Professional Documents
Culture Documents
for Lost Creek MUD Lost Creek Neighborhood Association September 19, 2011 Paul Schumann
Summary
Austin is increasing the wholesale price of water to the LCMUD by 19%. The tiered (increasing block) p ( g ) pricing structure for residential water g approved by the LCMUD board would have produced an effective rate of $4.61 (2009) and $4.54 (2010) per 1,000 gallons for residences Matching a tiered (increasing block) pricing structure with a fixed supply cost and forecasting future usage is extremely complicated and difficult Residential water demand is inelastic (0.35) with price Residential water demand is elastic (+3) with temperature Residential water demand is the largest (86%) Residential indoor water use is approximately 7,400 gallons per residence per month (43%) Residential outdoor water use is approximately 10,000 gallons per residence per month (57%)
9/19/2011 Schumann 2
Summary (cont.)
Water savings as a result of increased pricing is roughly the same for an increasing block or flat rate (5%) W Water use is not correlated with rain amounts i l d ih i Distribution of water users varies significantly by month Residences near the boundaries of increasing block pricing structure are affected most (positively and negatively) Water conservation results are highly variable, subjective and controversial Best indoor water conservation study indicated 17% reduction through 100% implementation of best plumbing practices and products For LCMUD largest water use is residential outdoor. Impacts to that can only be achieved through radical changes to landscaping
9/19/2011
Schumann
9/19/2011
Schumann
2%
10%
2%
86%
9/19/2011
Schumann
30,000
25,000 25 000
10,000 ,
5,000
9/19/2011
Schumann
Monthly Use
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
10,000
5,000
9/19/2011
Schumann
500
400
100
9/19/2011
Schumann
Temperature Dependence
35,000
30,000
10,000
5,000
0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 Average Monthly Temperature (Degrees F)
9/19/2011
Schumann
Correlation coefficient is a statistical measure of the linear relationship between two variables. It ranges between 1 and +1. The residential water use with rain was 0.09.
9/19/2011
Schumann
10
30,000
10,000
5,000
Residential indoor water use based on 1,000 residences and external research.
0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 Average Monthly Temperature (Degrees F)
9/19/2011
Schumann
11
Adopted by the LCMUD Board at the last meeting. Reported as equivalent of a $4.49 flat rate. The flat rate is based on Austins g Wholesale flat rate of $4.01. This base rate from Austin is 18.6% higher than the current rate of $3.38 per thousand gallons.
9/19/2011
Schumann
12
2009
100%
90%
80%
70%
Percent of Residenes
60%
50%
<11 11 to 35
40%
>35
30%
20%
10%
0% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Month Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
9/19/2011
Schumann
13
2009
35,000
30,000
25,000 25 000
10,000
5,000
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Month Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
9/19/2011
Schumann
14
>35,000 gals
$4.69 $4.09
500 Residences
450 Residences
50 Residences
15
9/19/2011
Schumann
9/19/2011
Schumann
16
800
March 2010 and July 2009 were the lowest and highest water use months in 2009 2010 Read the first data point for March 2010 as: There were 857 residences that used between 0 and 10,000 gallons of water in March of 2010.
300
200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 Monthly Water Use (1,000 gallons per residence)
9/19/2011
Schumann
17
800
700
300
200
100
9/19/2011
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Schumann
18
{(P1 X V1) + (P2 X V2) + (P3 X V3)} PW = + CO (V1 + V2 + V3) PW wholesale price P1 first block price P2 second bl k price d block i P3 third block price V1 first block volume V2 second block volume V3 third block volume CO overhead cost
19
Schumann
9/19/2011
Schumann
20
* Block prices are tiered (flat over regions), regions) decreasing price goes down as volume increases, increasing prices go up as volume increases
Source: Reference 6
9/19/2011
Schumann
21
9/19/2011
* High use consumers. Higher if near lower boundary of block pricing ** short run Price elasticity ratio of % change in demand for a 1% *** long run change in price **** median (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_elasticity_of_demand)
Schumann
22
2010
9,419,000 gallons 4 7% 4.7%
* Based on median best estimate of price elasticity of 0.35, Reference 6 ** Based on equivalent weighted average tier (increasing block) prices *** If pricing structure was in place for one of those years **** Flat rates produce the same savings
9/19/2011 Schumann 23
9/19/2011
Schumann
24
Reduction in water used based on method. *Based on 100% increase in price ** Unknown price increase
9/19/2011
Schumann
25
Reference 1 *41.9% average indoor use ** 69.3 gallons per capita per day, 3 persons per residence *** 69.3 gallons per capita per day, 4 persons per residence
9/19/2011 Schumann
26
Percent of Indoor Water Use 1.7% 21.6% 1.4% 15.7% 13.7% 16.7% 26.7% 2.3%
Conservation Water Use (gallons per capita per day) 1.2 10.0 0.7 10.8 4.0
Baths Clothes Washers Dish Washers Faucets Leaks Showers Toilets Other Total
9/19/2011
Results Peak demand in 2002 down 14% from 1990 f Water savings of 395,000 gallons per day (16% of winter usage) and reduction in wastewater volume Estimated 16% by 2028 (4.6 mgpd)
Ashland, OR
Cary, NC
Gallitzin, PA Gilbert, AZ
87% drop in unaccounted for water, 59% drop in production Successful in reusing reclaimed water 30% drop in water use
28
Goleta, CA
9/19/2011
Examples (cont.)
