[SCRAPPED] Encouraging Water Reclamation

[Agualia]

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses - Mild

The World Assembly,

Recognizing that a large number of nations are facing significant water shortages, affecting their populations and their economies, that could be solved,

Observing that not all water uses require the water to be drinkable,

Aware that recycled water can be used for various types of irrigation, industrial applications, and many other uses,

Noting with satisfaction that using recycled water in daily activity can reduce the diversion of water from delicate ecosystems, therefore reducing the strain on the animals and plants living in these areas,

Convinced that the use of recycled water can substantially reduce the strain on water resources as a whole,

Taking note that international legislation is needed as water management is a global issue and needs to be faced by all nations,

Noting that the past resolutions on water and water management do address the issue of water reclamation,

Affirming that re-thinking the uses and management of water resources is essential and clear a resolution should deal with this;

Hereby,

1. Defines the following for the purpose of this resolution:
   
   1. "Greywater" as water that has been treated and can be used as irrigation water or other non-potable uses,
   2. "Water Reclamation Facility" as a facility that treats various types of wastewater and turns it into greywater,
2. Mandates that all nations introduce adequate water reclamation facilities in accordance to the nation's economic, technological and
   logistical capacities,
   
   1. Water reclamation facilities can include sewage treatment or greywater reuse systems,
3. Requires major urban areas to create water reclamation scheme plans for their area,
   
   1. This can be done through incentives or legislation,
   2. Water Reclamation schemes for water uses excluding drinking water,
4. Urges member states to research the possible uses of recycled water.

[Agualia]

Hello everyone,

Here is a new resolution that deals with an incredibly important issue which is water resource management.
I believe this is a resolution that needs to be adopted. We need to address the issue of water management as soon as possible!

Thank You!

[Honeydewistania]

Hello everyone,

Here is a new resolution that deals with an incredibly important issue which is water resource management.
I believe this is a resolution that needs to be adopted. We need to address the issue of water management as soon as possible!

Thank You!

Is this meant to complement me and Kenmorias proposal on desalination?

[Agualia]

Is this meant to complement me and Kenmorias proposal on desalination?

[/quote]

Hello Honeydewistania. Your resolution is an amazing resolution that also tackles the issue of water management and I believe that your resolution should be passed and be implemented in all member states. This resolution is a different area of the same issue. I believe that if both resolutions manage to pass, the issue of water management could, maybe, be resolved. Finally!!!

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Although you have posted a draft here, you’ve also submitted the proposal straight to the queue. Without a drafting period, in which people can spot feedback before submission, it’s incredibly difficult to make a piece of legislation capable of passing. Therefore, I encourage you to return the proposal to the drafting stage, so that other players can help to improve it.)

[Agualia]

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Although you have posted a draft here, you’ve also submitted the proposal straight to the queue. Without a drafting period, in which people can spot feedback before submission, it’s incredibly difficult to make a piece of legislation capable of passing. Therefore, I encourage you to return the proposal to the drafting stage, so that other players can help to improve it.)

Thank you for your feedback. I will wait until tomorrow to see how many approvals the proposal gets to see how it does, then I will decide whether or not to put the resolution in drafting stage. Thank you again.

[Grays Harbor]

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Although you have posted a draft here, you’ve also submitted the proposal straight to the queue. Without a drafting period, in which people can spot feedback before submission, it’s incredibly difficult to make a piece of legislation capable of passing. Therefore, I encourage you to return the proposal to the drafting stage, so that other players can help to improve it.)

Thank you for your feedback. I will wait until tomorrow to see how many approvals the proposal gets to see how it does, then I will decide whether or not to put the resolution in drafting stage. Thank you again.

Draft first. Submit later.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Relevant resolutions to read:

Clean Water Act: viewtopic.php?p=3123158#p3123158
Convention On Freshwater Shortages: viewtopic.php?p=34697391#p34697391
Preventing Groundwater Contamination: viewtopic.php?p=35370849#p35370849

Convention on Freshwater Shortages especially makes your attempt largely duplication, from what I can see.

