Narmu l-ilma tax-xita fil-baħar

Malta storm

 

Nhar il-Ġimgħa l-inżul tax-xita ma waqafx u bosta mit-toroq prinċipali kienu mimlijin ilma. Kien hemm ukoll tappieri tad-drenaġġ f’xi inħawi li kienu qed ifawwru ilma jrejjaħ. Dan kollu mhux l-ewwel darba li ġara. Jiġri kull meta tagħmel xita qawwija jew inkella xita fit-tul.

Dan ġara u jibqa’ jiġri minħabba f’inkompetenza tal-awtoritajiet tul is-snin. Għax, minkejja li ilna iktar minn 135 sena b’liġijiet u policies li jobbligaw li l-ilma tax-xita li jaqa’ fuq il-bjut tar-residenzi tagħna jinġabar f’bir apposta, dan, ħafna drabi, ma jsirx.

Flok ma jinġabar fil-bir, dan l-ilma jispiċċa fit-triq inkella fid-drenaġġ. Għalhekk ikollna ħafna ilma fit-triq kif ukoll tappieri jfawru d-drenaġġ!  Din hi responsabbiltá ta’ min għażel li jagħlaq għajnjeh għall-irregolaritajiet minkejja li kellu l-obbligu li  jara li dawn l-irregolaritajiet ma jseħħux.

Xi snin ilu, f’eserċiżżju ta’ ħela ta’ flus, il-Gvern kien iddeċieda li jinfoq il-miljuni (inkluż ammont sostanzjali mill-fondi tal-Unjoni Ewropeja) biex iħaffer mini taħt l-art ħalli fihom jinġabar l-ilma tax-xita li imbagħad fil-parti l-kbira tiegħu, jintrema l-baħar. Il-Gvern immexxi minn Lawrence Gonzi kien daħal għal din l-ispiża minnflok ma dar fuq is-sidien tar-residenzi (u fejn applikabbli fuq l-iżviluppaturi li bnewhom) biex iħaffru l-bjar nieqsa ħalli b’hekk, l-ilma tax-xita, flok ma jinġabar fit-toroq u fid-drenaġġ li jfur fit-toroq u l-bajjiet tagħna, fil-parti l-kbira tiegħu jibda jinġabar f’dawn il-bjar.

Minflok ma l-ispejjes tħallsu minn dawk li ħolqu l-problema,  tqiegħed piż ieħor fuq l-ispiża pubblika. Minn fondi pubbliċi tħallsu l-ispejjes tal-iżbalji li saru minn min kien responsabbli għall-iżvilupp.

Fost il-kawża ta’ dawn il-problemi, hemm blokki ta’ flats u maisonettes f’kull parti ta’ Malta u Għawdex.

Bħala pajjiż, infaqna l-flus biex irmejna l-ilma l-baħar ħalli mbagħad nerġgħu niġbruh mill-baħar fl-impjanti tar-reverse osmosis. Kien ikun ħafna iktar utli kieku dan l-ilma nġabar fid-djar tagħna kif kienu jagħmlu bi ħsieb missierijietna. Għax in-natura kull sena tipprovdilna biżżejjed ilma għall-parti l-kbira tal-ħtiġijiet tagħna u huwa kollu tort tagħna li din ir-riżorsa prezzjusa qed tinħela.

Ippublikat f’Illum : Il-Ħadd 20 ta’ Novembru 2016

L-ilma tax-xita: forsi nibdew niġbruh

flooding B'Kara.301113

 

 

Hi aħbar tajba li qed jittieħdu inizjattivi biex inqas ilma jintrema l-baħar. Għadni kif smajt intervista mal-Inġinier Paul Micallef mill-Korporazzjoni għas-Servizzi tal-Ilma li spjega kif iktar tard din is-sena ser ikun konkluż proġett li bħala riżultat tiegħu madwar 7 miljun metru kubu ta’ ilma ser ikun użat għall-agrikuktura u għall-industrija. Qed jingħad li bħala riżultat ta’ investiment sostanzjali l-kwalità tal-ilma prodotta ser tkun aħjar minn dak li presentement qed ikun prodott mill-Impjant ta’ Sant Antnin.

Dan hu tajjeb u ħadd ma jista’ jiddeskrivieh mod ieħor.

