Letter to the Editor. E-mail opinions@kykernel.com.
Would you turn on your faucet and leave it running for days just for fun?
Would you go to the store, buy thousands of dollars worth of food and then leave it rotting in the sun in order to have a good time?
Of course you wouldn’t, because it would be incredibly wasteful.
However, if you participated in Christian Student Fellowship’s annual record-breaking water balloon fight last Friday, then you might as well have done both of these things, and on a much larger scale.
We are in the midst of a global water crisis.
According to the United Nations, one out of every six people currently does not have adequate access to clean, safe drinking water.
Further, 2.5 billion people do not have access to improved sanitation, which results in an increase in water-related diseases.
Billions of people around the world cannot access safe water on a daily basis, yet last Friday 5,976 people on UK’s campus threw enough water balloons at one another to provide 1,000 people with safe drinking water for 23 days.
All of this was, according to UK CSF campus minister Brian Marshall, for the purpose of “thousands of smiles and high fives and memorable stories.”
I applaud the CSF in their mission to enjoy life to the fullest, but why must they squander such a precious and rare resource in order to do so?
Couldn’t they think of a way to break a world record, have fun and not waste thousands of gallons of the one resource that this planet needs the most?
We live in an age where we all must be mindful of the consequences of our actions. We can no longer ignore our responsibility to this planet and its inhabitants.
And as an influential organization at the commonwealth’s largest university, the CSF has a responsibility to set a good example in all of its endeavors, be they record-breaking or not.
Esta Day is a Library and Information Science Graduate Student. E-mail opinions@kykernel.com.
I am not a member of CSF, and I feel that a large percentage of church activities are completely wasteful (e.g., the plans to spend up to half a million dollars rebuilding Touchdown Jesus). However, I feel that the argument presented by Esta Day is poorly thought out.
The given statistics about safe drinking water are troubling, but water is not exactly a “rare resource” in central Kentucky. While this is not the case for others in the world, CSF is not changing things by using a relatively small amount of water for entertainment. Water is different from, say, crude oil in that it is not a non-renewable resource; the problem is that it can be expensive to sanitize and transport water, and this is why so many in the world do not have access to clean drinking water.
You argue that the money could have been put to better use, but by this logic, we should cut out almost all of our spending. How much money is wasted every day on things that do no good for the world other than to entertain? Come January, will you be railing against Cats fans for spending god-knows-how-much on overpriced food and drinks at Rupp instead of giving it all to the Red Cross? People waste money all the time, and what CSF spent last week was just a drop in the proverbial ocean.
Finally, CSF does not claim to be an eco-friendly organization! This water balloon fight was not about conservation, it was about letting thousands of people have a good time and helping new students to settle in at UK.
There is more to say, but this is long-winded enough already.
Hi JL –
Thanks for reading and commenting on my letter to the editor.
First off, I don’t mention money at all, so I’m not sure where you got that idea. I simply stated that I wanted to see CSF think of a way to have fun that wasn’t so wasteful. I don’t care if CSF spends money or not. Money is made to be spent.
Secondly, I don’t use the word eco-friendly at all, either. The headline for my letter was created by the KY Kernel staff (this is a common practice among newspapers), and I had no say in what they came up with. I don’t think that their choice to use the term “eco-friendly” accurately described my argument, so, perhaps you should direct your grievance towards them. In that, I would be behind you, 100%.
I think you’re missing the purpose of my letter. I want people to think about the idea of wasting resources and the choices that we make. It doesn’t matter if they are “our” resources or someone else’s’, because the fact remains that we are all living on this planet and that whether you like it or not, what we do here does have larger environmental implications. Just because central Kentucky has an abundance of water does not make it right for anyone to waste even a single drop of it. By your argument, it would be alright for us to throw medical supplies at one another, because they are readily available in our region and the reason that most people lack access to them is because it is expensive and difficult to get them to those who need them.
Finally, if I may direct you to this news article:
http://www.lex18.com/news/level-1-drought-declared-in-24-western-kentucky-counties/
But it’s irrelevant because it’s not in central Kentucky, right?
My mistake on quoting the phrase “eco-friendly,” but my point there is that you can not expect every influential organization to be a model of every virtue. While it would be an admirable goal, CSF does not have a responsibility to you or to anyone else to carry out zero-waste activities. Now, if this were being done every week, or if UK Greenthumb had sponsored the event, strong criticism would be justified.
As for not mentioning money:
“Would you go to the store, buy thousands of dollars worth of food and then leave it rotting in the sun in order to have a good time?”
Money is an important factor here because it is a symbol of our wealth in resources (like water). If you imagine what could be accomplished if some of the money spent on luxuries were instead put into common-good efforts (like water treatment), then it becomes clear that you can not separate wealth from this subject.
Also, I am not trying to suggest that this water is “our” resource and that we should therefore we should do whatever we want with it. We do not use other products (like medical supplies) in a similar manner for several reasons, including concerns of cost and toxicity. I am saying that there is not an effective system in the region for moving large quantities of clean water around the world, so a small organization should not be harangued for using a resource that we have little capability of sharing or storing. What went into the ground that night will return to the water table for reuse.
“While it would be an admirable goal, CSF does not have a responsibility to you or to anyone else to carry out zero-waste activities.”
CSF and everyone else on this planet has a responsibility to each other and the environment to be mindful of their consumption and usage.
At the heart of what you’re saying is that it’s okay to waste water, as long as we have lots of it and it’s cheap.
And if you had any idea what happens when water gets absorbed into the ground, you’d understand that it isn’t as simple as “What went into the ground that night will return to the water table for reuse.” First it must filter through all of the chemicals in the grass, and then it must go through the storm drain system before it makes it back to streams. And I’m sure you know that Lexington’s storm drain and sewer systems are terribly outdated? In fact, our water quality is so bad that the EPA sued the city in 2006.
Statements like yours make it crystal clear why people don’t think that having “The World’s Largest Water Balloon Fight” is a big deal.