the Adventure Lifestyle magazine

percent of all freshwater consumed goes to produce food," says World Water Council's Shady. To animate those numbers, he outlined a typical morning for many in the proverbial first world. "You wake up in the morning, you shave, bathe, water your plants, have breakfast. And it's the breakfast that takes the most water! Do you know how much water goes into producing eggs, bacon, toast? This one meal is equivalent to about 20 bathtubs of water. And we have not even gone through the day yet. Wait till you have a steak." The statistics are startling but there is hope. According to Daene McKinney, an associate professor of civil engineering at the University of Texas's Center for Water Research and Resources, analysts and governments are already investigating new agricultural techniques. "As the world experiences increasing water scarcity and water stress, the place we're going to have to really look is toward agriculture and say, hey, if there's an inefficiently irrigated area out there that could be improved through technology, we have to change it." Israel pioneered the use of drip·irrigation-a localized watering system where water is applied in drops rather than bucketfulls-in the 70S and continues to use some of the most advanced technology available. But other areas, like Central Asia appear to be the least efficient in the world. "In Asia, the use of water is huge. In India and China, at least three billion people (half the world's population) are living off of these irrigated cultures. It's not all waste, but there needs to be more research into irrigation techniques, piping, and the methodology. Do you use all the water at once, or stage it?" These areas of research are very important because it's where we begin to get rid of the totally inefficient ways of irrigation and figure out ways of improving them. Another element in agricultural water use, McKinney says, is "how do we use our research dollars to improve the technology of applying water? It might lead to use of more genetically engineered crops ... " And this is precisely what Shady predicts: Genetically engineered food. He allows that it's a very sticky subject, but when at least 70 percent of all freshwater is used for food production, he believes we can't afford not to consider genetically engineered food-despite the drawbacks. "Through genetic engineering we can produce plants that consume less water," Shady says. " It's feasible, and we can produce grain-wheat, corn and rice-that would save 20-40 percent of that 70 percent that goes toward food production. Part of the problem is ignorance and lack of awareness about genetic engineering, the fear we have of it." Shady and others say the water crisis can be averted, even reversed, over a period of time. But others contend that water (and money) could be saved simply by growing more naturally water-efficient crops. Millet requ ires much less water to grow than corn and can be grown in drier conditions. According to Indian activist and author Vandana Shiva, genetically engineered crops are developed from industrial·age varieties and preferences that already use significantly more water than traditiona l varieties. "Genetica lly engineered crops are based on introducing new genes into existent hybrids which take 4 to 5 times more water than traditional varieties. Genetic engineering does not reduce water use because it depends on water intensive varieties." But even as critics debate more efficient water usage in agriculture- people still need clean freshwater piped into their homes. And increasingly, private companies are the ones doing this. Although opponents of privatization warn that it could hurt people who aren't able to afford water at a higher cost, others say it's the only way to properly conserve, by creating a market value. The World Bank recently reviewed Gleick's Pacific Institute Principles, which propose global guidelines and regulations for water privatization. Gleick's principles are predicated on the assumption that privatization means different things in different places but that in many places around the world it seems inevitable. To that end, water privatization can be a good thing, or it can be a bad thing. "Some think it's the only way, and the other side says water is a public good and you can't make it a commodity," Gleick said recently. "We're somewhere in between. I don't think privatization is going to disappear, but we do think there are some serious risks. And probably the greatest are associated with the public benefit that water provides ... if water is a public good, what happens to poor CONTINVED ON Pi'-GE :;z.R 25

• Cover