Tajjeb imma li nirrealizzaw li ħafna mill-ilma tax-xita qed jinħela għax fil-parti l-kbira tal-propjetà residenzjali li inbniet matul dawn l-aħħar 50 sena ma hemmx bjar. Din hi l-kawża tal-parti l-kbira tal-ilma tax-xita li jinġabar fit-toroq tagħna inkella li jiżbroffa mid-drenaġġ.

 

Toroq mgħarrqa ……… traffiku iġġammjat

 

msida_water. 021015

 

Rġajna għal darba oħra. Maltempata u t-toroq tagħna jegħrqu u t-traffiku jiġġammja.

Ħafna minn dak l-ilma li hemm bħalissa jiġri fit-toroq seta nġabar fi bjar. Imma parti mhux żgħira mill-bini tagħna m’għandux bir.

Min hu responsabbli?

L-ewwel responsabbiltà hi ovvjament ta’ min għamel l-iżvilupp mingħajr ma għamel bir.

Imma mhux waħdu.

Miegħu iridu jerfgħu r-responsabbiltà l-MEPA li ippermettiet l-iżvilupp bla bir.

L-ilma tax-xita, flok fil-bir, la ma hemmx, jintefa’ fit-triq, jew agħar minn hekk fid-drenaġġ.

Il-Korporazzjoni għas-Servizzi tal-Ilma ukoll għandha responsabbiltà għal dak li qed jiġri. Dan minħabba li l-Korporazzjoni ma tagħmilx il-verifiki sewwa qabel ma tawtorizza biex residenza tiġi imqabbda mas-sistema tad-drenaġġ pubbliku. Il-Korporazzjoni għandha l-obbligu li tivverifika li drenaġġ biss ser jintefa fis-sistema tad-drenaġġ. Minn spezzjon sewwa, malajr tista’ tinduna jekk il-katusi tal-ilma tax-xita humwiex imqabbda mad-drenaġġ ukoll.

Kieku l-MEPA u l–Korporazzjoni għas-Servizzi tal-Ilma jagħmlu xogħolhom sewwa, tispiċċa parti mhux żgħir mill-problema tal-ilma tax-xita fit-triq (waħdu jew imħallat bid-drenaġġ).

Sabu l-ilma ………… fuq Mars!

ilma fuq Mars.Independentilma fuq Mars.newsbook

 

L-aħbar li hemm possibilità tajba li fuq il-pjaneta Mars instab l-ilma nisslet ħafna interess fil-media. Anke f’Malta l-aħbar ingħata spazju għax bla dubju hi aħbar interessanti.

Dan l-interess huwa imnissel ukoll mill-fatt li f’ħafna pajjiżi madwar id-dinja hawn nuqqas ta’ ilma.

Min jaf, forsi, waqt li nieħdu pjaċir li fuq il-pjaneta Mars instab l-ilma nibdew nagħtu  ftit iktar każu napprezzaw l-ilma ftit iktar viċin tagħna.

Fil-passat riċenti f’Malta, bħala pajjiż,  ma tantx tajna każ tal-ilma. Il-kostruzzjoni tal-bjar fir-residenzi, biex fihom jinġabar l-ilma tax-xita, naqas sostanzjalment. F’ħafna każi, l-ilma tax-xita flok ma jinġabar fil-bjar intefa’ fit-toroq jew fid-drenaġġ.

L-għorrief fil-Parlament, flok ma insistew biex l-ilma tax-xita jibda jinġabar fil-bjar ħolqu proġett biex jiġbru dan l-ilma u jixħtuħ fil-baħar. Irmew l-ilma u miegħu irmew ukoll miljuni ta’ euros.

Aħjar nibdew nagħtu ftit każ tal-ilma ta’ madwarna flok l-ilma li x’aktarx hemm fuq Mars!

Malta’s EU story : the environment

JOINT SEMINAR BY THE OFFICE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT IN MALTA AND THE TODAY PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE

Friday 3 October 2014

address by Carmel Cacopardo

eu-flag

 

Since Malta’s EU accession there has been a marked contrast of interest in issues related to environmental governance.

EU accession has generally had a positive influence on Maltese environmental governance.  A flow of EU funds has been applied to various areas which Maltese governments throughout the years did not consider worthy of investing in.  On the one hand we had governments “occasionally” applying the brakes, seeking loopholes, real or imaginary,  in order to ensure that lip service  is not accidentally translated into meaningful action. On the other hand civil society has, in contrast, and  as a result of EU accession identified a new source of empowerment, at times ready to listen, however slow to react and at times ineffective.

