Slashdot Mirror


Coastal Megacity Karachi Is Running Out of Water (earther.com)

The Pakistani megacity of Karachi, home to more than 20 million people, is among the most water-stressed cities in the world, only able to meet half of its daily water demand. From a report: Karachi requires 1,100 million of gallons per day (mgd), but only receives 550 mgd, according to the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB). Karachi's water is sourced from the Indus River via Keenjhar Lake, which sits more than 90 miles away from the city. The water shortage in Karachi is linked to myriad factors including climate change, mismanagement of water resources, and corruption. Most of all, however, a rising population increasing at a rate of 4.5 percent a year creates a strain on the finite water supply. Pakistan ranks in the top ten of countries worst affected by climate change, and water shortages are likely to deepen in both intensity and frequency in the coming decade.

48 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. That's nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm running out of beer and the Grocery Outlet is closed and I'm too buzzed to drive. And I'm supposed to be upset because Karachi's running out of water just because there are 20 million people there? You SJWs really suck, you know that? Who's going to stand up for me, huh? Nobody, that's who. Wait, I think I just heard my neighbor come home. I bet he's got some beer. Never mind.

    Happy Memorial Day everybody!

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re: That's nothing by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Are you gasping for air, as you flip around in the bottom of that boat? You shouldn't have struck on that fishing plug. Anybody could have told you there was a hook. Granted, you've been hooked by a master, so you didn't really stand a chance.

    2. Re:That's nothing by nnet · · Score: 2

      Knowing it was a holiday weekend, how could you permit yourself to even potentially run out of beer?

    3. Re:That's nothing by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      Knowing it was a holiday weekend, how could you permit yourself to even potentially run out of beer?

      it's a long story, but a thirsty friend dropped by unannounced earlier to watch the Eastern Conference Finals and the next thing you know my strategic reserves were running low. But I'm one of those loaves and fishes kind of Episcopalians who will give you the shirt of his back and the beer out his fridge, so I unselfishly and without regard for my own well-being shared what I had. Because I'm like that.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re: That's nothing by Barsteward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At least he has a nickname to which we can attribute posts to. Moaning about a "troll" as an AC doesn't quite work.

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  2. Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Venona2018 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pakistan has gone from 40 million people in 1955 to 200 million in 2018. That is a 5 times increase in less than 65 years. Is there anyone who thinks that is sustainable? http://www.worldometers.info/w...

    1. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're saying the solution is more H1B visas?

    2. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Each of Berlin's residents uses an average of 110 litres of water per day. (Or for the americans, about 29.3 gallons).
      In Portland for example, residents use 50 gallons per day. But honeslty there is no comparison - there is NO water shortage in Portland, in fact they have more water than they know what to do with.

      As do the majority of US cities.

      Phoenix/Las Vegas will soon suffer the same fate as Karachi. The Colorado river is drying up and being used more as there are more people and swimming pools and less water to go around.

    3. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We have so much groundwater here that we pump it into rivers to keep our basements dry. We still use only about as much water for personal use as Karachi currently uses per person. Granted, with industrial and agricultural use, we use more than 40 times as much, but is that really comparable? We have more water than we know what to do with, so there's not really a point in conserving it, but I guarantee that our waste water is cleaner than Karachi's. We have a separate drain system for rain, so that waste water doesn't get into the rivers uncleaned when heavy rains would otherwise overload wastewater treatment plants.

      Karachi has more people than the Netherlands. The Dutch built wind-"mills" to drain an entire country and reclaim land from the North Sea. I'm not sure that Pakistan's population growth is unsustainable (yet), but the people of Karachi definitely need to step up their game and work on solving their problems. There's no use in complaining that the river doesn't have more water. And don't you dare blame it on climate change. Climate change is real, but Karachi's problem are not caused by it.

    4. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Harsh as it sounds, that is exactly the core problem: If you bred like crazy in a resource-starved situation, you will eventually run into mass die-off that normalizes your population numbers to something far lower. Of course, this also comes with a civilization collapse when it happens to a human population. In theory, a human population can avoid this catastrophe by restricting its own breeding to what is sustainable, but apparently this one here cannot.

