4 ms·

None of this makes sense to me. Water is still extremely cheap. Prices should go up in drought-prone regions they mentioned (eg Austin) to help incentivize redu

None of this makes sense to me. Water is still extremely cheap. Prices should go up in drought-prone regions they mentioned (eg Austin) to help incentivize reduced water use. If you're paying $100/m it means you're using too much water. If you can't afford that use less. Excluding laundry I currently use less than 5 gallons a day between myself and my dog. It's not hard to do.

Scoundreller 6y ago
I’d prefer tiered billing. The first X gallons/day cost $x, then it goes up. That way you subsidize sanitation, but charge for washing your car or watering your lawn. Many places have complicated programs to do that in reverse (get this credit for removing your lawn or this tax credit for a new washing machine). California lets you run your washing machine drain into your backyard without a permit, that’s one regulatory way to reuse gray-water. If gray water reuse requires $hundreds-$thousands in permits and plumbers, people won’t bother.
- nickik 6y ago
  I totally agree, that is the way to do it. However, we must realize that, specially in California, its actually agriculture that uses most water. Standford university turning of their fountains and other 'publicity' stunts will not fix anything. You need to fix the pricing in the broader water market, change the intensives for California farmers so they plant things that require less water, or have more intensive to limit water consumption.
  - Scoundreller 6y ago
    Right. It also depends on geography. Sometimes water is easy, but sewerage capacity is the limit, so gray water reuse makes sense to encourage where possible. Water is measured, but sewage discharge isn’t. I’d like holding tanks for gray water re-use for toilets. Apparently still gray water becomes septic after a day, but if it’s your toilet, shouldn’t you assume the water in there is septic anyway??
- driverdan 6y ago
  Austin, which was mentioned in the article, does do tiered billing. The tiers are still quite generous though. The only way I can see paying over $100/m in Austin is through wasting it on landscaping. If you're doing that you really have no right to complain since it's a luxury.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
igammarays 6y ago
"Water is still extremely cheap." - your anecdote. The entire point of a scientific study is to determine the truth of statements like these. Comparison is made to global standards and the consumer price index. And fine, I get you're saying you don't care about the millions of other people in your country who live a different lifestyle and pay ridiculous amounts for water. Fine, they're not your problem. But if you read the article, it's not just about affordability, it's a sign of the decay and decline of the infrastructure that supplies your water. You should care about the nation's water infrastructure, even if you don't care what other people are paying.
- driverdan 6y ago
  > who live a different lifestyle and pay ridiculous amounts for water Who choose to live a different lifestyle. I'm not saying everyone has to live in a bus and use a few gallons a day. I'm saying that if the cost of water significantly impacts your life you should reduce how much you use. No one in the US pays "ridiculous" amounts for municipal water. We're still talking pennies per gallon. > You should care about the nation's water infrastructure Absolutely. It's one of the reasons water should cost more, to maintain and improve infrastructure. Water should be billed at a rate that covers all of the costs involved.
  - igammarays 6y ago
    > It's one of the reasons water should cost more, to maintain and improve infrastructure. It should, but it's not. The article argues that the price of water is going up, but quality is going down. Affordability is not the primary issue (it seems to be marketed that way because that's what individuals care about) but the larger issue is that infrastructure efficiency, and grid stability is going down. Bureaucratic failures all around. > “High-cost low-quality water is a national issue . . . . the federal government is clearly not playing the role it needs to play,” said Howard Neukrug, director of the water center at the University of Pennsylvania and former head of Philadelphia’s water department.
  - bonchicbongenre 6y ago
    They really don't choose to "live a different lifestyle". It is simply the case that water, one of the basic necessities for life, is not readily available to many low-income Americans. Water access is routinely turned off or simply not available [0, 1, 2, 3] for those who can't pay or who are unlucky enough to live in certain areas. It is another example of the rampant wealth inequality [4] and degradation of social support [5] that been worsening in the US for decades [6, 7, 8] [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-05-21/poor-water-access-heightens-coronavirus-threat-for-many-americans https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52384622 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52384622 [2] https://time.com/longform/clean-water-access-united-states/ https://time.com/longform/clean-water-access-united-states/ [3] https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/4/17/21223565/coronavirus-clean-water-crisis-america https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/4/17/21223565/coronaviru... [4] https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053331 https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-soc-0... [5] https://people.umass.edu/crotty/Austerity_War.pdf https://people.umass.edu/crotty/Austerity_War.pdf [6] https://www.nber.org/chapters/c7443.pdf https://www.nber.org/chapters/c7443.pdf [7] http://www.macrohistory.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/HSCF_CEPR.pdf http://www.macrohistory.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/HSCF_... [8] https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/708815 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/708815