[Astrobolt]

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Although you have posted a draft here, you’ve also submitted the proposal straight to the queue. Without a drafting period, in which people can spot feedback before submission, it’s incredibly difficult to make a piece of legislation capable of passing. Therefore, I encourage you to return the proposal to the drafting stage, so that other players can help to improve it.)

Thank you for your feedback. I will wait until tomorrow to see how many approvals the proposal gets to see how it does, then I will decide whether or not to put the resolution in drafting stage. Thank you again.

OOC: Your proposal will not get many approvals without a campaign. Withdraw your proposal, spend at least a few weeks drafting it, and then submit.

[Bananaistan]

...
Convention on Freshwater Shortages especially makes your attempt largely duplication, from what I can see.

OOC: I wouldn't agree. GAR#441, section 5 c is the relevant section. It is merely a recommendation. Section 2 in this proposal is a mandate.

Nonetheless, I would encourage the author to withdraw and continue drafting. Legal =/= good.

[Agualia]

After much consideration, I have decided to retract the resolution from the queue and therefore, is now in drafting

[Agualia]

...
Convention on Freshwater Shortages especially makes your attempt largely duplication, from what I can see.

OOC: I wouldn't agree. GAR#441, section 5 c is the relevant section. It is merely a recommendation. Section 2 in this proposal is a mandate.

Nonetheless, I would encourage the author to withdraw and continue drafting. Legal =/= good.

Thank you very much bananaistan

[Potted Plants United]

OOC: I wouldn't agree. GAR#441, section 5 c is the relevant section. It is merely a recommendation. Section 2 in this proposal is a mandate.

OOC: Wouldn't that make it an amendment then? If the WA has previously only recommended something, can it then turn around and mandate it? It's no longer just a recommendation (as per the previous resolution) if it's now a mandate.

[Agualia]

OOC: Relevant resolutions to read:

Clean Water Act: viewtopic.php?p=3123158#p3123158
Convention On Freshwater Shortages: viewtopic.php?p=34697391#p34697391
Preventing Groundwater Contamination: viewtopic.php?p=35370849#p35370849

Convention on Freshwater Shortages especially makes your attempt largely duplication, from what I can see.

I believe that the "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" and the draft here are very different in terms of the specificity. The "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" just states that it is a possibility.

[Kenmoria]

OOC: I wouldn't agree. GAR#441, section 5 c is the relevant section. It is merely a recommendation. Section 2 in this proposal is a mandate.

OOC: Wouldn't that make it an amendment then? If the WA has previously only recommended something, can it then turn around and mandate it? It's no longer just a recommendation (as per the previous resolution) if it's now a mandate.

(OOC: I seem to remember that this was discussed some time ago, and the conclusion that was reached was that it is legal for a proposal to expand a previous recommendation into a mandate. The example given was of a parent recommending their child not to walk on the grass, and then a security guard ordering the same. The guard’s prohibition doesn’t contradict the parent’s recommendation, but reinforces it.)

[Potted Plants United]

I believe that the "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" and the draft here are very different in terms of the specificity. The "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" just states that it is a possibility.

OOC: Hence my question about the amendment above (this is Araraukar on another account). (To Kenmoria: Any chance you remember if that was an official GenSec decision or just GAers talking amongst one another?)

However, if you're willing to work on drafting this, some pointers:

1. Definitions: You don't need to define water reclamation and recycled water if you're using them in the dictionary definition ways. You might instead explain the benefits of water reclamation in the preamble, which is the part of the proposal that you use to explain to people why this proposal is a good idea and should be done. Instead you might want to define "water reclamation facility" and "greywater", since those have several different definitions based on how you use them. Most water reclamation from wastewater (blackwater) produces greywater, in RL, that can be used to, say, irrigate crops, but is not safe to drink without boiling.