      Or in other words, they are going towards a horrible catastrophe, all of their own making.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Zorpheus · · Score: 4, Informative

      And let's make clear the relation to the numbers in the summary: Karachi still has about as much water per resident as Berlin is consuming. They don't have a lack of water, they have bad management of it and are wasting it.

    6. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainable by sycodon · · Score: 2

      Especially Ellicott City this weekend.

      And the CO river is not drying up. It's being sucked up.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    7. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by v1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You bring up an interesting point. Every controlling structure has some resource that is key to maintaining or increasing its influence. In most governments, this is in arms or mining or even food production. But for religion, the most important resource is population. One common theme in any religion is they strongly oppose anything that affects population growth. They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them. They desperately want their followers to breed like rabbits, because that's how they increase their power and influence.

      Even if this origin has been lost to modern times, the roots are still firmly planted in the sacred books and the words of the prophets, and so it goes on, even if it's now destroying the foundations of their countries. They can't just step in and say "Hey, this is actually turning out to be BAD for us now, please stop!" They're kinda stuck with it. It takes generations to ease a religious body through a major change, and unfortunately this whole "climate change" thing and "global population booms" has come up a faster than these religious groups can change course to match.

      So for now, yes, all the priests and pontiffs and clerics are going to continue shouting "KEEP MAKING MORE BABIES!!" because it's all they or their followers know to do. Normally crusades, invasions, or other wars would keep this in check, but now that job is getting handed over to famine, disease, and civil unrest. What an improvement!

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    8. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      The population growth of a city (4.5% in this case) is completely unrelated to the population growth of the country. Cities grow because people move there.
      Parkistans population growth is 2% ... which is quite ok.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by green1 · · Score: 2

      And yet, you continue to fail to provide such an example. If it's easy to disprove it, simply do so. Most of us are quite familiar with several major religions that follow the poster's claim, however we're not necessarily aware of any that do not.

      I'm not actually picking a side here, I'm just saying that your comment doesn't add anything to the discussion unless you include the example that proves the poster wrong.

    10. Re:Quintupling your population is not sustainable by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They can't just step in and say "Hey, this is actually turning out to be BAD for us now, please stop!" They're kinda stuck with it. It takes generations to ease a religious body through a major change, and unfortunately this whole "climate change" thing and "global population booms" has come up a faster than these religious groups can change course to match.

      I can only speak for Norway but... 105 years since women got the vote. 57 years since the first female priest. 46 years since homosexuality was decriminalized. 40 years since legalized abortion. 25 years ago since the first female bishop and gay partnership law. 9 years ago since gay marriage. That's all (barely) in living memory. The church has shown an amazing ability to morph into a quasi-spiritual organization for all people who believe in souls and an afterlife as their worldly teachings have been stripped away and the fire and brimstone parts tucked away as not very PC.

      The truth is that it's not their teachings on condoms and birth control that makes the most difference, it's their position on women. If you look at all the shittiest countries the men work, the women are at home popping out 5-6-7 children and raising them to adulthood. They don't have jobs, they don't have education, many of them aren't even literate... but they can breed and no matter how dirt poor people are today we don't let kids starve to death. Once women start having their own career, birth rates drop like a rock. Working mom with three kids is doable, six kids is almost impossible.

      And all religions are quite capable of adjusting their teachings to accommodate that. Take an Islamic theocracy like Iran, nearly 70% of university graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) are women. They got a birth rate of about 1.7, same as many western countries. If they can do it, any country can. Take a look at Rosling's "peak child" statistics video to see how much some countries really did change in 50 years, both Christian nations, Islamic nations and Eastern religion nations.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  3. Obvious free market solution by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Obvious solution: Raise the price of water.

    Higher prices will incentivize consumers to conserve, producers to produce, and distributers to fix the leaks in their pipes.

    1. Re:Obvious free market solution by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ah, sadly not. People either pay nothing for water (they steal it) or they already pay a fortune to the "tanker mafia".

      http://www.circleofblue.org/20...

