California Fights Drought With Data and Psychology, Yielding 5% Usage Reduction 362
dcblogs writes with an article about hackers using technology to mitigate the effects of drought. From the article: "California is facing its worst drought in more than 100 years, and one with no end in sight. But it is offering Silicon Valley opportunities. In one project, the East Bay Municipal Utility District in Oakland used customized usage reports .... that [compare] a customer's water use against average use for similar sized households. It uses a form of peer pressure to change behavior. A ... year-long pilot showed a 5% reduction in water usage. The utility said the reporting system could 'go a long way' toward helping the state meet its goal of a reducing water usage by 20% per capita statewide. In other tech related activities, the organizer of a water-tech focused hackathon, Hack the Drought is hoping this effort leads to new water conserving approaches. Overall, water tech supporters are working to bring more investor attention to this market. Imagine H2O, a non-profit, holds annual water tech contests and then helps with access to venture funding. The effort is focused on 'trying to address the market failure in the water sector,' Scott Bryan, the chief operating officer of Imagine H2O."
flow = pressure/resistance (Score:3, Interesting)
Why not simply lower the water pressure by 10% to curb water usage?
Reduce usage - pay more (Score:5, Interesting)
In Denver we suffered through a drought that lasted a few years. There was a big campaign to get people to reduce their water usage - and it worked! People significantly reduced their water usage - so much that the water board was no longer getting the revenue that it said it needed. So, the rates went up.
Funny how the rates didn't go back down when the drought was over.
Also, not surprisingly, the golf courses got all the water they wanted.
A drop in a bucket. (Score:5, Interesting)
Meanwhile billions of gallons of water from California are, essentially, being exported to China [wsj.com].
NB: I apologize if the article is paywalled. The first look is free.
Re:compare water usage with "average"? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm trying to figure out why in the world I would lower my usage based on the usage of others around me?
I use the power and water levels I do, because I want to, and the serve my purposes in life, and I can afford to pay the levels I do.
I can't imagine myself lowering (or raising) my usage levels at all based on those others around me..??
Do people seriously keep up with the Joneses that much this day in age in everything?
Some people are motivated by civic repsonsibility and plain old "not being a dick" when they realize they are huge wasters.
If you haven't checked how do you know you aren't wasting water or electricity needlessly? Simple things like changing to a 1.25 gallon per minute shower head could greatly reduce your waste, yet some folks have an 8 gallon per minute and simply don't realize it. Most folks don't notice a difference in shower quality by doing this, it costs 10 bucks for a shower head (and 3-5 for plumber's tape if you don't have any) and less than 5 minutes of time. Seriously, you can order this crap from Amazon and it'll show up at your house, you don't even have to drive for it. Yet, do you know what your usage is? What do you have installed? If you do, you're in the minority. Most people do not and this is an attempt to fix easy issues like that.
Same thing goes for vampire draw on electricity. I bought 3 Belkin F7C01008q power switches (one for my home entertainment system and one for each of my computer workstation areas), despite the 100 dollar investment they've already paid themselves off twice over (or possibly more by now). I still get to "use" my electricty, it's not like I go, "Hey, can't play XBox tonight, gotta conserve power," but when I'm not using it there's no draw. Saves me money and reduces load on the grid. This is a no brainer but you're implying I'm somehow trying to beat my neighbors by not being a wasteful asshole? Seriously, this is the equivalent of me not littering as I walk down the street.
It boggles my mind that you seem to have a problem with the idea. I mean, what the actual fuck are you thinking that you don't want people to know if they're ignorately wasting shared, limited resources? Do you think your taxes won't go up to pay for a needless expansion to the grid or for water resources?
Re:Reduce usage - pay more (Score:5, Interesting)
Farmers in California grow a lot of rice which requires a lot of water. Most places that grow rice have lots of water. In California, even in "normal" years, there is no rain in the summer (dry season) so they have extensive dams and canals paid for by state and federal taxpayers which provide them lots of cheap water.
