Over a million residents in the Klang Valley faced yet another water crisis this past week, beginning on Sept 3, 2020. Supply was being restored in stages at the time of writing, with 62.7% of affected areas reconnected on Sunday (Sept 6) night.
Although people may see red over such unscheduled water cuts, I for one am extremely grateful to Air Selangor for doing the right thing by shutting off supply. Despite the expected backlash and the necessarily uncertain timeline to flush out the pollutants and restore supply, Air Selangor acted responsibly to ensure people are provided with clean, potable water.
This was not the case in the state of Michigan in the United States. In 2014, a cost-cutting measure by the Michigan water utility resulted in the residents of the town of Flint suffering from lead poisoning. People complained of smelly and polluted water but the utility and state authorities denied anything was wrong until the residents themselves had their water tested. The debacle resulted in 12 deaths and the health of nearly 8,000 children permanently affected. On Aug 20, 2020, the state of Michigan was ordered to pay US$600mil (RM2.5bil) as compensation to affected Flint residents.
In Malaysia, while Air Selangor ensures supply is clean, there are still issues that need to be addressed. The perpetrators of the latest pollution incident need to be punished – but is a monetary fine sufficient? The fact remains that nearly a million people could have been poisoned. Furthermore, should factories be allowed to operate by rivers that are a water source for water treatment plants? How are the people to be compensated for the inconvenience caused by disruptions to supply?
We have to seriously give importance to the health of the people and ensure that the possibility of poisoning does not occur. Our rivers are polluted by raw or partially treated sewage as well as industrial effluents, agricultural run-off, and waste from animal husbandry, land development and municipal rubbish dumps. Continuous monitoring of rivers is necessary along with strict enforcement of the law when it comes to waste management. Severe imprisonment for repeat offenders could be a deterrent to others.
Selangor has low water reserves which makes recovery of supply after a disruption difficult, usually stretching over several days. To increase water reserves, more water treatment plants were built, including the Semenyih 2, Langat 2 and Labohan Dagang plants. Water is channelled from Pahang to Kuala Langat to cater for our increasing needs.
But the overconsumption of water can lead to a water crisis, which is what happened in California. Unregulated usage caused the rapid and extreme depletion of surface and groundwater across the state, which experienced severe drought for seven years, ending in 2019 (though 2020 has had a dry start, experts warn). Selangor too has experienced droughts, in 2014 and 2016. We could easily fall into the same trap as the American state, ie, continuing to provide water to satisfy increasing demand and inadvertently drying up our resources.
Instead, we should be thinking about using our water resources sustainably. The World Health Organisation recommends 150 litres per person per day for a reasonable quality of life. In Malaysia, though, the average person consumes 209 litres a day. Other countries in South-East Asia consume much less: in the Philippines, it's 175 litres; Singapore, 155 litres; Indonesia has the lowest consumption, 130 litres.
It is time Malaysians learn to lower our usage of water. Water tariffs should be increased for usage beyond a set limit. Being a tropical country we are blessed with a lot of rain and rainwater harvesting is another way to conserve water resources. Municipal laws should include rainwater harvesting systems as part of design requirements for new homes or apartments.
Another issue that needs to be addressed is pipe replacement in the water distribution network. As much as 29% of treated water is lost in Selangor. According to the National Water Services Commission (SPAN), three-quarters of non-revenue water is due to physical losses through leaking pipes. Why don’t we simply replace these leaky pipes? It’s down to financing. The Water Industry Fund was established to ensure sustainability of water supply by protecting and preserving water courses; contributors to this fund are confined to water supply licensees and authorised persons at the moment. However, I think the fund should be opened to contributions from consumers, corporations and government grants. The money can be invested and the net returns can finance the maintenance of water infrastructure in perpetuity, thus ensuring water sustainability and security for all.
Will consumers contribute to this fund? Well, first there has to be trust. Consumers might not want to contribute because they might not trust that water utility services will improve. To build trust, consumers must be guaranteed water without supply disruptions or rationing. If the water utility is unable to fulfil this obligation, then it must compensate consumers. Water supply disruptions have a cost to people in terms of wasted time, cost to purchase drinking water, cost to travel to other places that have water, and cost in terms of business closures. The people must be compensated for all this – and this will ensure the efficiency of water utilities, as having to pay compensation would affect their bottom line. Having a clear client charter that stipulates the amount of compensation for days without water will enable people to consider paying higher tariffs or even contributing to the water fund.
At the end of the day, people just want clean, potable water coming from their taps.
DR KULSANOFER SYED THAJUDEEN
Petaling Jaya
No comments:
Post a Comment