6/22/2011 1:37 PM ET|
Is water the new gold?
Economics professors love to haze dewy-eyed freshmen with the diamond-water paradox.
It goes like this: Why, if water is so vital to life, is it essentially free? While diamonds, merely rocks with aesthetic qualities, cost a fortune. You can die of thirst. But you won't die if you don't have sparkly things on your fingers.
The answer, of course, is water is nearly free because it's plentiful, while diamonds are prized for their rarity. But if all the wells were to run dry, you'd happily trade all your worldly possessions for a single glass of water. It's all about survival.
Here's the rub: As a consequence of of population growth, industry and agriculture, fresh, clean water is about to become a lot harder to find. Sure, most of the world's surface is covered in the wet stuff. But 97% of it is full of salt. And most of the remaining 3% is frozen in glaciers or dusting the tops of mountains. Of what remains, a tiny amount is easily accessible in freshwater lakes, rivers and reservoirs.
The rest is held in ancient underground reserves such as the Ogallala Aquifer beneath America's heartland. And like fossil fuels, it is essentially a nonrenewable resource that is being rapidly depleted. That's because this "fossil water" is being extracted much faster than it's being replenished by rainfall.
The law of supply and demand makes this a scarcity story, just like copper, crude oil and gold. But unlike all of those resources, there is no substitute for clean water.
In an era of alternative investments, with even staid portfolio managers looking at things like timberland and physical gold as they fight a decade of flat returns in the stock market and ultralow yields in the bond market, water could be the next great commoditiy play.
And unlike those who invest in diamonds or gold, a water investor will never have to justify the practicality of his investments. It's as simple as this: You drink it or you die. The stakes couldn't be higher. Ismail Serageldin, the World Bank's leading environment expert, warned that the "wars of the 21st century will be fought over water."
First, I'll outline the scope of the problem. Then, we'll look at ways to profit from what is likely to be the defining natural-resource problem of the next decade.
To be sure, it's easy to suffer from crisis overload these days. Climate change. Crop failures. Tornadoes. Oil spills. The list goes on. But of all the issues, water is probably the most troubling yet underappreciated.
According to the United Nations, 50% of the global population will be living in water-stressed regions by 2030. Citigroup estimates that about one-third of the global population will not have access to adequate drinking water by 2025. Right now, 35% of the world's population, or 2.4 billion people, do not have access to safe drinking water and sanitation, the U.N. says.
These issues are poised to result in political turmoil, because more than 20 countries today get more than half their drinking water from rivers flowing out of neighboring countries, and more than 240 water basins around the world cross political borders. Major rivers like the Colorado and the Rio Grande, sucked dry by thirsty municipalities and farmers, now reach the ocean only during very wet years. Imagine the issues to be faced in the years to come along rivers like the Mekong, which flows through China, Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam.
The problem is that the world is using too much. Water demand in the United States has tripled in the past 30 years while population has grown just 50%. Every 20 years, world water consumption doubles -- a growth rate twice that of population.
Water also plays a central role in the major investment themes set to play out in the decades to come: the rise of the emerging-market economies, increased demands on the world's arable land (a result of the spread of high-protein diets), and increased urbanization.
People, as they become wealthier, tend to use more water. Studies by the Environmental Protection Agency put average American household water consumption at about 100 to 150 gallons per day per person, by far the highest in the world. Compare that to an average of 74 gallons in Europe, just 35 gallons by the Swiss and 23 gallons by the Chinese. Africans use just 17 gallons. Now, think of all the double-head showers being installed in tony condos throughout China and India.
Next up is agriculture, by far the largest user of water at 70% of demand globally. Because of rising population and the need to raise and feed the cattle and poultry bound for the plates of increasingly carnivorous Asian gastronomes, the U.N. estimates that an additional 10% of farmland will be put into use by 2030. That will increase total water demand by 14%.
