14 responses to “Water Hazard”

1. 

   Solomon Kuppan

   13 years Ago

   Let them play on clay course!!!!!!

   • Reply
2. 

   Hilary Bassett

   13 years Ago

   There are at least five major golf courses within half an hour’s drive from where I live, which is Mowbray in Cape Town. At some point rationalisation will be essential.

   • Reply
   1. 

      Peter

      13 years Ago

      I agree. It’s naive to think that there is a correlation between the two. The logistics of moving this volume of water would mean increasing the carbon footprint in order to do so. Nowadays, I believe that most golf courses are using recycled water anyway, which is not fit for human consumption. For those that are not, they should pay a levy or fine which would encourage them to change their perspective on things.

      • Reply
      1. 

         Tom

         13 years Ago

         Makes sense to penalise poor usage, I bet however there are far bigger wastages of water than golf courses. I suppose few of them will be as romantic, eg. People drink about 500 milllion litres of coke every day. So lets stop drinking coke because someone did some math.

         • Reply
3. 

   Tom

   13 years Ago

   The majority of those golf courses would be where there is no water shortage to begin with. Pipping that water from the US to say sudan where there is a shortage is just silly as silly to consider all water equally costly.

   • Reply
4. 

   Noel

   13 years Ago

   I am a keen golfer but am amazed at the water wastage on golf courses. So many times I have seen sprinklers running while it is raining – why? There is technology available that can override irrigation computer programms when the course has sufficient water levels without unnecessary wastage. Also do they really need to water every day, judging by the condition of my lawn which I am very proud of and only water two times a week in dry weather. why can’t golf clubs be forced to rationalise water usage, regardless of source.

   • Reply
5. 

   Kennedy

   13 years Ago

   I think the golfers should look for an alternative sporting activity so that we can use the water used for watering the field for human consumption, or else we can tarmac a particular road, so that they make it as a golf course. Kennedy (Kenya)

   • Reply
6. 

   Jan

   13 years Ago

   Ten browny points for the statisian that came up with this stats! hope it does not keep him/her awake all night. “If you drink to much water you will drown”, “a white polar bear can be linked to vehicle theft because they are left handed”. Stats – Stats – stats…
   most golf courses are using water from their own water hazards and they are naturally replenished. rather look at the government officials playing the golf ignoring the waste dumped into the rivers and dams by thier cities.

   • Reply
7. 

   Zaheer

   13 years Ago

   hmmm. so now how would we get the water from the golf courses in Europe, USA and Japan to Sudan? or even from Jozi to the drought in the free state?

   Linking water usage in areas where water is abundant to irresponsible usage of water is irresponsible and vacuous reporting.

   • Reply
8. 

   Steel

   13 years Ago

   I think there is nothing in the fact suggesting that water usage on golf courses should be redistributed around the world or anything like the absurdities that are being suggested by some comments. People are trying to read too much into this fact. It is just a comparative stat. 9.46 billion liters of water is hardly comprehendable unless it is illustrated in a way that people can relate to. I think it’s a really interesting fact. Hardly irresponsible and vacuous in my opinion.

   • Reply
   1. 

      Tom

      13 years Ago

      4.699 billion people of 4.7 billion people probably have no idea exactly how much water a golf course use as they don’t maintain one so it hardly helps to clarify how much water is used as you cannot easily picture water usage on a golf course or all the golfcourses of the world. Two incomparable stats compared with each other than the fact that both use water and someone could estimate both.

      For a stat to mean something there has to be quantifiable relationship if you want to compare. It has to relate something to something we all can relate to. A big challenge ofcourse.

      • Reply
      1. 

         Steel

         13 years Ago

         I’m not certain of the point you are trying to make. I feel that you were trying to oppose my view but stated exactly what I was trying to convey. Most people have absolutely no way of quantifying how much water is used on a golf course because (as you said) they don’t maintain one. And putting a ridiculously large number such as 9.46 billion into the mix still does not help in allowing one to fully quantify the amount (ie. Is that the amount of water that a block of houses use, or the amount a city uses, or the amount a country uses?). Thus the number is put into context by showing its the amount of water that could sustain 70% of the earth’s population.

         And the stat does mean something, it means that alot of water gets used on golf courses. The meaning seems quite clear.

         • Reply
         1. 

            Tom

            13 years Ago

            Both stats are abstract and hard to imagine. Golf courses consume a fraction of the water we use, look at daily water stats the world uses something like 5479 billion litres a day. 0.1 % … it is really small.

            My view is that it is an arbitrary comparison. The problem is also that not all water is equal in terms of access. Some places has plenty and some don’t. There are golf courses without grass… not that plenty but if there is water you will find a golf course when there is money available as well.

            The economics of golf doesn’t lend itself well to be compared with 70% of the world’s minimum estimated daily needs. Why not 75% or 73%?

            • Reply
9. 

   Steel

   13 years Ago

   The economics of golf???? I highly doubt that the fact was trying to highlight the ‘economics of golf’. And your view that it is an arbitrary comparison is certainly correct. An obvious comparison is no fun at all.

   • Reply