City Houston, TX Program Education program, plumbing retrofits, audits, leak detection and repair, increasing block rate schedule, conservation planning Five tiered rate structure Leak detection and repair, plumbing retrofits, water management programs, education program, meter improvements Plumbing fixture replacement, water efficiency surveys, irrigation improvements, training programs, conservation related research projects Education, metering, leak detections, water use regulation, comprehensive toilet replacement program Pricing reform, residential and industrial/commercial conservation, landscaping, education, technical assistance, regulations, planning and research, Schumann interagency coordination Results Reduction in water demand of 7.3%, savings of $260 million 19% decline in water use 24% drop in water use over ten years Savings of 59 mgd Irvine Ranch Water District, CA Massachusetts Water Resources Authority Metropolitan Water District of Southern California New York, NY
Reduced per capita water use from 195 gpd (1991) to 167 gpd (1998), 14%. Reduced water/waste water bills by 20% to 40% Saved 40mgd. Conservation rate structure saved 9 mgd.
Phoenix, AZ
9/19/2011
29
Examples (cont.)
City Santa Monica, CA Seattle, WA Program Water use surveys, education, landscaping, toilet retrofits, l d program il fi load Seasonal rate structure, plumbing fixture codes, leak reduction, incentives for water saving products, public education High efficiency plumbing retrofits, increasing block rate structure, irrigation restrictions, landscaping measures, public education Integrative resource planning Replacing inefficient showerheads and R l i i ffi i h h d d toilets Results Reduced water use by 14% and waste water fl b 21% flow by Water consumption dropped by 20% 25% drop in water use from landscaping program, 15% reduction from retrofit program 27 conventional and nonconventional resource options Reduced R d d water fl b 14 5 gpd flow by 14.5 d
Tampa, FL
Wichita, KS Barrie, B i ON
9/19/2011
Schumann
30
References
1. 2. 2 3. 4. 5. 6. Nature of Residential Water Use and Effectiveness of Conservation Programs, James Heaney, William DeOreo, Peter Mayer, Paul Lander, Jeff Harpring, Laurel Stadjuhar, Beorn Courtney and Lynn Buhlig, http://bcn/boulder.co.us/basin/local/heaney.html Residential Water R id ti l W t use T d i N th A Trends in North America, Th i Thomas R k Rockaway, P l C Paul Coomes, J h Ri d Joshua Rivard and Barry Kornstein, Journal of the AWWA, February 2011, http://www.awwa.org/files/Resources/Waterwiser/JAW0211rockaway.pdf Water Use Statistics, American Water Works Association, Drinktap.org, http://www.drinktap.org/consumerdnn/Home/WaterInformation/Conservation/WaterUseStatisti cs/tabid/85/Default.aspx Cases in Water Conservation: How Efficiency Programs Help Water Utilities Save Water and Avoid Costs, EPA, 2002, http://www.epa.gov/WaterSense/docs/utilityconservation_508.pdf Do Residential Water Consumers React to Price Increases?: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Santa Cruz, Shanthi Nataraj, Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics, University of California, http://giannini.ucop.edu/media/areupdate/files/articles/v10n3_3.pdf Managing Water Demand: Price vs. Non Price Programs, Sheila Olmstead & Robert Stavins, A emand: NonPrice Pioneer Institute White Paper #39, Pioneer Institute, July 2007, http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/rstavins/Monographs_&_Reports/Pioneer_Olmstead_Stavins_W ater.pdf Does Price Structure Matter?: Household Water Demand Under IncreasingBlock and Uniform Prices, Sheila Olmstead, W. Hanemann & Robert Stavins, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, 10/30/03, http://www.esm.ucsb.edu/academics/courses/595EE/Readings/olmstead_hanemann_stavins.pdf
7.
9/19/2011
Schumann
31
APPENDIX
9/19/2011
Schumann
32
Dependence on Rain
35,000
30,000
25,000 25 000
10,000
5,000
0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Total Rain Fall in Month 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0
9/19/2011
Schumann
33
8.0
7.0
60 6.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
9/19/2011
Schumann
34
Reference 2
9/19/2011
Schumann
35
Reference 2
9/19/2011
Schumann
36
Reference 1 Schumann
REUWS 45.2 39.3 30.8 26.7 21.9 7.4 3.2 2.4 176.9
Denver Water 38.6 31.5 28.9 21.5 24.5 5.7 2.9 2.0 155.6
LWC 37.5 32.4 18.4 20.5 33.8 4.0 3.1 1.9 151.6
Author
Paul Schumann 512.632.6586 (cell) 512.327.5449 paschumann2009@gmail.com
9/19/2011
Schumann
39