Scoundreller 6y ago

I’d prefer tiered billing. The first X gallons/day cost $x, then it goes up. That way you subsidize sanitation, but charge for washing your car or watering your lawn. Many places have complicated programs to do that in reverse (get this credit for removing your lawn or this tax credit for a new washing machine). California lets you run your washing machine drain into your backyard without a permit, that’s one regulatory way to reuse gray-water. If gray water reuse requires $hundreds-$thousands in permits and plumbers, people won’t bother.

nickik 6y ago
I totally agree, that is the way to do it. However, we must realize that, specially in California, its actually agriculture that uses most water. Standford university turning of their fountains and other 'publicity' stunts will not fix anything. You need to fix the pricing in the broader water market, change the intensives for California farmers so they plant things that require less water, or have more intensive to limit water consumption.
- Scoundreller 6y ago
  Right. It also depends on geography. Sometimes water is easy, but sewerage capacity is the limit, so gray water reuse makes sense to encourage where possible. Water is measured, but sewage discharge isn’t. I’d like holding tanks for gray water re-use for toilets. Apparently still gray water becomes septic after a day, but if it’s your toilet, shouldn’t you assume the water in there is septic anyway??
driverdan 6y ago
Austin, which was mentioned in the article, does do tiered billing. The tiers are still quite generous though. The only way I can see paying over $100/m in Austin is through wasting it on landscaping. If you're doing that you really have no right to complain since it's a luxury.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

igammarays 6y ago

"Water is still extremely cheap." - your anecdote. The entire point of a scientific study is to determine the truth of statements like these. Comparison is made to global standards and the consumer price index. And fine, I get you're saying you don't care about the millions of other people in your country who live a different lifestyle and pay ridiculous amounts for water. Fine, they're not your problem. But if you read the article, it's not just about affordability, it's a sign of the decay and decline of the infrastructure that supplies your water. You should care about the nation's water infrastructure, even if you don't care what other people are paying.

driverdan 6y ago
> who live a different lifestyle and pay ridiculous amounts for water Who choose to live a different lifestyle. I'm not saying everyone has to live in a bus and use a few gallons a day. I'm saying that if the cost of water significantly impacts your life you should reduce how much you use. No one in the US pays "ridiculous" amounts for municipal water. We're still talking pennies per gallon. > You should care about the nation's water infrastructure Absolutely. It's one of the reasons water should cost more, to maintain and improve infrastructure. Water should be billed at a rate that covers all of the costs involved.
- igammarays 6y ago
  > It's one of the reasons water should cost more, to maintain and improve infrastructure. It should, but it's not. The article argues that the price of water is going up, but quality is going down. Affordability is not the primary issue (it seems to be marketed that way because that's what individuals care about) but the larger issue is that infrastructure efficiency, and grid stability is going down. Bureaucratic failures all around. > “High-cost low-quality water is a national issue . . . . the federal government is clearly not playing the role it needs to play,” said Howard Neukrug, director of the water center at the University of Pennsylvania and former head of Philadelphia’s water department.
- bonchicbongenre 6y ago
  They really don't choose to "live a different lifestyle". It is simply the case that water, one of the basic necessities for life, is not readily available to many low-income Americans. Water access is routinely turned off or simply not available [0, 1, 2, 3] for those who can't pay or who are unlucky enough to live in certain areas. It is another example of the rampant wealth inequality [4] and degradation of social support [5] that been worsening in the US for decades [6, 7, 8] [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-05-21/poor-water-access-heightens-coronavirus-threat-for-many-americans https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52384622 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52384622 [2] https://time.com/longform/clean-water-access-united-states/ https://time.com/longform/clean-water-access-united-states/ [3] https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/4/17/21223565/coronavirus-clean-water-crisis-america https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/4/17/21223565/coronaviru... [4] https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053331 https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-soc-0... [5] https://people.umass.edu/crotty/Austerity_War.pdf https://people.umass.edu/crotty/Austerity_War.pdf [6] https://www.nber.org/chapters/c7443.pdf https://www.nber.org/chapters/c7443.pdf [7] http://www.macrohistory.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/HSCF_CEPR.pdf http://www.macrohistory.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/HSCF_... [8] https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/708815 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/708815