the links between needs and provision are always going to be the best resolution.

Kevin McGonigal said:
Christian: I am not sure what it is you are saying. You seem to be saying that the aqueducts were flawed because they were a private commercial venture. If that is what you meant to say that would be incorrect in the case of Ancient Rome. The Romans brought public baths and fountains with them wherever they conquered, fed by government constructed and maintained aqueducts so actually they demonstrate that public funding of drinking water has worked well since the time of the aqueduct. The problem, however, is that some goverments are so inept and corrupt that they will not or cannot construct the infrastructure to tap into a secure water source and then distribute it over a wide area. Such infrastructure is actually pretty new. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, circa 500 AD, most of the Western World lacked a safe secure water system until the latter part of the 19th Century, and that was limited to urban areas. What many parts of the developing world need is a system that is locally controlled and readily operated with a minimum of engineering, one that they can sustain without depending on a government that may, or may not, be capable of providing abundant, clean water with dependable regularity.

Christian McCrea said:
The best water system is a government-owned not-for-profit system. Commercial imperatives have not worked, once, ever, in the history of our planet - ancient or modern - in running sanitation and water supply systems. It was tried at the birth of the aquaduct as it is tried now. Its bad business, its bad planning - its just plain bad. Basic services are things that are supportable by other governments. If we want to help developing countries, teaching them to never rely on commerce for basic services is the first step.
Christian: I don't want to beat a dead horse on this but while government created water and sewage authorities supported by state entities may be the best solution for safe drinking water, there are simply too many regions where this is not practicable. This is not an arguement for a commercial, for profit, venture but more in the line of a co-op where the beneficiaries also control the process. A village controlled and operated system, whether it employs filtration or cisterns or iodine purification enables these people to control their own resources and their own destiny. It empowers people and lets them become independent of outside, often distant, unresponsive and indifferent governments that cannot be relied upon to provide any kind of basic services. In the Western World governents are mostly benevolent, capable and desireous of providing basic services. In much of the developing world government is none of this. If these people wait for their government to provide these sanitation services they will wait for something that will not happen. They must act on their own or perish in the interim.

Christian McCrea said:
I will pit the history of privately owned water systems against the history of publically owned water systems any day. "Local ownership" is fine as long as it actually is that, and I agree that corrupt governments stop this from happening, you have no disagreement there. But the record for solving that with private ownership of water is - lets be generous - shoockingly poor. Infrastructure that can solidify the links between needs and provision are always going to be the best resolution.

Kevin McGonigal said:
Christian: I am not sure what it is you are saying. You seem to be saying that the aqueducts were flawed because they were a private commercial venture. If that is what you meant to say that would be incorrect in the case of Ancient Rome. The Romans brought public baths and fountains with them wherever they conquered, fed by government constructed and maintained aqueducts so actually they demonstrate that public funding of drinking water has worked well since the time of the aqueduct. The problem, however, is that some goverments are so inept and corrupt that they will not or cannot construct the infrastructure to tap into a secure water source and then distribute it over a wide area. Such infrastructure is actually pretty new. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, circa 500 AD, most of the Western World lacked a safe secure water system until the latter part of the 19th Century, and that was limited to urban areas. What many parts of the developing world need is a system that is locally controlled and readily operated with a minimum of engineering, one that they can sustain without depending on a government that may, or may not, be capable of providing abundant, clean water with dependable regularity.

Christian McCrea said:
The best water system is a government-owned not-for-profit system. Commercial imperatives have not worked, once, ever, in the history of our planet - ancient or modern - in running sanitation and water supply systems. It was tried at the birth of the aquaduct as it is tried now. Its bad business, its bad planning - its just plain bad. Basic services are things that are supportable by other governments. If we want to help developing countries, teaching them to never rely on commerce for basic services is the first step.
Kevin, we're in total agreement, 100% down the line. A co-operative mechanism that is unambiguously owned locally, controlled locally and not under threat by any outside measure is of course the best option. I refer only to explicit attempts to privatise water in the name of that same stability.

Kevin McGonigal said:
Christian: I don't want to beat a dead horse on this but while government created water and sewage authorities supported by state entities may be the best solution for safe drinking water, there are simply too many regions where this is not practicable. This is not an arguement for a commercial, for profit, venture but more in the line of a co-op where the beneficiaries also control the process. A village controlled and operated system, whether it employs filtration or cisterns or iodine purification enables these people to control their own resources and their own destiny. It empowers people and lets them become independent of outside, often distant, unresponsive and indifferent governments that cannot be relied upon to provide any kind of basic services. In the Western World governents are mostly benevolent, capable and desireous of providing basic services. In much of the developing world government is none of this. If these people wait for their government to provide these sanitation services they will wait for something that will not happen. They must act on their own or perish in the interim.

Christian McCrea said:
I will pit the history of privately owned water systems against the history of publically owned water systems any day. "Local ownership" is fine as long as it actually is that, and I agree that corrupt governments stop this from happening, you have no disagreement there. But the record for solving that with private ownership of water is - lets be generous - shoockingly poor. Infrastructure that can solidify the links between needs and provision are always going to be the best resolution.

