Urban water conservation

Abstract

Water conservation may be defined as ademonstrably beneficial reduction in the amount of water of a certain quality for a specific use. Increasing costs as well as the risk of water shortages are likely to spur more efficient use of existing facilities. In many instances, conservation may be the most cost-effective way of increasing the supply of municipal water. Policymakers need to be familiar with the policy instruments, such as peak responsibility pricing, that could reduce the peak and average demands for municipal water and cost-effective technological options available to customers who wish to reduce water use. This paper is organized around these two themes and reviews the salient empirical findings in this field. Several municipalities have reduced peak demands, and the number of studies in demand management has increased substantially since the early 1960s. However, the interest in applying empirical findings has lagged behind research. Increasing costs are likely to stimulate innovative management and it is critical to explicate the problem and solutions so that policymakers would have the necessary understanding to make rational, cost-effective decisions. Time-and-location specific investigation is essential for enhancing such understand ing.

MUNICIPAL UTILIZATION OF WATER DEMAND MANAGEMENT: THE ONTARIO EXPERIENCE1

“…Economic Strategies. It is generally agreed that pricing mechanisms are the most effective means of conserving water (Hanke and Davis, 1973;Tate, 1984;Grima, 1985). The set price is considered to be the least effective pricing, providing no incentive to conserve (Baumann, 1978).…”

“…Repairing leaks in a water supply distribution system can have significant conservation potential. System losses range from 2 to 27% (Keller in Grima, 1985) and average 12 to 15% (Ellis, 1978). To reflect the potential water savings that are possible through system leak repair, a maximum of 10 points has been awarded.…”

“…Regulations calling for mandatory restrictions on water use can have significant impacts. Water reductions through lawn sprinkling bans of approximately 15% was reported by Hanke and Fortin (1985); a 20% decrease was found in a study in California (Miller in AWWA, 1980); and 3 to 10% reduction in Denver due to lawn watering regulations (Grima, 1985). With a range of 3 to 20% water use reduction, a score of 7 has been awarded.…”

“…Higher index scores would be associated with: 5. municipalities with older distribution systems (Pearse et al, 1985); 6. municipalities with larger populations served (Pearse et al, 1985); 7. municipalities with greater water supply system problems (Conservation Foundation, 1984;Pearse et al, 1985); and 8. water supply decision-making bodies of greater size and importance (Grima, 1985).…”

“…Economic and environmental considerations increasingly make the case for greater use of demand management (conservation) of water supply (Tate, 1984;Mitchell, 1984;Grima, 1985). Recognition of this comes from both the federal and provincial governments in Canada and elsewhere (Conservation Foundation, 1984;Ministry of Natural Resources et al, 1985;Canada, 1987), though present use and promotion of water conservation strategies appear limited.…”