Customer Reviews

The Ripple Effect: The Fate of Fresh Water in the Twenty-First Century

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The Ripple Effect provides a very basic review of the condition of freshwater around the world. The data is very useful and the commentary provides a variety of viewpoints about the global water crisis from a layperson's point of view. It is a body of work that should be read and used to determine a course of action that is intended to have significant impacts particularly in the under and undeveloped places on the globe. I highly recommend it to all water justice activists present and future.

The Ripple Effect is a well-written,though-provoking read about a fascinating subject that is relevant around the world. His explanation of this crisis is both comprehensive and captivating. I definitely recommend reading it!

I genuinely enjoyed this book as both science and non-fiction. It's an excellent read and a page-turner. Highly recommended for anyone concerned or interested in all things water.

Author Alex Prud `Homme claims "The Ripple Effect" is not an "encyclopedic" read, but at times if feels that way. That's not to say I wouldn't recommend this book; after all, the many troublesome issues over available, clean freshwater for citizens worldwide are crucial to know about and getting increasingly urgent by the year.

Prud `Homme cannot be accused of forgoing research or skimping on facts. He transitions nicely from one troubled region to the next, giving proper weight to the severity of the problems but not sensationalizing, and offering advice by experts throughout. I came away thinking super-arid Arizona, remote Las Vegas, sprawling California and weather-troubled Georgia are in for some rough times, presently and in the future. The Midwest, where environmentally destructive farming methods and flooding are common, also has its share of water-related predicaments. Prud `Homme drives the point home that people all over the world -- from seasoned hydrologists to the average man and woman -- will need to rethink every aspect of water. As populations explode, drinkable H2O is dwindling -- something's got to give in this equation. Additionally, outdated, unregulated laws and a worrisome inclination by politicians and their constituents during the last decade or so to pay less attention to "the fate of freshwater in the twenty-first century" have exacerbated the problems.

Admittedly, my eyes and thoughts glazed over at times as Prud `Homme intricately covered numerous judicial cases and technical details to supplement the themes. But numerous things stuck with me. Harmful agricultural methods, for instance, have contributed to the runoff of contaminated groundwater into major rivers, causing numerous "dead zones" where aquatic life has stagnated and useable drinking supplies have been curtailed. In addition, though they are much needed and provide a cherished economic drive, electricity, thirsty crops like corn and raising farm animals account for much more wasted and detrimental water use than water coming out of taps by U.S. residents as a whole, a fact I found interesting.

Smarter techniques and habits could change things for the better, such as building porous concrete that absorbs rainwater in urban areas and not purchasing bottled water. But evolution comes slowly when high-stakes money and ever-moving progress (in areas where it's difficult to transport water) are on the agenda. As more and more pavement is laid down in urban areas all over the country, some of it covering precious wetlands where rainwater is easily absorbed, the runoff of tainted water into underground pipes is inevitable. The flushing of pharmaceuticals and everything else under the sun is also a potential issue, as is climate change and evolving weather patterns that much of the world is drastically unprepared for. Leaders in forward-thinking countries such as below-sea-level Holland have thought outside the box and adapted beautifully, working in tune with nature for results that work. Other locales, such as New York City, could come to a standstill if a weather-related catastrophe struck -- and experts claim such calamities will occur. All this just scratches the surface of what's covered in "The Ripple Effect."

Solutions? Prud `Homme offers hope, including a cautiously optimistic section about desalination plants, which extract salt from seawater to make it drinkable. All is not bleak, but many people in the know say that the preciousness of water could someday exceed that of oil, and it's worth noting that the two resources work hand in hand. This is an eye-opening book that's worth the time.

Cadillac Desert is still the starting and stopping place for water use issues in the U.S. (Prud'homme does reference it a couple of times). There's other recent books on water usage which cover water in the rest of the world, both developed and developing.

That said, if you don't know the Colorado River is over-appropriated, that some Californians and Arizonans still want to steal water from the Columbia River, and West Texans from the Mississippi, if you're not familiar with water "recycling" or privatization of water issues, then this book is a good starting place.

This is a great book ---- It will make look at the water you are drinking with different set of eyes -- I would recommend this to anyone

There are always canaries in the mines and with an issue like water - a facet of life we've learned to take for granted - it may take a chorus of canaries to bring to light the critial story that must be understood by all of us. There is a change coming which holds significant, challenging and potentially catastrophic implications for life as we know it. How we manage water, how we replenish it and how we compromise it - coupled to a global climate with rising temperatures, a massive population growth tragectory, and the current enthusiam to emulate a western lifestyle born of the industrial growth in our most populated regions all produce a story we need to pay attention to. Water is under a enormous pressure to do more than it's chemical and physical propoperties may be able to accomodate without greater understanding and real adjustment on a HUGE scale by those of us who rely on it for our basic survival. This is a critical story for all of us to read and understand. It's an informed and balanced view of a monsterous topic. Wonderfully written and compelling.

The thesis of the book appears to be that we waste and pollute a vitally important resource because we don't value it enough. Unfortunately, those points are not made because the book is riddled with factual errors, ignorance of scientific terminology, misleading and/or alarmist statements, and bad editing.
As examples: methane is not toxic nor is iron a poison as Mr. Prud'homme claims they are. Those are just two of the erroneous statements that serve to undermine the credibility of the book. But, more on them later.

