ebmgh.com

Cape Verdean musical event on Saturday May 22 »« Most confusing headline ever?

Calling out water hogs

I really like the newspaper or TV stories where they publish a list of the top water users in an area. Where I live, in California, we’re coming out of 3 years of drought, and water managers have been gnashing their teeth trying to figure out how to get people to cut back. Some say, just raise everybody’s rates. There are a couple of problems with that. For the über-rich, the price of water is no object. Bill Gates used 4.7 million gallons in 2001, and had a $24,828 water bill, and I don’t suppose that troubled him much. But perhaps we can “name and shame” them out of their profligacy? If nothing else, it sends a few publicists scrambling.

These stories must be a breeze to write. Just send in a written request to the water utility. If they drag their feet or refuse, have your legal department remind them that these are public records, and threaten them with Freedom of Information Act request or whatever the equivalent is in your state. Publish the list, and as much data on the property and residents as you can find. Use your archives, wikipedia, Google Earth, and Zillow. Express outrage and indignation. Conjecture on whether or not they even look at their water bill, or merely have their accountant pay it. Try to contact them for comment. Dutifully print the statement from their publicist saying how surprised they are, they had no idea, they’re looking into it immediately. Print a detailed map (bonus points for a Google map mashup in your online edition).

My favorite story was the one in the Las Vegas Sun in 2008. The city is entirely dependent on water from Lake Mead, the big reservoir on the Colorado River behind the Hoover Dam. Problem is, the reservoir has been half-empty for years, and some scientists have openly conjectured that it might never refill, what with climate change and all. In the midst of all this, Vegas’ imperious water czar Pat Mulroy launches an improbable scheme to build a 10-foot pipeline to tap groundwater aquifers in the arid lands north of the city. You can guess how well that went down with the local ranchers and wildlife lovers. Amidst this backdrop, you have a prince from Brunei who uses 17 million gallons per year. That would ordinarily be enough for like 200 American families, or about 10,000 in Kenyan. Right after the prince in the list is Pierre Omidyar, the founder of eBay, and a fellow Tufts alumnus. Oh, for shame, Jumbo, for shame.

Here’s a roundup of some of the stories I’ve found.

May 17, 2010 at 1:27 pm
3 comments »
  • May 17, 2010 at 6:10 pmTTTE

    We sure do need to put the price of water up! Your Bill Gates example misses the point entirely.

    Look at fuel prices in USA compared to Europe or Australia. Cheap fuel leads to huge cars and people driving places rather than taking public transport, cycling or walking.

    Cheap water leads to wastage. Equitable pricing is not difficult to implement:

    http://thomasthethinkengine.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/this-is-serious-mum-%E2%80%93-a-new-model-for-urban-water-pricing/

    Pathetic ‘awareness campaigns’, ‘low flow shower head’ rebates and ‘efficiency case studies’ (a Pac Inst favorite) have done as much for increasing water use efficiency as ‘gas mileage targets’ did for American cars. Nothing.

  • May 18, 2010 at 12:07 pmMatthew

    Thanks for the comment Thomas. I’m all for using appropriate pricing as a demand management tool. I’m a big supporter of base allocations and steeply tiered rates to target non-essential, discretionary use.

    But no matter how steep you make the tiers, you are still going to have some water users for whom price is no object, e.g. Omidyar, Gates, and their ilk. Maybe a few among the super-rich will be more concerned about their reputation than about a $30,000 water bill. So I’d like to see more articles like these. Plus, they’re awfully fun to read!

    I wouldn’t say that the Pacific Institute is obsessed with water efficiency as much as we are with sustainable water management. Smart economics will be an (indispensable) tool to get us there, and so will improved efficiency.

    Cheers and keep the opinions coming.

  • May 18, 2010 at 7:35 pmTTTE

    Hi Matt,

    The thing that gets me about the ‘rich can pay argument’ is that it is a truism, but who cares?

    They should pay more, increases prices will not hurt the poor, they don’t have huge gardens and swimming pools.

    To the extent that water utilities have operating costs of ‘x’ split between all the users, if big water users are not paying much more, they are getting a subsidy from the poor.

    cheers

Commenting is closed