3 ms·
Sure, but on average less than northern cities. At the end of the day, I don't actually care about moralizing what's wasteful or not if the owner is being char
by legitster 4y ago
Sure, but on average less than northern cities.
At the end of the day, I don't actually care about moralizing what's wasteful or not if the owner is being charged the proper cost to acquire. If that's $1 a gallon for solar and desalination/recycled water, enjoy that lawn.
(Pedantic person side note: pools are not actually that wasteful. If they are properly covered when not in use, evaporative loss is actually pretty minimal).
- woodruffw 4y ago> Sure, but on average less than northern cities. This isn't true. Compare NYC's average of 117 GPD[1] to TMWA's 165 GPD[2]. That's 40% more water use, per individual. The last year that NYC's residents came close to using that much water was 1996. [1]: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/dep/water/history-of-drought-water-consumption.page https://www1.nyc.gov/site/dep/water/history-of-drought-water... [2]: https://www.nevadatomorrow.org/indicators/index/view?indicatorId=11315&localeId=1813 https://www.nevadatomorrow.org/indicators/index/view?indicat...
- Scoundreller 4y agoSwamp/evaporative coolers might be a big part of that difference.
- eesmith 4y agoWater in the Southwest has never been charged "the proper cost to acquire." It's being pumped out faster than it can be replenished. Rivers are drained dry. People have built for decades on the belief that water will never be its true cost. Now it's the end of that day. The "proper cost to acquire" isn't enough. Who pays the cost of repairing the damage done, like groundwater-related subsidence? Of restoring ecosystems?
- alistairSH 4y agoI don't actually care about moralizing what's wasteful or not if the owner is being charged the proper cost to acquire. In theory, I feel the same way. However, I'm not sure anybody is paying anywhere near the proper cost with externalities included.