    2. Re:Obvious free market solution by gweihir · · Score: 2

      In other words, the situation is completely screwed up and getting worse. Well, looks like we will get to watch a historic event live here.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. Leave or deal with it by mveloso · · Score: 2

    In the end, they can leave or deal with water scarcity. It sounds like things aren't bad enough for people to leave and improvements are impossible, so deal with it they will.

    1. Re: Leave or deal with it by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Or build desalinization plants.

      Patching leaky pipes is WAY more cost effective than building energy-hungry desalination plants.

    2. Re: Leave or deal with it by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

      It goes back into the ocean, and is (rather quickly) diluted so that there is no observable difference. Near the output 'vent' there is higher salt content in the water, which can affect the environment right around the output area, but that can be mitigated through various techniques.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re: Leave or deal with it by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They've been relining the water mains here to limit leaks and pipe failures. It's been going on across the city for several years now, and this is a really well managed, self-funded (ie, water fees pay for the water system) water system that's mostly newer than 120 years (good chunks maybe less than 75 years old), run by a more or less functional city government.

      Can you imagine what Karachi's water plant is like? I'll bet just creating documentation as to where the pipes are would be a decade-long odyssey and it probably wouldn't uncover miles of unauthorized extensions and tapping into the system.

      Fixing the leaks is a good idea, but I'd bet in Karachi building a desal plant is probably actually more cost effective compared to detangling the mess they have.

  5. Climate Change? by DatbeDank · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pretty sure the order of causes are corruption and water mismanagement followed by climate change being the crack that drained their fresh water supply.

    1. Re:Climate Change? by gravewax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      corruption, water mismanagement AND a massive population explosion over the last half century. climate change on top of all that I doubt has even a measurable effect by comparison.

  6. Re: Quintupling your population is not sustainabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Right, because they get their water from the same place.
    You fucking idiots will do anything to try and blame shit on the US.

  7. Because it is expensive by thesjaakspoiler · · Score: 2

    water from rivers is free. But agreed, who needs fresh drinking water to flush the toilet? Maybe they should have thought about a greywater system in the 65 years it took them to go from 50 to 200 milion people?

  8. A far better story: by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Informative

    A far better story: Parched for a price: Karachi's water crisis

    Quotes:

    Perween Rehman: "It is not the poor who steal the water. It is stolen by a group of people who have the full support of the government agencies, the local councillors, mayors and the police; all are involved."

    "Shortly before her murder, Rehman spoke to a documentary crew, who were making a film about her work."

    More:

    "The scale of the theft is staggering. ... stealing water in Karachi is an industry worth more than half a billion dollars." (each year)

    "Ali Asghar, 75, says he still has to pay bills to the utility company for water that never comes in the pipes."

    Another problem:
    Family size.

    "... Farzana Bibi, 40, ... manages a household of 5 people on an income of roughly $190 a month.

    "... his entire household of 17 people is dependent on water bought from tankers."

    Al Jazeera is generally a good place for such news. However, this story has no date. It was apparently written in 2017.

    So, the parent comment is exactly correct.

  9. Exceeded carrying capacity by sickre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cut off all emigration from Pakistan and let them deal with their own problems. Overpopulation has its consequences. China knew it and implemented the One Child Policy to great success. Europe (and colonies) and East Asia have dealt with their population problems and now have stable or declining rates. If South/West Asia, the Mid East and Africa can't figure it out themselves, we're not going to bail them out by taking millions of their excess people.

    1. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Harsh as it sounds, getting population growth under control and eventually down to zero is a critical step for survival of a nation today. Looks like Pakistan will be one of those that do not make it. Even if they can fix the water issue this time, if they continue to grow like crazy, the problem will just return far worse in the near future until it cannot be fixed anymore.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 2

      2018 folks, the year casual fascism was no longer met with instant derision.

