Sometimes signals can get mixed. This is certainly true in the South African water sector and is particularly true in Gauteng, which contains the bulk of the national economy.
The big driver of water insecurity risk is population growth. South Africa’s population growth is exponential, having tripled in the last four decades.
The simple reality is that the total population has been growing at a rapid rate since before the democratic transition in 1994. This means two things.
The first is that the water supply needs to be increased at a rate that matches this population growth.
Second, the economy must grow at a rate that matches population growth to create jobs, or we risk triggering a revolution of unmet expectations.
These two forces are in constant opposition to each other and are at the very heart of water as a national security risk.
A diminishing availability of water is centrifugal because it acts as a destabilising or destructive process in any political economy.
The other force, economic growth, is centripetal because it brings stability through economic prosperity, which creates jobs. More importantly, this centripetal force brings comfort to investors.
As a secondary matter, we need to understand this centripetal force as being the generator of the taxes needed to pay the salaries of civil servants and upgrade infrastructure.
Both these forces are continually at play in any functional economy, but they are particularly acute in a water-constrained country like South Africa. This makes communication difficult for the government because the messaging must be positioned within the jaws of these two opposing forces.
A good example of this is the stated objective promoted by the Platform for a Water Secure Gauteng: that we need a 10% reduction in water use per capita.
This is necessary if we are to have a sustainable water supply well into the future, but, communicated in isolation, it runs the risk of inflaming public anger. After all, with such high system losses — as high as 50% in places — the public perceive that they are being blamed for something over which they have no direct control.
The political risk with this message is that it deepens the trust deficit that already exists and can become a trigger for protest action.
Rand Water
We obviously need to reduce the daily water consumption per capita, but in a way that doesn’t provoke a counterproductive response from an increasingly angry public. It is in this context that we need to understand the processes under way at Rand Water.
What is technically known as System 5 has been in the planning pipeline for some time. The essence of this programme is the ultimate increase in supply of 1,200 megalitres per day (Ml/d) into the Gauteng network. That’s 1,200 million litres per day, catering for an additional 2.4 million people. These are big numbers.
This will be done in two phases, each delivering 600Ml/d. The first phase, known as 5A, is currently being rolled out, with 150Ml/d already being pumped into the system, and a further 450Ml/d scheduled for commissioning by December 2025.
This means that within the next few months the total system increase will be 600Ml/d, which will be followed at an undisclosed date in the future by Phase 5B, which will yield another 600Ml/d, bringing the total increase in supply to 1,200Ml/d.
This has major implications for the economy, even as businesses are taking strain. It will place additional pressure on municipalities to accelerate their leakage repair programmes, which is beyond the scope of what Rand Water can do within its legal mandate.
An important aspect of System 5A is that it makes use of cutting-edge civil engineering technology and innovation. This includes, but is not limited to, interlocking, pre-stressed concrete panels manufactured off-site to exacting standards. This reduces construction time while improving the efficiency of sediment removal.
Of greater interest to the public is the footprint that will benefit. This includes three pipeline networks: the Eikenhof, Palmiet and Mapleton systems. They supply Ekurhuleni, Tshwane, Johannesburg, Lesedi, Mogale City, Rand West and Merafong in Gauteng; Victor Khanye, Govan Mbeki and Thembisile Hani in Mpumalanga; and Madibeng, Rustenburg and Royal Bafokeng in North West.
System 5 is an example of the centripetal forces that I referred to above, and it must be understood in that context. It is not a public call to abandon the need to reduce consumption per capita by 10%, but it is a responsible position by a bulk water supplier on which the economic wellbeing and social stability of South Africa’s most important province are dependent.
This is a powerful signal being sent into the investment community that water is an economic enabler, and Rand Water is up to the task.
The responsible thing for us to do as a collective is to support the efforts being made by the Platform for a Water Secure Gauteng to create the enabling environment for Gauteng to avert the debilitating tragedy of water insecurity. DM