Text Version of Infographic titled, "When Everyone Conserves, Everyone Saves"

Ever wonder why your water rates are going up, even though you’re using less? These three communities show how conservation keeps rates lower over time.

Westminster, Colorado

Water conservation over 30 years reduced costs for customers.
1980: Population = 52,570 - 180 Gallons per person, per day
2010: Population = 106,114 - 149 Gallons per person, per day
Population more than doubled, while per person water use declined by 17%. Because the community conserved, the same family’s bill was 47% lower in 2012.

A conserving household’s annual bill was $655, 47% less than a Non-conserving household’s annual bill of $1,251.

Because of conservation, tap fees, paid by new property owners to join the water system were 44% lower ($21,229) than if there hadn’t been conservation ($38,181).

Why? If per person use had not decreased, Westminster would have needed 7,295 Acre-feet of new water supply and more infrastructure to meet demand, at a total cost of nearly $592 million - an expense passed onto ratepayers and new development.

Primary conservation drivers: Conservation programs (Indoor and Outdoor), Efficiency-Oriented Rates, Efficiency in New Development, National Plumbing Codes

Primary water challenges: Increased competition for water, rising costs of water supply, growing population.

Gilbert, Arizona

Water conservation over 20 years reduced costs for customers.
1997: Population = 75,144 -  244 Gallons per person, per day
2015: Population = 247,542 - 173 Gallons per person, per day
Population increased by 229%, while per person water use declined by 29%. Because the community conserved, the same family’s bill was 5.8% lower in 2015.

A conserving household’s annual bill was $619, 5.8% less than a Non-conserving household’s annual bill of $657.

Because of conservation, tap fees, paid by new property owners to join the water system were 45% lower ($9,468) than if there hadn’t been conservation ($17,201).

Why? If per person use had not decreased, Gilbert would have needed to invest nearly $341 million in water resources and water and wastewater treatment capital costs.

Primary conservation drivers: Conservation programs (Indoor and Outdoor), efficiency in new development, National plumbing codes, smaller lot sizes with reduced turf area

Primary water challenges: Rising costs of water resources, building the town’s water workforce, customer education on sustainable water use

Tucson, Arizona

Water conservation over 30 years reduced costs for customers.

1989: Population = 512,000 - 188 Gallons per person, per day
2015: Population = 717,875 - 130 Gallons per person, per day
Population increased by 40%, while per person water use declined by 31%. Because the community conserved, the same family’s bill was 11.7% lower in 2015.

A conserving household’s annual bill was $847, 11.7% less than a Non-conserving household’s annual bill of $959.

Why? If per person use had not decreased, Tucson would have needed to invest $350 million in new wate and wastewater infrastructure to pump more water through the water system and treat more wastewater.

Primary conservation drivers: Conservation programs (Indoor and Outdoor), youth and homeowner education, efficiency-oriented rates, national plumbing codes, equity

Primary water challenges: Rising costs of water, rising costs of infrastructure maintenance, public awareness of the value of water
So What Did We Learn?
When Everyone Conserves, Everyone Saves.

Water rates are rising, but when communities conserve, they don’t go up nearly as much.

Each water and wastewater customer has avoided the costs of acquiring, delivering, and treating additional water supplies that would have been necessary - had they not conserved.

Individual actions add up! When everyone does their part to conserve, the entire community benefits from lower rates in the long-term, sustainable water supplies, and healthier watersheds.

To learn more, visit. www.FinancingSustainableWater.org
Alliance for Water Efficiency