The Netherlands is more water stressed than...anywhere?! Freshwater management is insane here because we have so much of it.
this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
30 points (96.9% liked)
Climate
8486 readers
319 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I was going to comment the opposite.
The Netherlands is actually facing a fresh water crisis because unregulated farmers are pumping large amounts of water up from aquifers, causing them to pull in salt water from the sea which will poison the soil and make the aquifers undrinkable in the long term.
The rivers are too polluted to be safe for agriculture without expensive processing, but the process of fresh water filtering down through ground layers into aquifers makes it potable (long-term salinification notwithstanding).
I suspect the, er, "visual capitalist" disregarded those long-term externalities, or includes a theoretical capacity to clean (or even collect?) fresh water while not including the ability to desalinate salt water.
I also wonder how the graph accounts for water entering a country from another country. Most Dutch water management concerns the sea, which is not included in the graph, and rivers, which mostly come from other nations. If Germany consumed/redirected the Rhine, would that make the Netherlands appear more red on the map?
Also, Bangladesh and Nauru are both more "water stressed" than the Netherlands by your definition. Bangladesh regularly floods because it is a river delta in a monsoon region, and Nauru is an island nation that will be abandoned because sea levels are rising.
The UK is more water stressed than Australia ? That seems...unlikely ? Counter intuitive anyway
This is just looking at water usage/freshwater available. Australia has fairly large rainforests for example. So a lot of water available. At the same time the population is pretty small for such a massive country. The main issue is that the water is in the "wrong" part of Australia. The UK on the other hand is densly populated. So usage is high, while the land although on average probably wetter then Australia is also much smaller.
You have similar things in other countries as well.
Two random guesses:
- The UK has been inhabited for longer and thus many more of its aquifers may have been tapped.
- Despite being fairly arid, Australia is just massive comparatively. In combination with number 1, it may have huge aquifers under uninhabited arid regions that are close to full.
The UK has very fucked up land management, virtually all the capacity of the land to hold onto water has been destroyed in favour of dumping it into the sea as quickly as possible, the result is a country thats prone to both floods and droughts.