A measure of comfort may be found in the market forces underlying the energy transition, but for water, which lies at the heart of the climate crisis, the silver lining is harder to find.

Trump’s first term was marked by deregulation and underfunding of water resources and systems. His administration was quick to roll back the Obama-era Clean Water Rule, which extended federal protections to smaller bodies of water such as wetlands and streams. This reduced the government’s jurisdiction over many water bodies, leaving them vulnerable to pollution and degradation.

Concurrently, Trump’s first administration allowed water-intensive resource, manufacturing and agricultural sectors to operate with fewer restrictions on water use and pollution.

Less direct but perhaps more consequential was Trump’s stance on climate change – particularly his decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. Climate change is having an outsized impact on water already, disrupting the water cycle and amplifying water-related issues and disasters such as drought, flooding and extreme weather. It’s worsening water scarcity across parched swaths of the globe, including much of the western United States, and contributing to record-breaking wildfires like those tearing through California now.

Trump’s second term will likely see continued efforts to reduce federal oversight of water resources, weakening environmental regulations and reducing funding for water infrastructure. While Trump has expressed support for large-scale infrastructure projects, such as reservoirs, pipelines and desalination plants, these types of projects come with significant environmental costs and are vulnerable to climate-related risks such as flood-related damages and changes in precipitation patterns.

A jarring transition back to Trump

Under President Joe Biden, the U.S. government prioritized the supply and quality of water, which makes the transition to a second Trump administration all the more jarring.

Through the Biden administration’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) committed more than $50 billion to improve drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure – the largest investment in water in U.S. history. Under the Biden administration, the EPA also implemented the first national drinking water standards for “forever chemicals” (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS), launched a plan to replace all lead service lines in the United States and prioritized environmental justice for vulnerable communities disproportionately affected by water quality issues.

RELATED

Trump will preside over continued climate breakdown. How will he handle it?

Just because Trump wants to kill DEI doesn’t mean CEOs should

What Trump’s comeback tells us about why democracies are faltering

Meanwhile, Trump’s pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, Lee Zeldin, has drawn criticism for his frequent opposition to environmental legislation, including voting against the Inflation Reduction Act, voting to block carbon pollution limits for power plants and voting against extending the national flood insurance program. On January 29, the U.S. Senate confirmed Zeldin to head the agency, where he is expected to follow Trump’s orders to dismantle major environmental regulations.

A looming security issue for Canada

Looking north to Canada, water also faces a precarious future.

At a press conference last fall (hosted at a golf course he owns near Los Angeles), Trump angered many Canadians by promising to solve California’s water shortages by tapping into British Columbia’s water resources. “You have millions of gallons of water pouring down from the north with the snow caps and Canada, and all pouring down and they essentially have a very large faucet . . . You turn that, and all of that water aimlessly goes into the Pacific, and if you turned that back, all of that water would come right down here and into Los Angeles.”

That particular solution falls flat on both geography and economics. The Columbia River – and its Rocky Mountain headwaters, which Trump was referencing – flows from British Columbia to Oregon and is governed by a treaty between the two countries. A project to bring this water to Los Angeles would cost hundreds of billions of dollars.

But U.S. actions on trade, climate change, environmental deregulation and resource extraction do pose very real threats to shared water bodies such as the Great Lakes, the Columbia River and the St. Lawrence River.

Canadians have long been united in their opposition to exporting water. This is codified in the Transboundary Waters Protection Act, which bans large-scale removal of water from waterways shared with the United States. While the current Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) does not apply to water in its natural state, it is possible that water may become a bargaining chip in future trade negotiations. Canadians need to be prepared for that eventuality.

If there is room for stubborn optimism, it lies in community- and Indigenous-led watershed governance initiatives. A shift in jurisdiction from federal to state and local authorities offers an opportunity to advance watershed-scale management and stewardship approaches that promote collective action across public- and private-sector actors within each watershed.

The fires currently burning in and around Los Angeles serve as a stark reminder that climate change doesn’t care what we think. The impacts of drought, flooding, fires and extreme weather events will continue to be felt across the United States and Canada. Governments can choose to embrace policies and investments that address these rising human and economic costs – or be left holding the bill and the blame.