Land use planning and abusive hunting/trapping have for many years been the main items on the local environment agenda. Water, air quality, climate change, alternative energy, biodiversity, noise, light pollution, organic agriculture, waste management and sustainable development have rightfully claimed a place in the agenda during the past 10 years. Some more frequently, others occasionally.

Land use planning has been on the forefront of civil society’s environmental agenda for many years. Abusive land use planning in the 80s fuelled and was fuelled by corruption. It led to various public manifestations in favour of the environment then equated almost  exclusively with the impacts of land development. Many such manifestations ended up in violence. Whilst this may be correctly described as history, it is occasionally resurrected  as in the recent public manifestation of hunters protesting against the temporary closure of the autumn hunting season.

Whilst hunting and land use planning may still be the main items on Malta’ environmental agenda the ecological deficit which we face is substantially deeper and wider.  It is generally the result of myopic policies.

For example it is well known that public transport has been practically ignored for the past 50 years, including the half-baked reform of 2010. This is the real cause of Malta’s very high car ownership (around 750 vehicles per 1000 population). As the Minister of Finance rightly exclaimed during a pre-budget public consultation exercise earlier this week traffic congestion is a major issue of concern, not just environmental but also economic. Impacting air quality, requiring additional land uptake to construct new roads or substantial funds to improve existing junctions traffic congestion is a drain on our resources. May I suggest that using EU funds to improve our road network  will delay by several years the shifting of custom to public transport, when we will have one which is worthy of such a description.

The mismanagement of water resources over the years is another important issue. May I suggest that millions of euros in EU funds have been misused  to institutionalise the mismanagement of water resources. This has been done through the construction of a network of underground tunnels to channel stormwater to the sea.  The approval of such projects is only possible when one  has no inkling of what sustainable management of water resources entails. Our ancestors had very practical and sustainable solutions: they practised water harvesting through the construction of water cisterns beneath each and every residence, without exception. If we had followed in their footsteps the incidence of stormwater in our streets, sometimes having the smell of raw sewage due to an overflowing public sewer, would be substantially less. And in addition we would also avoid overloading our sewage purification plants.

Our mismanagement of water resources also includes the over-extraction of ground water and the failure to introduce an adequate system of controls throughout the years such that  most probably there will be no more useable water in our water table very shortly. In this respect the various deadlines established in the Water Framework Directive would be of little use.

Whilst our Cabinet politicians have developed a skill of trying to identify loopholes in the EU’s acquis (SEA and Birds Directive) they also follow bad practices in environmental governance.

It is known that fragmentation of environmental responsibilities enables politicians to pay lip service to environmental governance but then creating real and practical obstacles in practice.

Jean Claude Juncker, the President elect of the EU Commission has not only diluted environmental governance by assigning responsibility for the environment together with that for fisheries and maritime policy as well as assigning energy with climate change. He has moreover hived off a number of responsibilities from the DG Environment to other DGs namely Health and Enterprise.

In Malta our bright sparks have anticipated his actions. First on the eve of EU accession they linked land use planning with the Environment in an Authority called MEPA with the specific aim of suffocating the environment function in an authority dominated by development. Deprived of human resources including the non-appointment of a Director for the Environment for long stretches of time, adequate environmental governance could never really get off the ground.

Now we will shortly be presented with the next phase: another fragmentation by the demerger of the environment and planning authority.

In the short time available I have tried to fill in the gaps in the environment section of the document produced by The Today Public Policy Institute. The said document rightly emphasises various achievements. It does however state that prior to EU accession the environment was not given its due importance by local policy makers. Allow me to submit that much still needs to be done and that the progress made to date is insufficient.

The pre-budget document : Malta’s ecological deficit

prebudget 2015

 

The deficit facing our country is not just a fiscal one. It is also a social and ecological one. The Finance Minister addresses the fiscal deficit and with various measures tries to address the social deficit. The ecological deficit is however very rarely mentioned.

We have just been informed that the enormous tunnels constructed as part of the storm water management plan is on target and that Malta will soon be dumping a substantial part of our rainwater directly into the sea. For a country which lacks water resources this is suicidal.

