Water Futures to be traded like oil and gold?

Jesse Ransom (FFS) said:

I believe there is a meaningful distinction between speculating on the evolving cost of a thing you will in the future need for its intrinsic functionality, and encouraging speculation on the market value without specific concern for the intrinsic value of the thing.

I agree, but the only difference is this is mainstream and much more visible. 
 

People have been speculating on the value of water for many decades. I used to work for a farmer who farmed 9000 acres. He invested heavily in water value, and became more of a farm water lobbiest.  He knew every political leader in Washington, and hosted dozens of them in his home.  He frequently told me he didn't care much about the money from his crops, but control of water rights was where his money was. 
 

I'm happy to see this go more mainstream where more of us can be be aware of the importance and value, and be involved in influencing direction and policy. 
 

If we all see water commodity prices rise, we can use it as a call to action. When my old boss just makes dirty water deals in Washington that line his pockets, none of us know, but all of us pay.

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

Name another commodity that is literally required to sustain life.

Insulin.

But it's ok to pay for that. 

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

Nothing like the monitation to create value and control of something that should be a basic human right. 

Ah.... how confusing and violent the future looks.  People talk about human rights, and this "right" to water is presumably derived from that most basic right, the right to life.  Unfortunately, the resources to which we have access are quite finite, and as the population grows, and those resources become scarcer, people will begin to see their right to life is really just the right to the amount of life you are able to pay for.  This is already the system we live in.  It will just become more obvious as things like water (or air) that sustain life become harder to acquire.  You can't just walk up to a river or lake and scoop out the water you need.  That doesn't belong to you.  We already have a system to deal with thieves.

In reply to WilD :

Why not? I run water through a water from rivers and creeks through a water purifier when I am out bikepacking

fanfoy said:

Water is about to be traded like oil???

E36 M3! Canada is about to be invaded so that the US can bring us democracy!!!

I'm out!

Great Lakes Compact

Great Lakes Charter

If the SW US tried to siphon off Great Lakes water, there'd be a civil war and a lot of states would ally with Canada.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Plus, you've got the whole "rocky mountains" thing that makes it pretty difficult to send water the wrong way over (in any significant quantity at least). 

Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Plus, you've got the whole "rocky mountains" thing that makes it pretty difficult to send water the wrong way over (in any significant quantity at least). 

Well, yeah.  There IS that.  It's a pain at current water values and shipping costs.  But who knows what will happen to water futures due to speculation, or pipeline technology?

Manufacturing used to be done near where the products were sold, now they are shipping stuff from one plant to all over the world.

Comment was regarding a legislator from Arizona (IIRC) saying that if the SW ran out of water, they'd just get it from the Great Lakes.  And the response was, well, you'd see how many rifles we have up here.

Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Plus, you've got the whole "rocky mountains" thing that makes it pretty difficult to send water the wrong way over (in any significant quantity at least). 

Look out west. California solved the problem of pumping water over mountains. 
I proposed that flood water going north should be sent south to the Ogllala aquifer.  Rich farm land is sucking up all the ground water forcing farmers to go deeper and deeper with their wells. 
Use a tunnel boring machine  to take that flood water and pump it into the aquaifer filling it back up. 
The Dakota's and Minnesota will gladly take a fee for surplus water. 
The great thing is the plains have great wind power. So wind generators can efficiently pump all the water that's needed. 
     They could do the same thing with Mississippi Flood waters pump them to western Texas and New Mexico.   Put the tunnels right under the freeways. So no issue with right of way. 

93EXCivic said:

In reply to WilD :

Why not? I run water through a water from rivers and creeks through a water purifier when I am out bikepacking

You can also grab a bunch of berries from a hedgerow, or an apple from a tree near the road.  Just because a small diversion goes un-noticed and nobody says anything now, does not mean you could just take as much as you our your family might want from that source indefinitely.  There are places in the US today where you can buy land with surface water running over or adjacent to it and never be entitled to a single drop, nor can you access an aquifer below in some cases.  See the comments about the legality of rain barrels in the previous comments for how nuts this can get  (the point is, in some regions, every diversion of water is contentious).  The idea that a finite resource will always be available for the taking will lead to problems eventually.  Maybe not in our lifetime, but eventually.  Arid areas are going to see conflict first, obviously.

WilD said:

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

Nothing like the monitation to create value and control of something that should be a basic human right. 

Ah.... how confusing and violent the future looks.  People talk about human rights, and this "right" to water is presumably derived from that most basic right, the right to life.  Unfortunately, the resources to which we have access are quite finite, and as the population grows, and those resources become scarcer, people will begin to see their right to life is really just the right to the amount of life you are able to pay for.  This is already the system we live in.  It will just become more obvious as things like water (or air) that sustain life become harder to acquire.  You can't just walk up to a river or lake and scoop out the water you need.  That doesn't belong to you.  We already have a system to deal with thieves.

Maybe not in the arid west. However with Minnesota we have 15,000 lakes. Plus three  headwaters of major rivers.  The Mississippi, Red River of the north ( flowing into Hudson's bay ) and the head waters of the Great Lakes. 
    I pump as much water out of my lake as I want (as do all my neighbors). That's why I have more apples than I can harvest. 

As do we, Frenchy.  I live in Michigan and my immediate family owns quite a bit of land fronting water, above water, and surrounding water.  We are three people.  There may be mobs of people who want some of that water in the future...

In reply to WilD :

There is a delicate line between greed and need. I'll admit I waste water.  Growing apples, washing cars, going boating etc.

Much of the country. Heck, world that's not possible. 

Does that make me ( and You ) wrong? Or are we just fortunate?