Andrei
I thank you for clarifying the "non-use fee" of Chile. As a tool to encourage wise and equitable use these fees make good sense ... as long as a majority of capable politicians with good personal integrity choose-instruct-monitor the persons who implement the program.
My reference to the blatant theft of public wealth through such fees in California
was the other side of the coin. A consistently poor choice of politicians through the past century allowed the criminal element of that state's private sector to set fees and profit hugely from this, part of their land/water/energy combined "grand scheme" that presently robs the public and private treasury of at least $60 billion yearly.
Hopefully the news media of Chile will be able to avoid the rigid control by profiteers that blinded Californian journalists and therefore the public to their foolishness and so brought them to the brink of bankruptcy. Given good and complete information the public will recognize what is best for them and vote wisely, ignoring "something for nothing" promises like those that have given America its grossly bloated bureacracies, perverted water management policies and monstrous body of unneeded infrastructure. If the Press of Chile can be deceived-coerced-bought like that of California so that they fool most of the people most of the time then a few cunning criminals will derive immense windfall profit from mismanaging this most critical public resource.
A side note:: Your update on the use of fog collection nets and related tech in Chile would interest many on this forum. (It is in low gear just idling along when it should be presenting all sides of water management issues.) Many communities in California could benefit from this form of "rainwater harvesting" if their citizens are well-informed enough to choose leaders who will apply it wisely.
Thnaks for your good work
Jim Marple
==========
Re: The potential of non-use water supply fees Message List
Reply Message #13795 of 13819 < Prev | Next >
Dear Jim and other colleagues,
I briefly describe here the "non-use fee" introduced in the 2005 reform of
the Water Code. Additional information is available in our publications:
http://www.eclac.org/drni/noticias/circulares/4/22044/Carta22in.pdf
and
http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/0/26200/lcl2556e.pdf
Yours sincerely,
Andrei
"In virtually all jurisdictions, the allocation and retention of water
rights are contingent upon putting them to a socially recognized
beneficial use ... While the terminology is not uniform, the notion that
water rights risk forfeiture if not used, or if not used according to the
terms of a license or permit, is found in water laws of virtually all the
countries of the world ...
In 1981, Chile with its new Water Code departed from the beneficial use
doctrine ... In Chile, the granting of water rights without the
requirement of beneficial and effective use had given rise to various
situations that were detrimental to the country, such as the accumulation
of water rights for hoarding and speculation, as important barriers to
entry for competitors in various markets, particularly electricity
generation, and in order to block allocation of water rights for those who
actually needed them for productive projects ... The existence of water
markets did not alleviate the situation, since the incentives for selling
water rights, in the absence of penalty of forfeiture for non-use, were
minimal compared with the strategic advantages of controlling a key
production input.
In response to these problems, the Constitutional Court has acknowledged
the State?s right to regulate the conditions that are imposed on water
rights, and the antimonopoly agencies have recommended that no further
water rights be allocated in the hydroelectric sector until the Water Code
has been modified to include provisions that guarantee effective water
use. Finally, in 2005, the Water Code was reformed and now ...:
- A license fee will be charged for unused water rights, to act as a
deterrent against hoarding and speculation. This fee will be charged in
cases where there are no water abstraction works and will be governed by a
table of areas, given that water is scarcer and therefore more expensive
in the north of the country.
- Requests of new rights will be limited to actual project needs. This
means that all incoming requests will have to include an explanatory note
for applicants to explain how the water will be used. The authorities have
the power to limit the amount requested if this does not correspond to the
intended use (on the basis of a pre-established table of uses and
demands).
- The President will now have the authority to protect the public interest
by excluding water resources from economic competition when they need to
be reserved for public supply in the absence of other means of obtaining
water or, in the case of non-consumptive rights, in the event of
exceptional circumstances of national interest."
Fri May 14, 2010 6:29 pm
----------------------------------------------------------
Message #13795 of 13819
RockWare AqQA�
create Piper, Stiff, Ternary and eight other diagram types
� paste data directly from Excel
� convert units with a mouse click - no more keying in mole weights
� use many built-in spreadsheet tools
� compare replicate analysis and check standards
� mix samples
� flag exceedances of regulatory limits
� check for internal consistency against AWWA standards
� calculate fluid properties such as water type, TDS, hardness,
conductivity, and carbonate speciation, and
� calculate calcite saturation and CO2 fugacity.
http://www.rockware.com or 303.278.3534 X104
To Post a message to WaterForum, send it to: waterforum@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send a blank message to: waterforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
To get a DIGEST version /or for administration E-MAIL: waterforum@rockware.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.