Yet it is being carried out. EU funding for the project was also approved notwithstanding that dumping such large quantities of rainwater into the sea is anything but sustainable.

The pre-budget document published by the Minister of Finance in September ignores completely the ecological deficit. Now the Hon Minister is aware that ignoring the ecological deficit does not make it disappear. It makes it worse as the message driven home by the pre-budget document  is that there is nothing to worry about.

Water is not the only contributor to Malta’s ecological deficit. Waste management, air pollution, traffic management, biodiversity protection, land use planning, are other heavy contributors to the ecological deficit. I do not detect any keen interest in the matter at the Finance Ministry, as its main interest seems to be the construction industry which is being further encouraged, thereby increasing the ecological deficit by design. With such a limited vision it is no wonder that the ecological deficit did not make it to the pre-budget document.

Il-Gvern jiftaħar li ser jarmi l-ilma tax-xita fil-baħar

Malta storm

 

Spikkat l-aħbar il-bieraħ li x-xogħol fuq il-mina ta’ tnax-il kilometru li ser tiżbokka f’Ta’ Xbiex biex ittaffi l-impatt tal-għargħar wasal fl-aħħar.

Din il-mina ser isservi biex fiha jinġabar l-ilma tax-xita li jkun għaddej mit-toroq. Il-parti l-kbira ta’ dan l-ilma ser jintefa l-baħar. Il-Gvern qiegħed jiftaħar li dan l-ilma tax-xita ser jintefa’ fil-baħar.

Tajjeb dan? Dan hu ħela ta’ riżorsi u ma nistax nifhem min kien dak l-għaref li approva li juża’ l-miljuni ta’ euros f’fondi Ewropej biex narmu dan l-ilma tax-xita l-baħar.

Il-parti l-kbira ta’ dan l-ilma tax-xita ikun fit-toroq minħabba li ħafna bini li inbena matul dawn l-aħħar 50 sena huwa mingħajr bir. Għal din ir-raġuni l-ilma tax-xita mill-bjut ta’ dan il-bini jispiċċa fit-toroq jew jintefa’ fid-drenaġġ li għax ma jlaħħaqx ifur fit-toroq ta’ diversi lokalitajiet.

Mela meta l-Gvern (ta’ Gonzi) ta’ bidu għal dan il-proġett kien qed jagħmel tajjeb għall-abbużi li saru mill-industrija tal-bini tul dawn l-aħħar 50 sena. Il-Gvern sikwit jipprietka li min iħammeġ għandu jnaddaf (the polluter pays). Allura għax ma darx fuq min kien responsabbli u ġiegħlu jerfa’ l-konsegwenzi ta’ egħmilu?

Flok ma mexa b’responsabbilta, l-Gvern daħħal idejh fil-but tagħna u mill-kaxxa ta’ Malta kif ukoll mill-fondi Ewropej qed jagħmel tajjeb għall-ħsara kbira li l-industrija tal-bini għamlet tul is-snin.

Din ir-realta’ ma jgħidulkomx biha meta jkunu qed jippużaw għar-ritratti.

Ta' Xbiex storm water

 

 

Sustainable water policy required

rainwater harvesting

Malta needs a sustainable water policy that is implemented rather than just being talked about.

A sustainable water policy has a long-term view. Addressing today’s needs, it keeps in focus the requirements of future generations. It would protect all our sources of water while ensuring that this basic resource is valued as an essential prerequisite for life. Without water, life does not exist. With poor quality water or with depleted water resources we are faced with an inferior quality of life.

Measures to protect the water table are being implemented at a snail’s pace and risk being in place only when there is nothing left to protect. The number of metered boreholes is too little. The electronic tracking of water bowsers transporting ground water is stalled.

Alternattiva Demokratika considers that national institutions have been ineffective as the handling of groundwater is still a free for all.

Rainwater harvesting has been neglected for a long time. Building development, large and small, has ignored rainwater harvesting obligations. These obligations have been in place on a national level for over 130 years. However, they are more honoured in the breach.

Many residential units constructed in the past 40 years have no water cisterns. Consequently, rainwater is discharged onto our streets or directly into the public sewers. Flooding of streets and overflowing sewers are the result.