Alan Shapiro is principal at environmental consultancy Shapiro & Company and an instructor in the British Columbia Institute of Technology’s Sustainable Business program.

The post Trump’s deregulation agenda poses a threat to water health and security appeared first on Corporate Knights.

In July, a torrential downpour led to flash flooding across the Greater Toronto Area, causing extensive damage to homes, businesses and infrastructure. The costs of that single downpour are projected to exceed $1 billion, with the government and homeowners on the hook for a large part of the bill.

On the other side of the country, warm temperatures and low rainfall have led to severe or extreme drought conditions across much of British Columbia, Alberta and the Northwest Territories. The Mackenzie, Canada’s longest river, has seen an unprecedented drop of two metres, hampering navigation and access to remote Indigenous communities along its shores. The lack of rainfall is also contributing to increased fire risk, driving another record wildfire season, including evacuation of and extensive damage to the historic townsite of Jasper.

Estimates suggest that climate-fuelled water risks – droughts, floods and storms – could result in a loss of US$108 billion to Canada’s gross domestic product between 2022 and 2050, with multibillion-dollar losses projected for manufacturing, retail, banking and other key sectors. Flooding alone is expected to cost the Canadian economy more than US$30 billion over this period.

These are all just numbers. The lived reality is that climate change and nature loss are disrupting the global water cycle to a dramatic degree. This is changing the relationship of Canadian communities to water and exposing infrastructure vulnerabilities that have long been ignored. It’s also forcing us to consider an approach that works with the water cycle, rather than try to suppress it.

Floodplains naturally flood. Wetlands are naturally wet. They are well-equipped to absorb heavy rains. And yet we pave over and build housing in these spaces regularly. Introduce a downpour into an extensively drained and highly urbanized landscape and it will return to its old channels. (A map of buried stream systems beneath major Canadian cities – some in pipes, others in culverts – was compiled by CBC earlier this year.) Impervious surfaces such as pavement amplify these processes, preventing water from filtering into the soil.

Widespread flooding in British Columbia’s Fraser Valley in 2021 served as a dramatic illustration of this fact. Much of the flooded low-lying area – Sumas Prairie – was previously a lake, which was drained and converted to farmland in the 1920s. When heavy rains caused drainage infrastructure to fail, Sumas Lake returned to its previous footprint, forcing the evacuation of 1,100 homes and causing the loss of 630,000 livestock animals, and cutting off all highway routes between Vancouver and the rest of Canada.

A recent study by researchers at the University of British Columbia, along with members of the Sumas First Nation and other partners, suggests that returning the lake to its natural state would support climate adaptation, endangered species restoration and Indigenous reconciliation. This would involve buying out low-lying properties at a cost of around $1 billion, less than half of the $2.4-billion price tag of repairing dikes and installing a new pump station.

Whether they are framed as restoration, low-impact development, managed retreat or otherwise, the solutions are quite simple. Give water space on the landscape and build in a way that works with the natural water cycle.

RELATED:

• How letting water be water can lead to better climate resilience
• Hero: Meet the ‘sponge city’ guru who is climate-proofing China
• Water will be a critical piece of Canada’s net-zero puzzle

Erica Gies, author of Water Always Wins, refers to this as the Slow Water movement, working with local landscapes, climates and cultures to support local water supply, flood control, carbon storage and biodiversity. Counter to the established “grey infrastructure” paradigm of controlling water through dikes and pipes, Gies advocates for restoring a multitude of small areas for water to slow and stall throughout a region, analogous to a decentralized electrical grid.

Canadian cities are beginning to embrace this way of thinking.

In Montreal (which was flooded at the time of writing as a result of a large water-main break), a multi-year project is underway to construct more than 30 “sponge parks,” designed to help rainwater filter into the soil. These spaces offer numerous benefits, including a buffer against flooding and drought and cooling during heat waves. Scaled to the level of entire cities, as is currently being demonstrated in China, this represents an ambitious leap in the design of resilient municipal infrastructure that works with the water cycle rather than against it.

Similarly, the City of Vancouver has set a goal of capturing and treating 90% of its rainfall through green infrastructure. Green roofs, permeable pavement and rain gardens – all part of Vancouver’s strategy – aim to replicate natural water processes, drawing on plants, soil and built structures to capture and filter rainwater before returning it to waterways. All the while, working to keep water off city streets and out of basements.