Kevin McGonigal said:
Christian: I am not sure what it is you are saying. You seem to be saying that the aqueducts were flawed because they were a private commercial venture. If that is what you meant to say that would be incorrect in the case of Ancient Rome. The Romans brought public baths and fountains with them wherever they conquered, fed by government constructed and maintained aqueducts so actually they demonstrate that public funding of drinking water has worked well since the time of the aqueduct. The problem, however, is that some goverments are so inept and corrupt that they will not or cannot construct the infrastructure to tap into a secure water source and then distribute it over a wide area. Such infrastructure is actually pretty new. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, circa 500 AD, most of the Western World lacked a safe secure water system until the latter part of the 19th Century, and that was limited to urban areas. What many parts of the developing world need is a system that is locally controlled and readily operated with a minimum of engineering, one that they can sustain without depending on a government that may, or may not, be capable of providing abundant, clean water with dependable regularity.

Christian McCrea said:
The best water system is a government-owned not-for-profit system. Commercial imperatives have not worked, once, ever, in the history of our planet - ancient or modern - in running sanitation and water supply systems. It was tried at the birth of the aquaduct as it is tried now. Its bad business, its bad planning - its just plain bad. Basic services are things that are supportable by other governments. If we want to help developing countries, teaching them to never rely on commerce for basic services is the first step.
a not-so-subtle pattern emerges that everyone in this discussion has pointed out. most of the 'solutions' put forth in the story are actually really terrible and not sustainable. the unifying theme of the 'solutions'? making money and building new businesses. community businesses that will likely need loans, 'granted' by the World Bank.

I think the water crisis is horrible. I know that a lot of us take water for granted and the fact that some people only have access to unclean, unfiltered water is unsettling. I think we should do whatever we can to stop this problem.

It isreally interesing how that much water can get contaminated. All there water supply got tanted, and that is a lot to comprahend. It is uneasing knowing that water can get contaminated.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Latest Activity

N updated their profile
Sep 25
Sophie C. commented on Asger Jon Vistisen's blog post Stinging Nettle
"I love that you've brought this to attention. An extensive database of uncommon but resistant and hardy plants/foods could be developed and organized by climate. Ease of growth and processing should also be taken in to account. I will try to…"
Aug 19
Meghan Mulvey posted a blog post

Fourth of July on the Lake

This past weekend was the annual celebration at the lake house in Connecticut. It is amazing that the lake is still so clear and beautiful after all these years. The watershed association has done a wonderful job protecting these waters from the damaging effects of development.The wood grill was finally ready to cook on, so we didn't miss the propane tank fueled grill anymore. The food actually tasted fresher than in the past and was easy to keep fueled.Dad was very proud of the solar hybrid…See More
Jul 6
Asger Jon Vistisen posted a blog post

Stinging Nettle

In this blog post I will focus on a plant that is abundant in our nature, and which is immensely nutritious. It's of course the Stinging Nettle. Let's start with the chemical constituents of this plant:37 % Non-Nitrogen-Extracts19 - 29 % Ash9 - 21 % Fiber4 % Fat22 % ProteinOnce the leaves are drid, their protein content can reach an astounding 40 %, which is much higher than beef, which even under the best of circ***tances can never exceed 31 % protein. In addition the Stinging Nettle consists…See More
Apr 13
Jonathon McCallum posted a blog post

The meal

It is 7'oclock, I was late home from work due to an assignment that i wanted to get ahead on. By the time I get home I am feeling extremley tired and I cannot be bothered to make a proper meal. I walk to the fridge and open it to see what there is for me to eat. All of the out of date foodstuffs have been automaticaly thrown away by the fridge, they will be recycled tomorrow as animal feed or something. I see i have organic local eggs and some local cheese. Foods are vacc** sealded for easy…See More
Mar 10
Jean Paul Galea shared a profile on Facebook
Mar 1
Kevin posted a blog post

Future

FutureToday is 2020/1/1. It is just like yesterday. The war is still continuing. It has started since 2010. In 2010, that year was a horrible year. Almost every energy ran out. Every country’s governments were crushed down at the same time. There were riots everywhere. All of the big company’s bosses were killed xdeadx in the riots. Troops fought each other everywhere. Food was bought up xawayx at once. There were no more food supplies in any shops. The economy was all crushed down. All the…See More
Jan 1
Namwaka Mooto posted blog posts
Jan 13, 2016
T D updated their profile
Sep 3, 2015
Brook Warner posted blog posts
Aug 25, 2015
Santiago Vega posted blog posts
May 5, 2015
Santiago Vega commented on Santiago Vega's blog post Act 8
May 5, 2015
Santiago Vega posted photos
May 5, 2015
Rico Angel Rodriguez posted blog posts
May 2, 2015
Rico Angel Rodriguez posted a photo

public servants

The exchange works directly for state and public workers and servants. It gives them credit in exchange for the amount of public work they contribute to the community. The more constructive they are based off a base rate the more credit they recieve.
May 2, 2015
Brian Hurley posted blog posts
May 2, 2015

Follow EVOKE on Twitter




Official EVOKE Facebook Page




EVOKE RSS Activity Feed










© 2020   Created by Alchemy.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service