The Government has decided to tackle this by applying public funds to a problem created mostly by private developers. Through the storm water relief projects funded primarily by the European Union, the Government will, in effect, exempt the culprits. Instead of the polluter pays it will be the (European) taxpayers who will pay, thereby exempting the polluter from his responsibilities!

The developers have pocketed the profits while the taxpayer will foot the bill. This is the result of successive governments lacking the political will to penalise the culprits.

In addition, rainwater discharged into the public sewer is overloading the three sewage purification plants now in operation and, consequently, increasing their operating costs during the rainy season. These increased costs are shouldered by all of us, partly as an integral part of our water bills and the rest gobbling up state subsidies to the Water Services Corporation. This is due to the fact that water bills are a reflection of the operating costs of the WSC, which include the management of the public sewer and its contents!

Storm water plays havoc with residential areas, especially those constructed in low lying areas or valleys carved by nature for its own use and taken over by development throughout the years! Overdevelopment means that land through which the water table recharged naturally was reduced considerably throughout the past 40 years. Instead, storm water now gushes through areas with heavy concentrations of nitrates which end up charging the aquifer. A report by the British Geological Society has identified a 40-year cycle as a result of which it would take about 40 years of adherence to the EU Nitrates Directive to give back a clean bill of health to Malta’s water table.

Treated sewage effluent is being discharged into the sea. Being treated means that, for the first time in many years, our bathing waters are up to standard. But it also means that we are discharging into the sea millions of litres of treated sewage effluent that, with proper planning, could have been used as an additional water source for a multitude of uses. Instead, it is being discarded as waste.

After the sewage treatment plants were commissioned as an end-of-pipe solution at the far ends of the public sewer, the authorities started having second thoughts on the possible uses of treated sewage effluent. At this late stage, however, this signifies that means of transporting the treated sewage to the point of use have to be identified (at a substantial cost) when the issue could have been solved at the drawing board by siting a number of small treatment plants at points of use.

This could obviously not be done as the Government has no idea of what sustainable development is about. The Government led by Lawrence Gonzi excels in speaking on sustainable development, yet, he has failed miserably in embedding it in his Government’s method of operation.

I have not forgotten the speech from the throne read on May 10, 2008, by President Eddie Fenech Adami, on behalf of the Government, outlining the objectives of the legislature that is fast approaching its last days. The President had then stated: “The Government’s plans and actions are to be underpinned by the notion of sustainable development of the economy, of society and of the environment. When making decisions today, serious consideration will be given to the generations of tomorrow.”

In water policy, the Nationalist-led Government has failed miserably. The mess that it leaves behind is clear proof that during the past 25 years it has taken decisions that have completely ignored tomorrow’s generations.

published in The Times of Malta, December 1, 2012

The risk of being ill-prepared

Hurricane Sandy swept through the states of New York and New Jersey making it clear to all that the forces of nature, amplified and stronger as a result of climate change, will spare no one.

The impacts of climate change are here for all to see. The destructive power of nature is being made incrementally worse by a warming climate. In 2012, it was Hurricane Sandy that wreaked havoc on New York and New Jersey. In 2005, it was Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans.

The havoc left behind in New York and New Jersey has been documented by the visual media. Less evident was the damage and misery in Haiti and neighbouring Caribbean countries.

Nature does not discriminate; it does not distinguish between rich and poor. Nor does it distinguish between developed and undeveloped countries. It sweeps away all that lies in its path.

Large areas of New York were without electricity. Over 40,000 New Yorkers were homeless as a result of Hurricane Sandy. This made the news.

However, disaster-stricken Haiti has been hit much harder. More than 200,000 Haitians already in makeshift homes as a result of the 2010 earthquake are now homeless.

A cholera outbreak in Haiti could be made worse by floods. Haiti, which is an agricultural economy, has also suffered a large loss of crops. This will lead to food shortages compounding the misery of an already impoverished nation.

Meteorologists have commented that more hurricanes are occurring late in the season, even after their “normal” season has ended. A 2008 study had pointed out that the Atlantic hurricane season seems to be starting earlier and lasting longer.

Normally, there are 11 named Atlantic storms. The past two years have seen 19 and 18 named storms. This year, with one month to go, there are already 19 named storms.

It is not only in the Atlantic that the climate is changing. Earlier this month, the Meteorological Office informed us that, in Malta, October 2012 was the sixth hottest month on record since 1922. With an increased frequency we too are witnessing more intense storms, which are playing havoc with an ill-prepared infrastructure.

