Water Conservation (college, calculation, subsidized)

[highdesertmutz]

Originally Posted by rruff

How could conservation have prevented any of these things?

I bought a gallon of water at the store. I drank one quart from it, but forgot and left the remaining 3 quarts outside during the day uncovered, and the next day, I was down to 2 quarts because leaving it outside in the heat made it evaporate, I then drank one more quart, and used the remaining quart to wash a pair of soiled socks, now I have no water to drink, I'll just go buy more. I went to the store, and they were fresh out of drinking water. now I'm screwed. and thirsty. sure wished I had those 2 quarts I wasted.boy am I dumb! and sorry.

[Galounger]

Originally Posted by songinthewind7

I guess I was surprised that the people in Ga. were not a little more prepared.

I've lived in Georgia almost 40 years and Northern Georgia (including metro Atlanta) has never had the type of drought situation it has now. Normally Georgia has one of the highest precipitation levels in the nation with huge amounts of rain falling from thunderstorms every spring and summer but all that has seemed to change in the last several years. And a lot of people still don't believe there's something seriously wrong with the planets environment.

[Tim Rankin]

Originally Posted by domino

Conservation just makes good sense.

Of course it makes good sense. Look at this chart:



These gains have been made through a combination of education, restrictions and incentives. Without these conservation gains, ABQ would be needing more water sooner. It doesn't matter whether you approach the argument from a conservation viewpoint or an economic one. Conservation does have benefits [ask any Atlantan], and it also saves $$$.

This website shows the San Juan-Chama diversion project.

Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority - San Juan-Chama Drinking Water Project

Fortunately for its residents, the agreement for this water was made in 1963, much to the credit of NM's legislators @ that time. That water will serve NM's needs well into the future, but the "easy" water is now gone. Conservation has effectively extended the time the easy water will serve our needs. When the easy water is gone, we will have to spend serious $$$ to get more.

p.s. The gallons/capita/day chart is for ABQ - link provided upon request.

[mortimer]

I had to laugh at this one: ( I almost peed my pants!)

Asked by Tim Rankin:

TR> Zoidberg, why the arguments against conserving water?
TR> Are you just having fun with us?

Zoidberg is one of the most skillful "pot-stirrers" and "string-pullers" I've
ever seen. He may be serious, but OF COURSE he's jacking with you/us/me.

He's on record as saying "arguing is fun ..."

Zoidberg has taken trolling to an art form. You almost can't even tell
that he's doing it. The Master. < bowing up-and-down with arms out>

Just look at this thread. There have been lots of good posts as a result
of Zoidberg's post which I will now proceed to dissect below here:

TR> are you just trying to ease your guilty conscience over owning a pool ...

Now you're kidding, right? I saw a smilie there, so I'm guessing, "yes."

As has been earlier discussed, pools don't really use much when you are
comparing them to lawns. (Unless, of course, you are Zoidberg and your
pool is a leaky old relic.)

Zoidberg writes:

Z> ... there is a high cost associated with bringing that first
Z> drop to a residence; the installation and maintenance ...
Z> the pumps ... cost of mailing bills, etc.

I don't care. You are arguing the cost accounting reasons for
the charges. These are obvious to me. Again, I don't care.

Z> It wouldn't be right to make it completely free. ...

Yes it would. If the goal is to get people to conserve water
then having it cost a whopping $3 to double my use from 1,000
to 2,000 gallons or $6 to double it from 2,000 to 4,000 gallons
doesn't make sense.

If I use 2,000 gallons it costs me $57, but if I use 4,000
my bill shoots up to $63. What's my incentive to conserve?
If, instead, those fixed costs are allocated to those who
regularly use 100,000+ gallons a month, there would be
good reason for most people to cut back.

If you bury the cost in the usage from gallon one then cost
concious people ( AKA Cheap B@stards ) will pay more attention.

If the average user uses 15k gallons/month and pays about
$100 then I should be able to get by with a water bill of $20
for my use of under 4k gallons. Using/wasting that extra 1k
gallons would cost me another $6 ( a bottle of wine ).

Of course, it should actually cost more per gallong for the second
1k and more for the third and so on. Actually, if you can get by
with using less than 1,000 as, I'm sure, some apartment dwellers
do, it should just be free.