Beyond cities, rural regions across Canada are beginning to explore green infrastructure opportunities, such as wetland and grassland restoration, shoreline stabilization and agricultural water-management projects. These initiatives have been driven as much by future planning as by near-term economic benefits. A recent analysis of natural infrastructure in the Prairies estimated the sector’s direct contribution to the region’s GDP as $4.1 billion, employing more than 33,000 people in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

These solutions present opportunities not only for communities and governments, but also for technology and business. Green infrastructure requires a network of advanced tools to model climate risks, monitor performance and manage assets. Just as Scope 3 reporting is driving companies to address greenhouse gas emissions in their supply chains, so is the focus on water for leading companies shifting upstream. In 2018, Anheuser-Busch InBev, one of the world’s largest brewers, set a water stewardship goal for all of the regions where they operate that are located in high-stress areas to have measurably improved water availability and quality by 2025. This has included a multilateral project to restore ancient water-harvesting systems upstream of Lima, Peru – the world’s second-largest desert city.

Canadian insurers such as Co-operators and Aviva are similarly looking upstream, exploring partnered restoration and stewardship initiatives to mitigate downstream flood risks for their clients.

As the impacts of climate change intensify, we must work with the water cycle to bring water back into our cities and onto our landscapes, (un)paving the way to a resilient future.

Alan Shapiro is principal at environmental consultancy Shapiro & Company and an instructor in the British Columbia Institute of Technology’s Sustainable Business program.

The post To take on floods and droughts, we have to stop fighting water and start embracing it appeared first on Corporate Knights.

So why is it that freshwater has been cut out of a sustainable economic model that promotes the responsible use of marine resources – and at a time when such management is more critical than ever? With oceans warming at an alarming rate, and lake and river systems facing increasing climate stress, ensuring that global water systems, both fresh and marine, are protected is one of the most pressing concerns we face.  

And yet, the “blue economy,” as the model has been dubbed, has sidelined freshwater considerations – a massive omission in a country like Canada, with an estimated two million lakes and more than 8,500 named rivers. The Great Lakes, the world’s largest freshwater lake system, alone provide drinking water for more than 40 million people in Canada and the U.S., and directly generate more than 1.5 million jobs and $60 billion in annual wages.   

To date, the blue economy narrative has largely been dominated by the World Bank’s definition of “blue economy” as a “sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods, and jobs, while preserving the health of ocean ecosystems.” 

This oceans-only framing has been far-reaching, influencing conversations at global, national, and regional levels. In Canada, for instance, Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s Blue Economy Strategy, currently in development, is framed as an opportunity to harness Canada’s “ocean growth potential.” This includes creating jobs in coastal communities, ensuring that oceans remain healthy, and learning from international successes such as green shipping initiatives in Norway and Denmark and sustainable ocean resource development in Fiji and the Bahamas. 

It is worth noting, however, that a range of definitions exist for “blue economy,” some focused purely on oceans and others taking a broader view that encompasses all water resources. A handful of prominent alternatives to the World Bank’s view include the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UN ECA) and the Great Lakes Commission.  

In particular, UN ECA defines “blue economy” as “the sustainable use and conservation of aquatic resources in both marine and freshwater environments. This includes oceans and seas, coastlines and banks, lakes, rivers and groundwater.” 

Policy–makers and business leaders in Canada and around the world must adapt the blue economy model to reflect the reality of their geographies and communities.

Many other international organizations, from the World Economic Forum to the European Union, struggle with the oceans-only framing, instead opting for workarounds such as “ocean and freshwater economy,” “green and blue economy” or “ocean and water tech.” 

The true test of a definition is not in the abstract but in its application and utility. 

How can any definition of “blue economy” that considers the Great Lakes as peripheral effectively serve Canada’s environmental or economic interests? 

Policy–makers and business leaders in Canada and around the world must adapt the blue economy model to reflect the reality of their geographies and communities. We are entering another record-breaking summer of heat and drought, with nearly 25,000 Alberta residents already evacuated due to wildfires and the Spanish government approving an unprecedented €2.2– billion drought-response plan. It is more critical than ever before to ensure that our fragile global water cycle – both fresh and salty – is protected and preserved for future generations. 

