findings from the “arizona water meter” · findings from the “arizona water meter” water...
TRANSCRIPT
Findings from the“Arizona Water Meter”
Water Resources Research Center, Univ. of AZNovember 17, 2010
Drew Beckwith, Water Policy [email protected]
(720) 763-3726
2
Arizona Water Meter – What
15 communities 7 criteria
1) Per capita use and trends2) Water rate structures3) Conservation measures4) Ordinances5) Funding6) Water loss7) Effluent use
3
Arizona Water Meter – Why
Expansion of WRA water program Assess state of the state Conservation as a viable alternative Learn from others = everyone benefits Recognize good programs
4
Arizona Water Meter – How
Survey pre-population w. ADWR data Provider review City summary compilation Provider review City summaries are the database (App B)
5
Participating Entities
Buckeye Chandler Mesa Peoria Phoenix Scottsdale Casa Grande
(AWC)
Tucson Sierra Vista (AWC) Safford Payson Clarkdale Prescott Lake Havasu City Yuma
Variation w.r.t. size, location, ownership, demographics, and regulatory program
6
1) SFR Per Capita Use
249175
150142
130125124123
105102
9998
7366
61
0 50 100 150 200 250
ScottsdaleSafford
YumaChandler
MesaPeoria
Lake Havasu CityPhoenix
Sierra Vista (AWC)Tucson
Casa Grande (AWC)Prescott
ClarkdalePayson
Buckeye
7
1) System-Wide Trend
-7.9%1.0%1.5%
6.5%8.0%8.9%9.5%
11.5%12.0%12.1%
14.2%16.5%
18.0%19.0%
77.0%
-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
ScottsdaleYumaPeoria
ClarkdalePayson
MesaChandler
Sierra Vista (AWC)PhoenixTucson
Lake Havasu CitySafford
PrescottCasa Grande (AWC)
Buckeye
8
2) Marginal Price
9
2) Average Price
10
3) Public Awareness Measures
11
3) Conservation Measure Count
23
45
910
1217
181818
1919
2329
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
YumaClarkdale
SaffordCasa Grande (AWC)
BuckeyeLake Havasu City
MesaPhoenixPrescott
ChandlerSierra Vista (AWC)
PaysonPeoria
TucsonScottsdale
12
3) Conservation Assessment
00
222
4555
910
1111
1319
0 5 10 15 20
SaffordSierra Vista (AWC)
ClarkdaleLake Havasu City
YumaPayson
MesaBuckeye
Casa Grande (AWC)TucsonPeoria
ScottsdalePrescott
ChandlerPhoenix
13
3) Conservation Measures
Most popular Messaging and Youth Education (14 of 15) Events and Audits (2/3rds)
Mid-range HET rebates Landscape conversion incentives
Underutilized ICI measures Large landscape incentives
14
4) Ordinance Chart
15
4) Ordinances
Water Intensive Landscaping Limitations Landscape Watering Restrictions Other Examples:
Planting new turf and expansion of existing turf areas is prohibited (Payson)
Golf course developments must generate a sufficient amount of effluent to meet irrigation needs of the golf course (Clarkdale)
16
5) Funding
$-$-$0.02
$0.56 $1.05 $1.07 $1.17 $1.30 $1.32 $1.37
$1.77 $1.90
$2.98 $4.28
$7.07
$- $2.00 $4.00 $6.00 $8.00
Casa Grande (AWC)Sierra Vista (AWC)
YumaMesa
BuckeyeClarkdalePhoenix
Lake Havasu CitySaffordTucson
ChandlerPeoria
PrescottScottsdale
Payson
17
6) Water Loss
18.0%16.0%
11.9%9.4%
9.0%8.6%
7.7%7.5%7.4%
7.0%6.8%
6.3%5.1%
2.5%0.4%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Lake Havasu CitySaffordTucsonPayson
YumaChandlerPrescott
Casa Grande (AWC)Mesa
ScottsdaleBuckeye
Sierra Vista (AWC)Phoenix
PeoriaClarkdale
18
6) Water Loss
ADWR – 10% standard Leak detection Meter replacement Apparent lack of systematic accounting
E.g. AWWA/IWA Water Loss Methodology Notable exception – Peoria
19
7) Effluent Use
10 of 15 put 95% to use Direct Use – irrigation, process water Recharge Exchange
Regional partnership (SROG) 60,000 AF to Palo Verde
20
Scoring
Consistent and transparent “snapshot”1) Per capita: SFR and system-wide trend2) Rate structures: avg. price and thresholds3) Conservation measures and assessment4) Ordinances5) Funding6) Water loss7) Effluent use
21
Scoring – SW Trend
System Wide Potable Per Capita Trend 15 points if adjusted 2008 system wide potable
use decreased 10% or more since 2003 12 points if use decreased 5-10% 9 points if use decreased 0-4% 6 points if use increased 0-15% 3 points if use increased more than 15%
22
Scoring – Cons. Measures
Number of Measures (8 points max) 0.25 points for each specific conservation
measure
Assessment of measures (7 points max) 0.50 points for each assessment of a
conservation measure
23
Scoring – Water Loss
Water Loss 10 points for the city with the lowest water loss
in 2008, each subsequent city receives one less point
1 point guaranteed if water loss is less than 10% 0 points if water loss is greater than 10%
24
Tucson Snapshot
25
Mesa Snapshot
26
Overall Scoring
27
“Top Drop” Awards
Oct. 14th – Desert Botanical Gardens Publically recognize leaders Prescott, Tucson/Phoenix, Payson
Karin Sheldon President, WRA
Ilene Grossman Conservation Program Manager, Tucson Water
28
Take Home Messages
AZ water providers are doing good work Room for improvement
Report is a database Learn from each other WRA will be here to help
Water conservation is an excellent tool for increasing water supplies
29
Questions & Comments
The “Arizona Water Meter”is available at:
www.westernresources.org/azmeter
Drew [email protected]
(720) 763-3726