Factual errors
On page 41 there is a reference to an abandoned copper mine "...the thirty-nine-thousand-foot-deep pit..."
39,000 feet is equal to 7.4 miles. The deepest mine shaft in the world is the TauTona gold mine in the Witwatersrand region of South Africa, which is currently working at depths of 12,800 feet. Such a vast, deep pit that Prud'homme reports just does not exist.
On page 142 he states "While national water fees average about $458 per residence a year, some of Denver's expanding suburbs.... The town of Louisville charges $20,000 per house, and Broomfield charges $24,424 per house per year."
A simple email inquiry to the Broomfield water department elicited this response from the Billing & Accounts Administrator, City and County of Broomfield:
"Yes, I'm sure they are talking about the one time water impact fee. However, ours is currently $22,454.00. I don't know where the extra $1,970 comes from. Our average bill (water usage and water flat charge, no sewer) is approximately $485 per year. As for Louisville, I just looked online and their water impact fee is $24,140."

Improper use of scientific terminology
It is bad enough when news media frequently refer to carbon dioxide as "carbon," but that misuse appears to have become an accepted convention. However, Mr. Prud'homme takes the error to a new level. On page 209 he states, "Wetlands...(they also absorb carbon, a greenhouse gas...." and, on page 230, "...send millions of tons of carbon gas into the air...."
Carbon can appear in several familiar forms such as graphite, soot, charcoal, or diamond, but never as a gas.
Even that usage could be overlooked as an accepted slovenly shortcut by a journalist, but the author gives the same treatment to nitrogen. On page 93 he quotes "Some scientists have labeled nitrogen a `missing greenhouse gas' because it is not one of the four gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and sulfur hexafluoride)... named in the Kyoto protocol...."
Apparently the "scientists" he quotes cannot distinguish between nitrogen compounds and nitrogen gas. Further, the author did not read his own writing -- he lists nitrous oxide (a nitrogen compound) as being named in the Kyoto protocol he just quoted.
Further, if nitrogen is a greenhouse gas, then we're certainly doomed because nitrogen makes up over 78% of our atmosphere.
On page 67 while warning about the appearance of modern chemicals in our drinking water, triclocarban is described as "... an antibiotic...." less than one minute of research finds that triclocarban is not an antibiotic, it is an antimicrobial. Another minute reveals the difference between them. It's important.

Misleading or alarmist statements
Prud'homme's promiscuous use of the word "toxic" leads him to some absurd positions. On page 28 he states, "... saturated with other toxic compounds, such as xylene, toluene, and methane." Wrong. A person may be killed by methane through suffocation or explosion, but not by poisoning. Methane is not "toxic," it is biologically inert.
On page 16 he refers to "...toxic metals, such as copper and zinc..." and on page 102 "numerous poisons -- including arsenic, cobalt, iron, and thallium at dangerous levels,..."
Both copper and zinc are necessary dietary trace minerals: we need them to be healthy. Iron also is a necessary mineral in our diet. I'm sure even Mr. Prud'homme's editors (if there were any) have heard of "iron deficiency." If iron were toxic then all cast iron cookware should immediately be discarded.

Just plain nonsense
On page 51 we are told that "Sewage treatment requires enormous amounts of energy, which is costly and adds to climate change...." Is the author saying that sewage should not be treated, but, instead, dumped raw into our rivers as we used to do? We should do this to avoid climate change?
Another alarmist use of "toxins" is seen on page 77, "Endocrine disrupters are found in many everyday items, including... and plastics (especially plastic containers numbered 3, 6, and 7, which are associated with potentially harmful toxins)." Are the endocrine disruptors "associated with potentially harmful toxins" or is it the "plastic containers numbered 3, 6, and 7?" That sentence just does not make sense.
Then on page 339, writing about the ultra-pure water needed in electronic chip factories, "...which acts as a sponge for microcontaminants, such as colloidal solids, particles, total organic carbon, bacteria, pyrogens (fragments of bacteria), metal ions, and the like."
This list makes no sense. "particles"? Of what? "total organic carbon" is not a contaminant, but, rather, a measurement of contamination. That usage is nonsense in the quoted context. "Pyrogens" are not "fragments of bacteria" they are fever-causing agents.

The above are just a few of the examples of error, ignorance, alarmist statements, and nonsense found by a general reader in this book.

I've spent a lifetime working with water issues, and found this an interesting look at some aspects of the problems we face. It would have been more interesting if it had been about 100 pages shorter. It rambles, occasionally rants, and is pretty short on conclusions or recommendations. There are annoying math errors or misstatements. At one point he says 300,000 acre feet is enough water for 25 million people, and in the next paragraph, says that Denver uses 300,000 acre feet a year. Last time I looked, Denver wasn't quite up to 25 million people. That happens numerous times. There are strange descriptions like "front mounted washing machines." I assume he means "front loaded" but who knows. His main cure for everything seems to be eliminating agricultural irrigation, which is great until you begin to get hungry. It reads like an engineering book edited by English majors in places. That kind of poor editing undermines the credibility of what was obviously extensive research.

The Kindle edition was full of annoying typos. Spell check isn't the same as copy editing.

A U.S. GAO report predicts 36 states will face water shortages by 2013. The greatest source of water pollution today (85%) is storm water runoff. In 1970 it was only 15%. Animal waste spread over fields is a major component of runoff waste. Combined storm-water/waste-water drains in New York City overload its waste-water treatment plants. The EPA regulates only 91 chemicals out of some 60,000 used.

U.S. water use has risen from 151 billion gallons/day (1950) to 410 billion in 2005. Irrigation (70%) and power plant cooling are the two biggest uses. Upgrading from the largely vegetarian diets of Africa and Asia (2,000 liters/day) to the meat-eating Euro-American diet (5,000) will be a bigger factor boosting water use than population growth.