2. If you're talking about actually getting drinking water quality water out of such a reclamation facility, then you should definitely specify that. Right now "possible uses" is painfully vague. What is your actual aim here? Drinking water? Water for irrigation and manufacturing?

3. What about lowtech non-urban solutions such as using soil and natural biological processes to "filter" especially greywater back into groundwater? Or are you focused ONLY on hightech urban approaches?

[Agualia]

I believe that the "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" and the draft here are very different in terms of the specificity. The "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" just states that it is a possibility.

OOC: Hence my question about the amendment above (this is Araraukar on another account). (To Kenmoria: Any chance you remember if that was an official GenSec decision or just GAers talking amongst one another?)

However, if you're willing to work on drafting this, some pointers:

1. Definitions: You don't need to define water reclamation and recycled water if you're using them in the dictionary definition ways. You might instead explain the benefits of water reclamation in the preamble, which is the part of the proposal that you use to explain to people why this proposal is a good idea and should be done. Instead you might want to define "water reclamation facility" and "greywater", since those have several different definitions based on how you use them. Most water reclamation from wastewater (blackwater) produces greywater, in RL, that can be used to, say, irrigate crops, but is not safe to drink without boiling.

2. If you're talking about actually getting drinking water quality water out of such a reclamation facility, then you should definitely specify that. Right now "possible uses" is painfully vague. What is your actual aim here? Drinking water? Water for irrigation and manufacturing?

3. What about lowtech non-urban solutions such as using soil and natural biological processes to "filter" especially greywater back into groundwater? Or are you focused ONLY on hightech urban approaches?

Thank you very much for these precious pointers. This resolution had an aim to encourage water use for irrigation, manufacturing, etc...
I'm sure that the population's of member states wouldn't be keen on drinking "recycled water" so for now, it would be to keep it that way.
For the 3rd point, it would be both.
I will work on modifying the draft.

Thank you again!!

[Agualia]

Several modifications to the preamble have been made!

[Kenmoria]

I believe that the "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" and the draft here are very different in terms of the specificity. The "Convention On Freshwater Shortages" just states that it is a possibility.

OOC: Hence my question about the amendment above (this is Araraukar on another account). (To Kenmoria: Any chance you remember if that was an official GenSec decision or just GAers talking amongst one another?)

(OOC: It was discussed by Gensec, but doesn’t appear to have actually reached an official decision. Amusingly, it was you who brought up the example I partially remembered.)

[Agualia]

In relation to the questions about the uses of these new sources of water and if it is for drinking. Does 3b clarify that?

[Agualia]

I changed the definitions and added a new clause (4a)

[Araraukar]

(OOC: It was discussed by Gensec, but doesn’t appear to have actually reached an official decision. Amusingly, it was you who brought up the example I partially remembered.)

OOC: *checks the date of the post* Ah, yeah, at that point my long term memory storage (it's super weird what badly fitting medication can do to one's mind) thingy hadn't gotten quite back to normal yet, I honestly have no memory of that discussion whatsoever. Or maybe there were just too many similar ones on the general topic and they all kinda blurred together.

Still OOC: As for the proposal at hand...

Recognizing the importance of water to the daily lives of all,

Observing that water is used in various ways including urban, agricultural and industrial uses,

Further observing that today, there are water uses that do not require the water to be drinkable,

Aware that recycled water can be used for agricultural irrigation, industrial applications, irrigation in parks and golf course, and many other uses,

Noting with satisfaction that using recycled water in human activity can reduce the diversion of water from delicate ecosystems, therefore reducing the strain on the animals and plants living in these areas,

Okay, it's a cute essay but it doesn't quite address the issue. You want to think of the "3 Ws" in your preamble: WHAT is the problem you're seeking to solve, WHY does it need international legislation to handle, and WHY you think it hasn't been already sorted out by existing legislation.

So what is the problem you're trying to solve? Answer in your own words, don't rush to edit the proposal.