Alan Shapiro is principal at sustainability consultancy Shapiro & Company and director of Foresight Canada’s BC Net Zero Innovation Network’s Water Cluster. Elise Coffey is a junior consultant at Shapiro & Company. 

The post The global push for a ‘blue economy’ is ignoring freshwater appeared first on Corporate Knights.

Water cuts across many of Canada’s major emitting sectors, from oil and gas to agriculture. Canada’s biggest GHG-emitting industries are also some of the country’s largest water users – and the emissions hiding in that water usage are largely untracked. 

A recent analysis from Global Water Intelligence estimates that water and wastewater utilities may account for nearly 4% of global energy consumption. In Canada, studies have found that water and wastewater systems are municipal governments’ largest energy uses, accounting on average for 38% of energy consumption. By extension, these systems contribute 32% of reported municipal emissions, nearly half of that coming from sewage treatment. This figure also doesn’t include the release of nitrous oxide and methane – both potent GHGs – during wastewater treatment.

The emissions trend for water utilities poses an even greater concern. In regions such as California, drought and a growing population are increasing demand for energy-intensive water supply projects, such as desalination and water recycling. And even in regions not yet facing water stress, higher water treatment demands (needed to filter out emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and microplastics) require increased energy use. 

And that’s just municipal utilities. When you consider the water-related emissions from industrial sectors, such as oil and gas and mining, the significance of water in Canada’s GHG emissions landscape continues to grow. 

But surprisingly (or maybe unsurprisingly), we have very little data on water-related emissions, or for that matter, most forms of water use in Canada. That knowledge gap poses significant challenges for defining sector-specific baselines and targets. Mapping these emissions across major sectors – including utilities, oil and gas, mining, agriculture and others – is a critical step toward understanding how to reduce them. And, at least so far, the federal government hasn’t included any mention of water in its plans to reach net-zero by 2050, lagging behind many other jurisdictions. 

Across the Atlantic, the U.K. has been leading the charge around water and net-zero. In 2020, water utilities in the U.K. made the first sector-wide commitment to deliver a net-zero water supply for customers by 2030. The sector plans to do this through a range of strategies, from efficiency interventions to renewable energy generation, estimating that it will save 10 million tonnes of GHG emissions by reaching net-zero 20 years earlier than the British government’s current 2050 target.

In Canada, new infrastructure projects are beginning to recognize the renewable-energy-generation potential of wastewater systems. Earlier this year, Noventa Energy Partners announced the world’s largest raw wastewater energy-transfer project, at Toronto Western Hospital. The $38-million project will generate thermal energy using raw municipal wastewater, supplying 90% of the hospital’s heating and cooling requirements, and reducing its carbon emissions by 250,000 tonnes. 

Other sectors have also invested heavily in reducing water-related emissions. In the oil and gas sector, B.C.’s Saltworks Technologies has developed a way to harness waste heat from oil sands operations to treat industrial wastewater, minimizing freshwater withdrawal and reducing carbon emissions compared to conventional treatment technologies. Meanwhile, in the agricultural sector, Alberta’s Livestock Water Recycling is using water treatment technology to remove clean water from manure. This allows farmers to reclaim water, produce more effective fertilizers, and reduce their methane emissions by up to 82%.

While the connection between water and energy is clearly visible, it’s worth noting another relationship that is no less important: that between water and carbon. Numerous studies, including at the IISD (International Institute for Sustainable Development) Experimental Lakes Area in Manitoba, are mapping relationships between carbon and freshwater systems such as lakes. As we explore options to capture and store atmospheric carbon, it will be important to understand how freshwater systems operate as sources and sinks in a changing climate. Investing in these systems through ecosystem restoration and natural infrastructure projects offers additional tools for Canada’s net-zero toolbox. 

Canada has a long way to go to reach net-zero in 2050, and water will be a key part of achieving that goal. Understanding and addressing these emissions will be critical as we navigate the uncharted waters ahead.

Alan Shapiro is the director of Foresight Canada’s waterNEXT network and principal at water and sustainability consultancy Shapiro & Company. 

