Findings from the“Arizona Water Meter”

Water Resources Research Center, Univ. of AZNovember 17, 2010

Drew Beckwith, Water Policy Analystdbeckwith@westernresources.org

(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 Beckwithdbeckwith@westernresources.org

(720) 763-3726