And finally, the great human migration into cites will further strain antiquated infrastructure in the developed world and force the construction of new facilities in the emerging world. In 1950, 29% of the world lived in cities. The U.N. estimates that number will be 60% by 2030.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Comparing water to gold and fossil fuels is ridiculous. We have the raw materials (mostly in the form of surface water) for clean water we just don't have the proper infrastructure to clean the water or deliver it. In essence, the comparison is like saying we are running out of oil because we don't have enough refineries. Elementary school science teaches you the earth cycles its water and it is a closed cycle (water is not lost.) It's further evident we are not running out of surface water by the flooding in the US and other countries. We have water. We just don't have the means to process and distribute the water. (And we can always desalinate ocean water, too.)
We should be questioning why most of the U.S. economic stimulus package went to transportation projects and very little to water/wastewater projects. In my opinion, water is more important than gold...and transportation.
We need to fund our water infrastructure. This is a problem that money can fix, unlike oil. And if the government doesn't fund it, private enterprise will. Which is what Mr. Pickens is relying on.
Please support the use of Retention ponds in your local area. They ease flooding, and recharge the groundwater. They are far superior to Detention ponds, which just ease flooding.
Plenty of water rains/snows down on the US. We simply need to hold it from becoming runoff and going into the ocean. (Bonus: it's cheaper to build a retention pond than to upgrade drainage systems when new development is built.)
The problem isn't the fresh water being available, it is getting it to where people want to live (or getting people to quit moving to where there isn't any water). Even at the low-flow rates at night and during winter (50,000 cubic feet per minute), enough fresh water goes over Niagara falls to meet the needs of every person in the US and Canada (and this is with all the upstream withdrawals already factored in). Most of this water ends up being emptied into the ocean unused. The Mississippi dumps 4 times this much water into the Gulf of Mexico (low flow is ~200,000 cfs). These two combined could provide fresh water at the US usage rate for everyone in the western hemisphere (and these rates are after they already provide the water needs for roughly 100,000,000 people living in the watersheds).
West Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Southern California are DESERT. Yet people keep insisting on moving there, and worse yet insist on planting inedible crops (grass lawns and non-native trees) that require them to dump millions of gallons of the precious fresh water on the ground to keep these decorations alive. Combine this with all the desert that has been converted to farmland thanks to Hoover Dam, and you can see how we aren't being very efficient.
As to the Ogallala, T. Boone's rights will be worthless if (as Mirhaydari claims) the aquifer is going to be sucked dry by 2025 or 2030, so are we supposed to invest our money in the rights to drill more dry wells? I'm confused here. Not really, since the floods along the Missouri and Mississippi wil provide a nice recharge to the aquifer over the next couple of years.
Mirhaydari once again pulls some sensationalized BS and some shoddy science to demonstrate his ignorance for the MSN readers to see. On top of that, on what is supposed to be a financial website, he makes absolutely no indications of how this is supposed to impact your finances going forward.
The same thing can be said about Lead vs. Gold....and by lead I mean bullets. When the crap hits the fan and a country is spiraling down into nothing...you can have all the gold in the world....but it don't mean anything, but lead does. I can't throw a gold coin at someone to get them away from my food, water, and family....but boy that lead will bring someone down. Everyone is investing in Gold right now because everyone thinks it means something if a government collapses. Sure...perhaps...if you can get your stock pile out of where ever it is, put it on a row boat with you and sail to another land. But good luck throwing all those gold shillings at the people coming to kill you.
We are being pushed into small apartments in cities without air conditioning. so that progressives can let millions of immigrants into our country. We cant fill the needs of our own but Liberals are blind to the fact that Immigrants by the millions will be used for votes by liberal politicians.
Obama's socialist pals say americans should not be allowed to own homes or property. Its for the public good. Oh really???? They are turning our country into a third world Hell.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
[BRIEFING.COM] The stock market finished a down week on a cautious note with small caps leading the retreat. The Russell 2000 lost 0.5%, widening its weekly decline to 2.6%, while the S&P 500 shed 0.3%. The benchmark index ended the week lower by 2.7%.
This morning, the market was provided a basis to rebound with the July employment report, which was just right for the policy doves (209K versus Briefing.com consensus 220K). It showed payroll growth that was weaker than expected, ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'