



The different political economies of water and energy

should be recognized, as these affect the scope, speed

and direction of change in each domain.





While energy

generally carries great political clout, water most often

does not. Partly as a result, there is a marked difference

in the pace of change in the domains; a pace which is

driven also by the evolution of markets and technologies.





Unless those responsible for water step up their own

governance reform efforts, the pressures emanating

from developments in the energy sphere will become

increasingly restrictive and make the tasks facing water

planners, and the objective of a secure water future, much

more difficult to achieve.





Failures in water can lead directly to failures in energy and other sectors critical for development.





Sustainability of water resources is becoming a business

risk for some energy managers. Multinationals and other

large corporations are increasingly interested in their

water footprints and how to minimize them.





In its 2013

Global Risks Report , the World Economic Forum ranks

the ‘water supply crisis’ as the fourth crisis in likelihood

and second in impact, a marked elevation from its rank in

previous reports (WEF, 2013).

Climate change adaptation and mitigation





Climate change adaptation is primarily about water, as stated for example by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which identifies water as the fundamental link through which climate change will impact humans and the environment (IPCC, 2008).





In addition, water is critical for climate change mitigation, as many efforts to reduce carbon emissions such as carbon capture and storage rely on water availability for long-term success.





Providing sufficient energy for all while radically reducing greenhouse gas emissions will require a paramount shift towards fossil-free energy use, very high energy efficiency, and equity.





These goals may limit the availability of water resources for communities and ecosystems and result in a reduction of adaptive capacity for future change.





For example, bio-fuels need vast quantities of water to grow the bio-fuel crop and process it into bio-energy, while large hydro-power plants need to store vast quantities of water, especially during dry seasons, which could in certain instances hamper irrigated agriculture as an adaptation measure to combat climate-driven drought.





In this case adaptation and mitigation measures are competing for water. Another urgent mitigation challenge intimately linked to water is terrestrial carbon sequestration.





Water in vegetation, soils and wetlands is the lock that seals carbon reservoirs, for example in peat lands, and provides necessary water for sustaining or restoring carbon storage by forests.





Climate change mitigation requires effective adaptation to succeed. The water cycle is sensitive to climate change and water is vital to energy generation and carbon storage. Water can also serve as a bridge to support both adaptation and

mitigation.













For instance, reforestation can reduce or prevent destructive surface runoff and debris flows from intensifying precipitation events by stabilizing hill slopes and promoting recharge.





Strategic decisions should ideally acknowledge the turnover

periods of technical systems, such as approximately 40 years for energy systems, in order to recognize the risks for technical lock-in in systems that lack robustness in coping with changes in climatic conditions and demand (IEA, 2012a).





Climate change and variability further complicate the

situation.





Major droughts and high temperatures

can hinder the ability of the power sector to achieve sufficient

cooling, leading to power outages. When the monsoon

rains arrived late in 2012, leaving much of northern India

in drought and extreme heat, farmers turned to electrical

pumps to bring groundwater to the surface for irrigation.

Electricity demand peaked at the same time that hydro-power

reservoirs were at their lowest, resulting in numerous

blackouts.





The reverse scenario can also occur: a problem

with a power grid far away might become a local power

outage that inhibits water production and treatment.





Other examples of water and energy interconnections

include policies supporting the development of bio-fuels

that have had negative impacts on land, water and food

prices.





Replacing fossil fuels with bio-fuels

in transport will measurably reduce the carbon footprint,

but will also enlarge the water footprint of transport

(UNEP,).





Desalination of salt water and pumping of

freshwater supplies over large distances may help reduce

freshwater scarcity in certain places, but will also increase

energy use.





Conflicts over water between irrigation and

hydro-power provide yet another example.





Interconnections, however, need not necessarily have

negative repercussions. In France, for example, under

the RT 2020 sustainable energy framework all buildings

by 2020 will produce more energy than they consume,

and they will also purify and recycle water naturally.





Such policies are driving the development of innovative

technologies; for example, a system that filters waste water

for use as grey water while at the same time harnessing

the energy-generating potential of the algae present in

the waste water.









An added benefit of this approach is that

it reduces the volume of waste water returning to the

treatment plant, ultimately resulting in energy savings.





Source: United Nations

Cleantech Grants







