Analysis does not measure up

By June 12, 2014


The Customer Conservation Progress reported in the May 28 Mountain Democrat has some flaws in the analysis. The year-to-date of 4 percent since the first of January does not take into account that more than half of the usual water use is for outdoor watering, and while it was not a nice, wet year, there was sufficient rainfall that many people may have been like me, and not needed landscape watering before mid-May.

Also, letters to the editor indicate that many of us, me included, have already upgraded our indoor water use with low-flush toilets, low-flow faucets and shower heads, and consciously made efforts to reduce water use several years ago — when the water rates went significantly higher. When I finally gave up on the old washer, a major decision criteria for the new one was water conservation.

Now that landscape watering has actually begun, the weakly conservation was four times the “year-to-date,” which I think is a better indicator of our efforts. Do we still need to improve? Yes. But I think our citizens will continue to pay attention to the watering day restrictions. I would also like to see non-residential water use conservation improve, and for a real analysis of how well we are doing on water conservation, I would ask EID to give us an analysis that shows residential and non-residential uses separately.

I am doing my part, how about you?


Letters to the Editor

  • Recent Posts

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.