      [ Note: Not the emigration bit, that's something for each country to legitimately decide for themselves who and how many people immigrate. I was referring to the praise for a clearly fascist intrusion on a core element of personal freedom by an obviously fascist government. A "great success"! ]

    3. Re:Exceeded carrying capacity by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      If South/West Asia, the Mid East and Africa can't figure it out themselves, we're not going to bail them out by taking millions of their excess people.

      Except that we literally are. And anyone who objects "is" a fascist, racist, etc. ...

  10. Population growth is just momentum, actually by Moritz+Moeller+-+Her · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The number of children per woman in Pakistan has decreased rapidly in the last decades to now around 3 children per woman (2.3 is required for population to just be static in the long run). The only reason the population still grows is many children growing up and having (on average 2-3) kids of their own. There is no statistic link between religion and population growth.

    See here: https://www.google.com/publicd...

    Or if you do only trust the US, check the CIA:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/pu...

    --
    Moritz
    1. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong interpretation! World population growth is heavily influenced by the growth of Muslim population. One should rather compare the rate of population growth of Muslims vs that of non-Muslims.

    2. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was skeptical, but the Pew center corroborates your claim for the period from 2010-2015.

    3. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Moritz+Moeller+-+Her · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My original source is this highly recommended and entertaining Ted Talk youtube video from Hans Gosling - "Religions and Babies".

      https://www.google.com/url?sa=...

      --
      Moritz
    4. Re:Population growth is just momentum, actually by Megane · · Score: 2

      Correlation is not causation. It's actually a third-world thing more than a religious thing. With certain exceptions (like Mormons), the western world has had low or negative population growth because of societal change, not religion. Until children stop becoming an asset and start becoming a hindrance to lifestyle, humans will reproduce more. On the other hand, there might be some indirect causation in that Muslims tend to live in the third world and hold back progress, keeping them in charge of third-world shitholes, which keeps the birth rate up.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  11. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by religionofpeas · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want to understand how big the issue is, then "they only get half the water the need" is a good description.

    1.1 billion gallons, or 4.2 million cubic meter are equally useless for proper visualization.

  12. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by azcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You got it! Karachi is home to more than 20 megapersons and is only able to meet about 5 decidemands of water per day.

    --
    Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
  13. Desalination! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    They need to use Desalination

    1. Re:Desalination! by fish_sauce · · Score: 2

      As far as I know, desalination have never been a viable option. It is too slow and use too much energy compared to the result output.

      "The energy requirements are so high that the cost for a lot of countries is too much.That’s why it’s mainly used in regions lacking freshwater, ships, and military vessels.

      There are environmental concerns too. Desalination plants take in salt water straight from the ocean and can kill or harm fish and other small ocean life as water travels from the source to the plant."

  14. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem is in units of people. 10 million too many. Good luck trying to save the planet by banning plastic grocery bags while the third world is breeding like locust.

  15. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes but is it half the water they need in gallons? We Americans don't understand metric fractions.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  16. Re:Pakistan == Mud People by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Acre-feet for the win.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  17. Re: same with Cape Town South Africa by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    We need to be doing more of that in America. We are going to see shortages sooner, rather than later.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  18. I didn't say Al Jazeera is perfect. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2

    There may be areas in which Al Jazeera is not helpful.

    However, if, like me, you live in the U.S. and have never been to the countries Al Jazeera covers most, the articles are often far ahead of others on the same subject.

    You said, "They covered a ceremony in my hometown and claimed eight people died. No one died."

    Could you tell us more about that?

  19. Re: Pakistan == Mud People by bluegutang · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, large cities generally use less resources per person than small cities or rural areas.

    And Pakistan has an average of 2.62 kids per family which is hardly "breeding like locusts". Replacement fertility is probably about 2.4 in Pakistan, so they are barely over replacement.

  20. still alive by nten · · Score: 2

    Actually imperial units are still in widespread usage here even within engineering groups. My company uses metric for softwaee, but physical stuff like structures or antennas gets done in foot pounds and the like. I am a proponent of switching, but they tried that 40 years ago and the only thing that stuck was liters on bottles of diabetes, er soda.

    --
    refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.