This study examines the long-term impact of water conservation on water rates and tap fees and finds that rates would be substantially higher today if not for water savings achieved since 1980.
Ever wonder if your efforts to conserve water actually make a difference to your utility bills or the cost of water infrastructure? A study conducted by Westminster, Colorado, in 2013, highlighted just how significant the impact of water conservation can be, not just on the environment, but on your wallet too. This report, led by R. Feinglas, R. Gray, and P. Mayer, looked at how customer conservation helped limit rate increases for this Colorado utility.
Water utilities often face a tricky balancing act: rising infrastructure costs mean they need to increase rates, but often, public response can be challenging, especially as water demands sometimes decrease. Instead of simply accepting this conundrum, the team in Westminster decided to dig into their own data to find some answers.
The staff at Westminster meticulously examined their water use patterns from 1980 to 2010. They did this by taking the total water demand across all customer types and dividing it by the estimated population served each year. What’s particularly interesting is that they even accounted for reclaimed water used for irrigation, adding it back into the potable water use figures to ensure a comprehensive and conservative view of overall water consumption.
Through this detailed analysis, they were able to estimate what water use in 2010 would have been if water conservation programmes and policies hadn’t been in place. The results were eye-opening.
The study concluded that if per capita water use had not declined, Westminster would have needed an additional 4 million gallons per day (MGD) of potable water by 2010. This isn’t just a theoretical number; it translates directly into avoided costs for the city and its residents:
When all the estimated costs of this hypothetical increased demand were tallied, including the associated debt financing charges, the financial implications were stark.
Perhaps the most compelling finding for the average resident was the impact on their utility bills. The study revealed that had the citizens of Westminster not reduced their water use, the total annual water and sewer bill for a typical single-family household would have been 91% higher, soaring from $655 to a staggering $1,251. Breaking it down further:
Beyond existing customers, new customers also benefited, as the combined cost of new infrastructure and water resources, which forms part of tap fees, would have increased significantly.
This report from Westminster provides clear evidence that water conservation isn’t just about saving a precious resource; it’s a powerful tool for economic efficiency, directly limiting the need for costly infrastructure expansion and keeping water rates more affordable for everyone. It’s a testament to how collective action in water efficiency can yield substantial financial benefits for communities.