The civil protection issues resulting from flooding will be hopefully addressed through storm-water relief projects substantially funded by the EU. While this will go a long way towards reducing damage to life and limb, it addresses the effects while leaving the causes of flooding largely unaddressed.

Malta’s climate change adaptation strategy, adopted some time ago, had pointed towards the issue of rainwater harvesting, which has not and still is not given due importance in new developments both those on a large scale as well as those on a much smaller scale.

The lack of application of rainwater harvesting measures through the construction of appropriately-sized water cisterns is an important contributor to the flooding of Malta’s roads and the overflowing public sewers whenever a storm comes our way. This occurs irrespective of the severity of the storm. Addressing this cause would go a long way towards reducing the volume of storm water that has to be contained to prevent it from causing damage.

By now it should be clear that there is no political will to address the issue as such a measure would entail taking action against developers (large and small) who did not provide rainwater harvesting facilities in their quest to increase profits (or reduce costs) in their land development projects. This has been the unfortunate practice for the past 50 years. Old habits die hard.

The expenses required to tackle a principal cause of the problem has been shifted from the developers onto the public purse, this including the EU funds being utilised. This expense has to make good for the accumulated (and accumulating) incompetence in rainwater management by focusing on the effects but simultaneously ignoring the causes.

Therefore, when one speaks on the devastating impacts of nature and climate change it should be realised that some of these impacts are being amplified as a result of the way in which successive governments have mismanaged this country’s resources.

The impacts of flooding are the ones which leave a lasting impression due to their detailed documentation by the media. There are, however, other impacts that are as important and in respect of which a public debate is conspicuously absent. I refer in particular to the impact of rising temperatures on agriculture and health.

Higher temperatures will slowly change our agriculture as the type of crops that can withstand higher temperatures are generally different from those which are currently prevalent. In addition, higher temperatures means that we will have some alien insects flying around, some of which are disease carriers.

Not discussing these issues does not mean that they will disappear. It only means that we are ill-prepared for the inevitable impacts and the necessary changes.

There is much to be done. So far, we have barely scratched the surface.

Published in The Times of Malta Saturday November 10, 2012

A five drop policy

We need a five drop policy: a sustainable water policy which would treat with care our five sources of water.

Drop No. 1 is a drop of rainwater. We need to handle rainwater with care. If we harvest it appropriately we will be able to make use of it when it is required. If we harvest it we will also reduce its flow in streets and diminish substantially the overloading of our sewers whenever it rains.

Drop No. 2 is a drop of storm water. Storm water flowing through our streets can be substantially reduced if rainwater harvesting is done appropriately. The remaining storm water would then be less of a danger to life and limb. It would be less of a civil protection issue and much more an exercise of collecting rainwater from streets to be utilised for non-potable purposes.

Drop No. 3 is a drop of ground water. Ground water has been mishandled for years on end. It is time that we realise that this resource which has been collected and stored by nature is finite. Through the years it has been over-extracted such that the quality of what’s left is compromised. It has also been contaminated by human activity, primarily agriculture, such that it would take a minimum of 40 years to reverse the process.

Drop No. 4 is a drop of treated sewage effluent. Treated sewage effluent is being discarded as a waste when it should be valued as a very precious resource. Treating sewage before discharging it into the sea honours Malta’s obligations under the Urban Wastewater Directive of the European Union. However throwing it away into the sea is an unsustainable practice which should be discontinued. We should appreciate its value and put it to good use. At the moment we are discharging treated sewage effluent into the sea at three points along our coast and then taking it up again at other points to produce potable water through our reverse osmosis plants!

Drop No. 5 is a drop of sea water.  Sea water is much cleaner nowadays due to sewage being treated before discharging into the sea. This has improved substantially our bathing waters. But sea water is also the source of over 55% of our potable water which we process through our reverse osmosis plants.

These five drops of water make up our water resources.

Water is of strategic importance to ensure a healthy eco-system, for our quality of life as well as for our economy.  Government can and should do much more to protect this precious resource. But we should also consider how we could improve our input by using this resource properly.

A sustainable water policy is a five drop policy through which each and every one of us values each and every source of water.

This post was originally published in di-ve.com on Friday 9th November 2012