16 Oct 2014

The risks of cheap water

About a dozen people have sent me this NYT article, and I agree with its point: water for urban and agricultural use is too cheap, which is why demand is outpacing supply.

I sent one correction to the journalist in response to this statement:
"Rates have little relation to water's replacement cost. In Fresno, which gets less than 11 inches of rain a year, a family of four using 400 gallons a day faces a monthly water bill of $28.26. In Boston, where rainfall exceeds 40 inches, the same family would pay $77.73."

Your example misses the fact that prices are set to recover system costs and they usually exclude the value/replacement cost of water. That's why Boston's is expensive: their system is complex, etc.
For solutions to the problem of cheap water, I recommend my cheap free book, which explains how to fairly and efficiently price water in cities as well as balance between environmental and irrigation uses of bulk water.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

True, that is why I pay USD 10/m^3 of water; because I am not using much.

Wayne Lusvardi said...

Boston's resident population of nearly 590,000 almost doubles each day by commuting workers and students, shoppers, tourists, conventioneers, hospital patients and visitors.

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.