The post Water will be a critical piece of Canada’s net-zero puzzle appeared first on Corporate Knights.

For the ocean community, this vision centres on the “blue economy,” defined in a recent Delphi Group report as referring broadly to economic activities that are both based in and actively good for the ocean. While “blue economy” remains an emerging and somewhat fuzzy concept, the report echoes a growing trend toward viewing a broad range of ocean-related activities – established industries, emerging technologies and environmental challenges – through a single blue-economy lens.

While we applaud this movement toward integrated management of ocean resources, we can’t help but notice that freshwater is missing from the conversation.

From a management perspective, freshwater and oceans have historically been distant cousins – clearly related, occasionally crossing paths, but largely living independent lives. But as our knowledge of planetary systems has evolved, the distance between these two worlds has narrowed considerably, and the number of connections between them has rapidly grown.

Take, for example, desalination technologies. The ocean-based blue-economy definition classifies desalination as an ocean activity (see the World Bank’s 2017 report). But Canadian water technology companies, such as British Columbia–based Saltworks, are successfully developing and applying desalination technologies to a range of industrial wastewater treatment applications.

Or let’s consider the “wicked problem” of plastic. Plastic pollution is a major issue facing the world’s oceans and is increasingly propelling Canada’s international commitments, from its founding role in the Global Plastic Action Partnership to its strong support for the Ocean Plastics Charter. But plastic pollution is not, at its core, an oceans issue. Of the more than eight million tons of plastic that ends up in the world’s oceans every year, most is carried into the ocean by rivers, with 90% of plastic pollution coming from just 10 river systems.

A recent map of Canada’s water-technology ecosystem highlights dozens of similar connections, from hydropower (emerging technologies harnessing both tidal and freshwater currents) to aquaculture (a rapidly growing sector including land- and ocean-based operations). These connections make it clear that there is no magic dividing line between freshwater and oceans, where one rule book ends and another takes over.

What do we stand to gain from bringing these two worlds together under a single blue-economy umbrella? In no uncertain terms: a lot.

Because of Canada’s size and the number of sectors that intersect freshwater, coordination in this space has always been a challenge. Freshwater simultaneously fits into a range of sectors, from mining and energy to agriculture and municipal services, and lives nowhere, with no dedicated agency advocating for its interests (the current conversation around the creation of a Canada Water Agency is a promising one, which we’re following with interest).

By extension, freshwater infrastructure and innovation, including around drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and environmental protection, does not attract attention or investment at the same scale as the ocean economy.

How, then, can we leverage the strengths of Canada’s ocean community to advance the interests of “all waters”? We can start by learning from and building on the successes of institutions such as Canada’s Ocean Supercluster, a multi-sectoral organization created by the federal government to support ocean innovation, which has provided a hub to coordinate activity around ocean technologies and solutions. An equivalent entity for freshwater could play a significant role in accelerating investment and innovation around water challenges.

We can also draw inspiration from the ocean economy to generate new sustainable business models and investment for the freshwater sector. Hosted in 2018, the first global conference on the sustainable blue economy explored how to harness the potential of our oceans to improve the lives of all and leverage research and innovation to build prosperity. Building on this theme, Canada’s emerging Blue Economy Strategy (currently focused exclusively on oceans) aims to align economic growth in the ocean sector with job creation and climate action, as well as greater participation of Indigenous Peoples, women and under-represented groups in the ocean economy.

Building back better requires us to take a holistic view of water systems and understand the numerous and complex interconnections between freshwater and ocean sectors.

The prime minister’s Speech from the Throne in September 2020 recognized that “investing in the Blue Economy will help Canada prosper.” Reframing the blue economy as “economic activities that are based in and actively good for all water systems” will better position Canada to tackle the complex environmental challenges that water systems face and harness emerging economic opportunities at the interface of freshwater and ocean sectors.

Melissa Dick is a program manager with Aqua Forum, a non-profit organization whose flagship program is the AquaHacking Challenge.

Alan Shapiro is the director of waterNEXT, Canada’s emerging water-technology ecosystem, and principal at Shapiro & Company.

The post Refreshing Canada’s definition of the blue economy appeared first on Corporate Knights.