Why do you think it needs specifically unwieldy international legislation to deal with (especially as the current wording is vague to the point of being useless), rather than local regulations?

And why do you think it hasn't already been addressed by the existing resolutions that have to do with water issues? There are something like three or four total now, if you count the wetlands one.

Do note that just because something is legal as per the proposal rules to address, doesn't necessarily mean it is a good idea to write a resolution on. I am not saying this is a topic that simply cannot be legislated further on, but given that there are quite a few resolutions on water management already, you'll need to come up with some original oomph at using the preamble to convince people

Also, drop any mentions of humans (as the RL species - try t think of some other way to put it - because WA doesn't have just human populations) and golf courses (because there are SO huge controversies about watering golf courses and other such things that shouldn't exist where they've been built, when local people can't afford drinking water - that you honestly don't want to poke that wasp's nest!).

Convinced that the use of recycled water can substantially reduce the strain on today's and tomorrow's water resources,

What are "today's and tomorrow's water resources"? Couldn't you just drop "today's and tomorrow's" from it? And why don't you count the recycled water as a water resource?

Noting further that water reclamation is very energy efficient compared to other ways of getting water,

...nnnnnnot in most cases, because if you've got a river that you take irrigation water from with a simple pump, as compared to having to actually put water through intricate purification systems in a facility, and then pumping it across the landscape to where you want to use it, taking water from the river is definitely more energy efficient. In any case "energy efficient" is not what you want to be concerned about, here, but rather water pollution (see previous resolutions) and preventing that.

Affirming that re-thinking the uses and management of water resources is essential;

And?

Defines the following for the purpose of this resolution:

1. "Water Reclamation Facility" as a facility that treats wastewater and turns it into greywater,
2. "Greywater" as water that can be treated and used as irrigation water or other non-potable uses,

All water can be treated further, so if the water reclamation facility just produces slightly less dirty water, what good is it for anyway? Where are you "reclaiming" the water from that normal waster water treatment plant that then releases the purified water into the natural water systems, would not be already doing? Also, what kind of waste water are you treating? Some waste water is greywater to begin with!

Mandates that all nations introduce adequate water reclamation facilities in accordance to the nation's economic, technological and
logistical capacities,

Adequate what? What's the standard they must reach to be adequate? Do they need to process certain percentage of all waste water? Does rainwater in stormdrains count? Must they achieve certain level of purity in their output? What is the standard of adequacy?

1. Water reclamation facilities can include sewage treatment or greywater reuse systems,

They don't "reclaim" water, though, they just either purify it or reuse it. Where are you pulling the "reclamation" from? What or where are you reclaiming water from?

Requires member states to encourage cities/urban areas to use water reclamation schemes,

1. This can be done through incentives or legislation,
2. Water Reclamation schemes for water uses excluding drinking water,

What the fuck actually even is a "water reclamation scheme"? And requiring to encourage doesn't actually make anything to happen. Either encourage or require, don't try to do both at once. And this is supposed to BE the legislation, so actually write it up!

Urges member states to research the possible uses of recycled water,

1. Including agricultural uses such as irrigation.

[/list]

So you're requiring them to "reclaim" water from some unspecified source without any idea what they might do with it? Wouldn't it make much more sense that this first of all applied in places that are water deficient. If you live in the tropics and it rains every day for two hours, bucketing down, you're unlikely going to need to "reclaim" water or irrigate anything to begin with.

Needs a lot of work, but answering the "3 W" questions in your own words will be a good start.

[Slackertown]

The text seems to ramble a bit, but it's a good stab at an important issue.

[Agualia]

Taking into account the advice given on this forum, the draft has been modified.

[Agualia]

If no nation has any more ideas for changes or has anything against, well, then this draft is soon to submit!
Thank you for all the help in drafting the resolution. I believe that this is an incredibly important resolution that needs to be passed in order to tackle a major issue!