from OccupyCorporatism Website
There is an estimated 366 million, trillion gallons of water on planet Earth.
That number appears to be fixed, according to UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Council of the International Hydrological Program (HIP). The alarmist threat of man-made climate change states that where and how this water manifests itself in hydraulic flux across our biosphere is questionable.
The HIP are a UN program system devoted to researching and finding natural water resources and managing those resources found. While the UN is well aware that the necessity of water as a vital source for life means the retention of power over all life, they are well into their schemes to develop global governance over all sources of fresh, clean water.
The IPCC document HS 15332 Climate Change Impacts - Securitization of Water, Food, Soil, Health, Energy and Migration explains how the UN plans to secure resources to use at their disposal.
Once those resources are under the complete control of the IMF they become assets to be reallocated back to the enslaved nations for a price.
This scheme makes water sources under central privatization cost more and become less accessible to those who desperately need it. Water prices rise while the quality of it diminishes. This forces natives in places like South Africa and India to collect water from polluted streams and rivers, which compromises their health.
The cycle in complete when those who had their water stolen from them through coercion die from contaminated water that they were forced to use.
If the alarmist view is taken as fact (regardless of the empirical data to disprove it), then rising sea levels will somehow allow more water to evaporate in the atmosphere, lowering water table levels dramatically. Estimations state that hydro-electric dams, like the Hoover Dam, would cease generating electricity by 2024.
While some areas on Earth, under climate change computer models, are expected to become wetter, some are equally expected to become drier.
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) claims that from research flooding worldwide takes an estimated 25,000 lives and is responsible for economic loses that add up to $60 billion annually.
Reworking of highways to elevated areas and moving infrastructure from coastlines are a challenge for alarmist engineers. Relying on policymakers and behavioral shifts are at the core of the alarmist perspective. Cities must evolve from out-of-control consumerism to eco-friendly examples of moderation, just as we see in Transition Towns.
Engineers and planners, working with Agenda 21 policies in mind, are devising “ecosystem-based” responses to protecting the biodiversity of land and animals under the guidelines set forth by the UN.
When it comes to land conservation, the UN is explicit as to how they want to ensure its success. Schemes that are devised to meter the output of resources and control how much is used by an individual are being made available to governments through allocation of taxpayer money under the direction of the UN Sustainable Development initiatives and Millennium Development Goals.
Over the past two decades, scientists have been using a cheap method called ocean fertilization that is the dumping of iron dust into the oceans in order to stimulate the growth of CO2 breathing phytonplankton.
Under guidelines of UNESCO, ocean fertilization is conducted under the assumption that they are “adding nutrients, or increasing the nutrient supply from deep waters” when really they are polluting the oceans with a toxic metal.
Small scale experiments have confirmed that iron seeding of the oceans does promote the phytonplankton’s growth. Yet, ocean fertilization causes catastrophic effects, such as creating oxygen-depleted dead zones in the world’s oceans.
The Royal Society, who supports these seeding oceans efforts, admits that the deduction of CO2 it would facilitate is a negligible 10 parts per million which would not have any real impact on global temperatures.
J. Gary Lawrence, adviser to former President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development said :
Local governments and municipalities are utilizing the capture of rain-water under strict regulation.
It is not meant for any individual to capture rain-water for private use. The community as a whole, under Agenda 21 control and distribute water resources to all; as long as there is enough. Watersheds, controlled by local governments who adhere to Agenda 21 policies would control who gets access to water, how much and how much it will cost the individual.
The UN Environmental Program (UNEP) in a UN-Water Survey of 130 Countries Status Report have forced reformation through international water laws that apply pressure under the guise of “expanding populations, urbanization and climate change”.
While clean drinking water for humans is controlled, improvements designed to ensure freshwater reserves for the ecosystem are first and foremost.
Management and use of water under the international agreement known as Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) was back at the 1992 UN Conference on Sustainable Development. This is a part of the Agenda 21 plan.
Cooperation of the UNEP and the UN-Water, an inter-agency mechanism to control freshwater resources, relates UN policies to governments on how to allocate their assets.
Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP executive director, said:
Steiner believes that integrating UN policies for water resource management will facilitate a sustainable approach to water. The needs of the global population, which is expected to rise to 9 billion by 2050, will demand total governance.
The UN blames population growth combined with communities in rural areas increase the necessity of stricter guidelines to avert,
The UN “suggests” that by 2015 all countries develop financing strategies and action programs that adhere to the IWRM.
They want all nations to report to the UNEP concerning water resources management so that the UN can assess their progress and make changes as they see fit.
Simply put, the securitization of water on a global scale, will be run by the United Nations only.
Their target recommendations will then be directed to individual governments to be made into laws. The citizens of those nations will have no choice but to follow the laws of their countries; if they are to get their ration of life-giving water.
Even in industrialized nations, this will mean the difference between access to fresh, clean water and having to use polluted water sources which threaten our health and well-being.