Easy to understand and quite well analyzed. Thank you!

Climate issues affects China's economy too

I'm not the only former believer urging American prosecutors to lay criminal chargers to the leading IPCC scientists and media news editors for knowingly inciting this needless panic of CO2 climate crisis. Climate Change Crisis wasn’t sustainability. It was a 25 year old failed CO2 death threat to billions of children. Now who’s the fear mongering American neocon Republican? Bush had is Iraq War of lies and fear mongering, now Oboma has his, although he never even mentioned the “crisis” in his last state of the union address.

To fully understand the Euphrates conflict, it would be best to first have a look at my humble work entitled "The Middle East, War for Water" (enlarged edition), chapter 9, pages 211-244 and chapter 5, pages 87-92.

We have done very little study on saving. This article has provided an example that what Americans say is not always right, at least in theory. The US, the most advanced country on earth, which is also the ealiest to implement public utility regulations. There must be much difference in regulations among states and counties given various different situations. Therefore, Chinese readers shouldn't be surprised that there are so many water companies in the US.

In fact there is relatively low level of monopoly in water industry. Most of water utilities are small regional firms. So no wonder there are so many water companies in the US. On the contrary, the level of concentration is high in electricity industry. At present, there are over 3600 electricity companies. Therefore, it is not appropriate that the article started by saying that water companies have natural monopoly. In addition, accoding to the renowned Aemrican Prof. Joseph Tomain, the most important nature of monopoly is that the costs would decrease with the expansion of the scale or the increase of the revenue, which would benefit comsumers. Of course, the assumption is that the government is able to "control" and the untilitles's financials have to be transparent and are monitored by public.

I imagined that problems encountered by this lady mentioned in the article. I don't think these problems are actual issues. Because the water demand management is actually implemented in many places including California with remarkable achievements. The key to success is to involve authourities, not to fight alone like the way that lady did. The utitlies as a company is focused on profit, providing a public service, ie, serve the taxpayers with their own money. In order to attract investors, a reasonable investment return has to be in place. In China, the annual return is about 4-5%. Don't forget, the overriding purpose of the investment is provide a public service. If the water consumption is declining, it's necessary to increase water rates so as to reaslise the profit target or financial balance in order to achieve the necessary investment returns set out by law. It is the common place within elelctricity industry. The bottum line is that the profit of a water company should be partially or entirely decoupled with the revenue.

Go back to the lady's problems. She is a good person. Unfortunately the fact is that being a good person doesn't mean that good deed can get done as the deed can not be accompolished by her indivivual effort only. Put it plainly, her company lacks a clear business strategy, especially from the water saving point of view. It is possible that the local government's water saving startegy is only at the superfacial level without diving itself deep down the issue, similar to situations in China.

I will explain how to tackle this next.