Saturday, August 27, 2011
Smart El Paso
Well-written article showing how El Paso has eliminated lawns to bring its water usage under total control.
Spend $11 million to save $460 million and avoid a disaster. Sounds good to me.
Note the comparison to the half-hearted efforts by Austin and San Antone. El Paso paid $1 per square foot, which would be around $10,000 for a typical suburban lot. Ten thousand makes it worth your while to do some work and sacrifice some esthetics. The $400 offered by San Antonio obviously didn't persuade anyone.
Moral: Pay attention to real human nature. Don't make piddly-ass little symbolic gestures then complain that people ought to do the right thing. People will do the right thing when you give them the right combination of rewards and respect.
= = = = =
Sidenote: Spokane has made a weak effort in this direction with weak results... but it's really unnecessary here. Our water supply has plenty of spare capacity, especially since the world is getting colder and wetter. We take water from an aquifer that runs through deep gravel under most of the city. It's not a finite 'locked' aquifer like those in the Plains; it's just an underground branch of the Spokane River, constantly flowing from snowmelt upstream. Bonus: because the aquifer runs under the city, part of the water used on lawns percolates back into it. ¶ 11:05 AM
Over the past 20 years El Paso has paid residents a combined $11 million — $1 per square foot — to remove their grass and replace it with gravel, cement or desert plants. The city has permanent restrictions on watering days and reduced water consumption by offering special showerheads and rebates for water-efficient toilets.
Austin offers a $20 to $30 rebate for each 100 square feet of turf removed as part of a pilot program. So far 70 residents have replaced their grass...
San Antonio offers rebates and gift certificates of up to $400 to residents who choose certain grasses, reduce their turf and cut their water consumption. Only about 360 residents have taken part since the program began in 2008...
The Hueco Bolson aquifer, El Paso's main water source, has stabilized since the city plan was implemented in 1991, and a recent study shows El Paso will have a steady supply for at least the next century, said Ed Archuleta, president of El Paso Water Utilities.
The city's annual water consumption in 2010 had dropped by 1.6 percent since 1990, while its population increased about 36 percent. The utility says the city saved more than $460 million that would have been needed for more pumping and treatment plants to accommodate higher water use.
Spend $11 million to save $460 million and avoid a disaster. Sounds good to me.
Note the comparison to the half-hearted efforts by Austin and San Antone. El Paso paid $1 per square foot, which would be around $10,000 for a typical suburban lot. Ten thousand makes it worth your while to do some work and sacrifice some esthetics. The $400 offered by San Antonio obviously didn't persuade anyone.
Moral: Pay attention to real human nature. Don't make piddly-ass little symbolic gestures then complain that people ought to do the right thing. People will do the right thing when you give them the right combination of rewards and respect.
= = = = =
Sidenote: Spokane has made a weak effort in this direction with weak results... but it's really unnecessary here. Our water supply has plenty of spare capacity, especially since the world is getting colder and wetter. We take water from an aquifer that runs through deep gravel under most of the city. It's not a finite 'locked' aquifer like those in the Plains; it's just an underground branch of the Spokane River, constantly flowing from snowmelt upstream. Bonus: because the aquifer runs under the city, part of the water used on lawns percolates back into it. ¶ 11:05 AM