This year, there is a drought so the reservoirs are dry and the farmers are whinging seriously about "their" water.
California has lots of water for people... not so much to grow rice in the desert.
(Same argument applies to most California farming which uses an unsustainable amount of water to grow food in a desert.)
They just need to.... (Score:5, Interesting)
They just need to do what they've done in other western "dry" states and price water on consumption. In my state I pay a normal about $30 a month for the first 7000 gallons, which is enough for most moderately sized households internal uses. But the next 7000 gallons cost me double the $30 and the third set of 7000 costs me triple. In the summer my water bill goes from $30 a month to almost $300. This progressive pricing was introduced during our last big drought and water consumption went down 20% almost immediately and has continued to drop every year. Xeroscaping became very popular.
In fact I'm in the process of ripping up several hundred feet of sod to be replaced with native plants.
Re:Meanwhile, in Toronto... (Score:5, Interesting)
Water saving measures have drained funds from water taxes that are used to maintain the infrastructure...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com... [theglobeandmail.com]
The smarter towns do what many other (often private) utilities do - have a line item for "fixed costs" and another for "usage". You get a fixed charge of $10-20 for access to the utility, and then a per watt-liter-whatever charge for usage. Even if you use NOTHING, that flat cost comes in every month.
Water billing is largely done on a city/village/town basis. Often, the water comes from a common-source (county 'water agency') which passes on costs to the smaller towns feeding off of it.
Now: if someone along the way mismanages it [dgreport.com], that's a different problem.
Re:A drop in a bucket. (Score:3, Interesting)
MOD PARENT UP, also around 97 billion gallons went to fracking.
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/0... [salon.com]
Re:Reduce usage - pay more (Score:5, Interesting)
That and 90 billion gallons of water in Alfalfa sent to China, and 97 billion gallons
used for fracking...
Also I hear the commercial water rate is lower then the residential rate, ie.
the per gallon price is cheaper for the corporates then for the sheeple.
So basically the citizens are paying corporate welfare to big AgriBiz.
Re:Did you read the ATL? (Score:4, Interesting)
You have a point, but you're a long way from cutting into actual need.
I live in a country where everybody has access to high quality ground water. Our avarage daily water consumption is per capita less than a third of that of a the US, where you don't have access to high quality water. (our tap water is cleaner than bottled water.)
I was shocked by the disregard for water the first time I visited the US. Just as an example, your toilet bowls are huge lakes of water compared to what I'm used to. Flushing all that water just made me feel guilty.
Re:They just need to.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Utah. We had a nearly 7 year drought with sub 50% snowfall every year. Near the end of that drought all the reservoirs in the mountains that provide the summer water were damn near empty. The progressive pricing was instituted county wide and has continued since along with some of the extra money being spent on water use reduction public campaigns such as http://www.slowtheflow.org/ [slowtheflow.org].
They also setup several community demonstration gardens with various native and non-native plant life to show people how to plant attractive yards that consume significantly less water which are the water conservation gardens link on the page I linked above.
Phoenix is actually one of the places I believe within the next decade is going to have an eye opening event with water. Las Vegas is currently in the throws of theirs, Utah did it in the late 90's early 00's. Rainfall patterns are changing and the new Colorado river pact is going to dramatically change water allocation for Phoenix at some point in the future (probably the very near future) and you don't have the advantage Utah does (if we don't use our water in ends up in the evaporating toxic waste pit called the great salt lake which means there is no reason not to use every drop). If I was you I would be actively campaigning for increased water rates and water use reduction plans because if you don't put them place in before the catastrophe when it is forced on you it's going to be very costly.
Most Phoenix dwellers aren't aware of this but the vast majority of the water Phoenix uses comes from the Colorado River and it's pumped 6000 feet over the mountains using the power from Glen Canyon dam which is nearing it's life expectancy (it's about silted up). At some point in the future the Colorado River allocation is going to change drastically and at some point in the future the Glen Canyon dam is likely to go away. So not only will the water allocation go down you will have to start paying money to pump it over the mountains (the government currently pumps it for free).