This also goes for my PNM electricity bill and my New Mexico
Gas Company bill. Some months nearly a quarter of my bill for
either one is fixed fees.

rruff wrote:

rr> He isn't arguing against it, only pointing out that
rr> there isn't a compelling reason to worry about it.

That was my take and I am in agreement. However, here we
have to argue about the definition of "worry." (Remember that
it is "fun to argue" so Zoidberg should be happy.)

I don't lose sleep over water use and waste, but I think that
something must be done and the simplest thing is to make it
more expensive to waste it and let people figure out how they
want to do their conserving.

highdesertmutz contributed:

mutz> ... people might think we have endless supplies of drinking
mutz> water, when in fact, we do not.

Wrong example.

We *do* have endless supplies of drinking water.
We have almost endless supplies of water for bathing.
We have huge supplies of water for washing clothes and dishes.
We have some water available for watering plants and growing food
in our yards.
We have less and less water available for golf courses.
Water for large-scale agriculture is being squeezed out more and more.

I can afford to pay $10, if necessary, for water to drink. You can
extract water from the air we breath for that much money.

It's like petroleum. You never actually run out. It just gets more
and more expensive and things that you used to use it for become
prohibitively expensive.

It's also like petroleum in that our largest supply is our ability to
use less of it. That supply is also our fastest to come on-line.

songinthewind7 added:

song> I guess I was surprised that the people in Ga. were not
song> a little more prepared.

Actually, I was surprised that there was even a problem there.
I think of Georgia as being a damp and humid place that rains
too much for me. Not worrying about "wasting" water is a perk
of living there ( was a perk ).

Of course, there isn't an environmental problem that can't be
always made much worse by a growing population.

[highdesertmutz]

thanks for letting me know I'm wrong, you are the expert. water in the air? right, t or c average humidity is around 15%. maybe people should think about drinking their own pee, hey, astronauts do it!
http://www.water.org/waterpartners.aspx?pgID=916
don't pee your pants, put it in a jug for later use.
and, why can't you post like everyone else here, the way you don't copy and paste makes it all run together like jibber jabber. are you using a 1970's Univac OS or what there?

Originally Posted by mortimer

I had to laugh at this one: ( I almost peed my pants!)

Asked by Tim Rankin:

TR> Zoidberg, why the arguments against conserving water?
TR> Are you just having fun with us?

Zoidberg is one of the most skillful "pot-stirrers" and "string-pullers" I've
ever seen. He may be serious, but OF COURSE he's jacking with you/us/me.

He's on record as saying "arguing is fun ..."

Zoidberg has taken trolling to an art form. You almost can't even tell
that he's doing it. The Master. < bowing up-and-down with arms out>

Just look at this thread. There have been lots of good posts as a result
of Zoidberg's post which I will now proceed to dissect below here:

TR> are you just trying to ease your guilty conscience over owning a pool ...

Now you're kidding, right? I saw a smilie there, so I'm guessing, "yes."

As has been earlier discussed, pools don't really use much when you are
comparing them to lawns. (Unless, of course, you are Zoidberg and your
pool is a leaky old relic.)

Zoidberg writes:

Z> ... there is a high cost associated with bringing that first
Z> drop to a residence; the installation and maintenance ...
Z> the pumps ... cost of mailing bills, etc.

I don't care. You are arguing the cost accounting reasons for
the charges. These are obvious to me. Again, I don't care.

Z> It wouldn't be right to make it completely free. ...

Yes it would. If the goal is to get people to conserve water
then having it cost a whopping $3 to double my use from 1,000
to 2,000 gallons or $6 to double it from 2,000 to 4,000 gallons
doesn't make sense.

If I use 2,000 gallons it costs me $57, but if I use 4,000
my bill shoots up to $63. What's my incentive to conserve?
If, instead, those fixed costs are allocated to those who
regularly use 100,000+ gallons a month, there would be
good reason for most people to cut back.

If you bury the cost in the usage from gallon one then cost
concious people ( AKA Cheap B@stards ) will pay more attention.

If the average user uses 15k gallons/month and pays about
$100 then I should be able to get by with a water bill of $20
for my use of under 4k gallons. Using/wasting that extra 1k
gallons would cost me another $6 ( a bottle of wine ).

Of course, it should actually cost more per gallong for the second
1k and more for the third and so on. Actually, if you can get by
with using less than 1,000 as, I'm sure, some apartment dwellers
do, it should just be free.

This also goes for my PNM electricity bill and my New Mexico
Gas Company bill. Some months nearly a quarter of my bill for
either one is fixed fees.

rruff wrote:

rr> He isn't arguing against it, only pointing out that
rr> there isn't a compelling reason to worry about it.

That was my take and I am in agreement. However, here we
have to argue about the definition of "worry." (Remember that
it is "fun to argue" so Zoidberg should be happy.)

I don't lose sleep over water use and waste, but I think that
something must be done and the simplest thing is to make it
more expensive to waste it and let people figure out how they
want to do their conserving.

highdesertmutz contributed:

mutz> ... people might think we have endless supplies of drinking
mutz> water, when in fact, we do not.

Wrong example.

We *do* have endless supplies of drinking water.
We have almost endless supplies of water for bathing.
We have huge supplies of water for washing clothes and dishes.
We have some water available for watering plants and growing food
in our yards.
We have less and less water available for golf courses.
Water for large-scale agriculture is being squeezed out more and more.

I can afford to pay $10, if necessary, for water to drink. You can
extract water from the air we breath for that much money.

It's like petroleum. You never actually run out. It just gets more
and more expensive and things that you used to use it for become
prohibitively expensive.

It's also like petroleum in that our largest supply is our ability to
use less of it. That supply is also our fastest to come on-line.

songinthewind7 added:

song> I guess I was surprised that the people in Ga. were not
song> a little more prepared.

Actually, I was surprised that there was even a problem there.
I think of Georgia as being a damp and humid place that rains
too much for me. Not worrying about "wasting" water is a perk
of living there ( was a perk ).

Of course, there isn't an environmental problem that can't be
always made much worse by a growing population.

[mortimer]

highdesertmutz said:

> ... thanks for letting me know I'm wrong, ...

I'm always glad to oblige.

I had a feeling that you'd quote my entire post (needlessly)
right beneath my post.

The hissy-fit that missed my point entirely was a bonus.
I really liked that.

> ... why can't you post like everyone else here ...

You are the first person to ever criticize my posting style.
Therefore, I must assume that I'm doing a fine job - style-wise.

If enough people start laying into me like you did about my style,
then I'll gladly leave. Somehow, I think I'm doing it OK since my
posts have a higher proportion of original content.

Let's see if youi can get madder at me than you were just before.

That would be funny.

[highdesertmutz]

Originally Posted by mortimer

highdesertmutz said:

> ... thanks for letting me know I'm wrong, ...

I'm always glad to oblige.

I had a feeling that you'd quote my entire post right beneath my post.

The hissy-fit that missed my point entirely was a bonus.

> ... why can't you post like everyone else here ...

Originally Posted by mortimer

You are the first person to ever criticize my posting style.

Just returning the favor, as you've done to me in the past. the thread is all your pal, take it away, I'm finished.

Originally Posted by mortimer

Therefore, I must assume that I'm doing a fine job - style-wise.

If enough people start laying into me like you did, then I'll
gladly leave. Somehow, I think I'm doing it OK since my posts
have a higher proportion of original content.

Let's see if youi can get madder at me than you were just before.

That would be funny.

[songinthewind7]

Another way to conserve water in the yard or garden is to put mulch around the plants and trees to slow down the evaporation of moisture and to cut back on the weeds.
Pine needles are good for this.
Rake the pine needles up, good recycling.

[rruff]

Originally Posted by highdesertmutz

I bought a gallon of water at the store. I drank one quart from it, but forgot and left the remaining 3 quarts outside during the day uncovered, and the next day, I was down to 2 quarts because leaving it outside in the heat made it evaporate, I then drank one more quart, and used the remaining quart to wash a pair of soiled socks, now I have no water to drink, I'll just go buy more. I went to the store, and they were fresh out of drinking water. now I'm screwed. and thirsty. sure wished I had those 2 quarts I wasted.boy am I dumb! and sorry.

If there is a shortage due to drought then conservation is a necessity. But otherwise the water we don't use either flows downstream or evaporates... we can't store it.

[mortimer]

songinthewind7 added:

> mulch around the plants and trees to slow down the
> evaporation of moisture and to cut back on the weeds.
> Pine needles are good for this.

I've always liked that about pine trees. People often describe
them as "messy," but to me, the area under the pine is "clean"
and low maintenance.

Why people insist on having grass growing all the way up to the
trunk of a tree is beyond me.