Water Aid Ads

Do schools still teach history?

Wind it back 150 years - your great great grand parents were drinking worse filth than anyone in Africa.
 
Do schools still teach history?

Wind it back 150 years - your great great grand parents were drinking worse filth than anyone in Africa.

If you can't have water from the county in Florida then you have to drill 30-60ft down
it's not drinkable unless you put it through a pump with 2 filters and then it still tastes like crap.

But it's ok for the sod(grass) but leaves a brown stain on your house :(
 
Did they rely on foreign aid to resolve their water problems or did they fix it themselves?

Water infrastructure projects cost millions of pounds, millions of pounds that countries like the ones in Africa cannot afford.

Lots of funds are diverted to Africa and other nations to help them get up and running, but the main targets are cities as it would be prohibitively expensive to supply the whole country.

The company I work for have an international arm that specialise in Water and Wastewater treatment construction. Feel free to read some of the info at www.biwater.com

Good example is the one which was constructed in Khartoum, Sudan just recently.

http://www.biwater.com/casestudies/detail.aspx?id=61
 
Did they rely on foreign aid to resolve their water problems or did they fix it themselves?

The surplus of labour and money caused by the industrial revolution fixed it. We also imported knowledge from the continent.

If we were starting from square one I doubt we could afford plumbing for London today.
 
This is kind of my point. Why settle so far from water? Why not move elsewhere? Why not attempt to find a clean water source/avoid polluting your only water source?

That's what successful societies have done in the past. Why aren't they able to do the same?

Maybe the land where they can farm isn't near the water. Maybe the land where they can live isn't either.

Honestly, if it was as simple as you're making out, do you not think they might have thought of those things too?
 
Water infrastructure projects cost millions of pounds, millions of pounds that countries like the ones in Africa cannot afford.

Lots of funds are diverted to Africa and other nations to help them get up and running, but the main targets are cities as it would be prohibitively expensive to supply the whole country.

The company I work for have an international arm that specialise in Water and Wastewater treatment construction. Feel free to read some of the info at www.biwater.com

Good example is the one which was constructed in Khartoum, Sudan just recently.

http://www.biwater.com/casestudies/detail.aspx?id=61

Most rural houses in N. America aren't on any kind of water infrastructure. They are on private wells and septic that are dug by the home/land owner. There is no government action or funding involved other than getting a permit to dig.

Why can't Africans do that themselves? If you want water dig a well. If there is no water table DON'T LIVE THERE.
 
Most rural houses in N. America aren't on any kind of water infrastructure. They are on private wells and septic that are dug by the home/land owner. There is no government action or funding involved other than getting a permit to dig.

Why can't Africans do that themselves? If you want water dig a well. If there is no water table DON'T LIVE THERE.

One year you have rain, the next you don't.

Just get on that bus yeah?
 
I do wonder if there is any mileage in the school of thought that says perhaps this is natures way of saying people shouldnt live there? People should live in an area where there are natural resources to support them, surely?

Throwing money at people living in inhospitable areas is surely just a sticking plaster?
 
Did they rely on foreign aid to resolve their water problems or did they fix it themselves?

So, you're OP was really a thinly disguised attempt to express your dissatisfaction with providing foreign aid? Probably hoping everyone else would agree with you as well?

Here's a newsflash for you - we have a moral responsibility to help those less fortunate than ourselves, a fact recognised by the current ccoalition government as the foreign aid budget is one of the few to escape the swingeing cuts they've levelled at other areas.
 
tbh the OP makes a valid point. Other societies have started, grown and prospered without external aid and they've either overcome the barriers, or have eased the situation through ingenuity or relocation. There is an argument that aid does as much bad as good, but it isnt a very popular line, and wouldnt get PMs elected.
 
Most rural houses in N. America aren't on any kind of water infrastructure. They are on private wells and septic that are dug by the home/land owner. There is no government action or funding involved other than getting a permit to dig.

Why can't Africans do that themselves? If you want water dig a well. If there is no water table DON'T LIVE THERE.

The ideas is the aid provides money for pipes and drilling equipment/specialists.

[TW]Fox;17810357 said:
I do wonder if there is any mileage in the school of thought that says perhaps this is natures way of saying people shouldnt live there? People should live in an area where there are natural resources to support them, surely?

Throwing money at people living in inhospitable areas is surely just a sticking plaster?

I know what you mean, it could also be a way of mother nature suggesting that there are too many people in a location. In nature if this happens things die out to a sustainable level...


I know this will get a few nasty responses but i'm going to post anyway... My initial thought when those adverts say something like "every 15 seconds a child dies in Africa from dirty water" is "good". Yeah I'm evil but the population of Africa has exploded in recent years, and it's just going to get worse. The more people there the more they destroy the natural environment ,and we lose biodiversity. Yeah slightly hypocritical me sat in a building with clean running water but that's my feeling... Reduce your birth rate to a sustainable level then I'll start thinking about providing aid to help keep your 2-3 kids alive. When you're having far more than that (on average) then I'll not bother...
 
[TW]Fox;17810357 said:
I do wonder if there is any mileage in the school of thought that says perhaps this is natures way of saying people shouldnt live there? People should live in an area where there are natural resources to support them, surely?

You mean like Iceland? Which ironically has the highest quality of life in the world.

icelandlandscape.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom