Wet and dry. Urban water management issues in the Western United States and Canada Frédéric Lasserre Laval University

Drinking water: what costs, with what resources? Producing drinking water, distribute it, collect and treat used water: major municipal responsibility. Social stakes are enormous: 1 billion people have no access to safe water Water increasingly polluted Infrastructure to build or renovate : major investment Regulations on drinking water are more and more severe (at least in developed countries)  Resource management issue (quantity, quality)  Public finance issue

1. Access to the resource Domestic use are usually small compared to industrial or agricultural use (withdrawal and consumptive use) City = major concentration of people Total demand may thus be significant and spatially very concentrated => Problem of security of supply

Source : archeolyon.com Even in Antiquity, the issue of urban water supply was significant, with for instance the construction of aqueducts

Issues of resource protection and resource sharing

2. Access : the case of Western American cities Los Angeles, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Phoenix : coping with dry climates. Las Vegas : 12 cm of rain/yr Domestic use of the water : less than 15% of total water use in the West (agriculture: 75%)

Often blamed for water problems : fountains and hotels in Las Vegas Pictures: F. Lasserre

Nevada0,490,81,222,62,76 New Mexico 1,021,31,521,8222,09 Utah1,061,461,722,232,82,86 Arizona1,772,723,675,136,66,56 Colorado2,212,893,34,355,19 Florida6,799,7512,941618,519,3 California19,9523,6729,7633,936,938 Evolution of population of selected American States (million) Lasserre and Descroix > a very fast expanding population; now stopped or much slower -> concentration of large demand in specific places

… with a peculiar urban model Las Vegas, 1984 and 2011 Landsat images

Albuquerque, NM Lasserre Urban sprawl and individual house-based urbanism -> cost of infrastructure -> lot of outdoor use of water Las Vegas, NV

Irrigation (mainly golf courses) 7,6 Industry 1 Retail trade 13,4 Public Institutions (government, schools, hospitals) 5 Hotels 6,3 Residential 59 Others 7,7 Water use in Southern Nevada, 2007, % Southern Nevada Water Authority, 2009 Water Resource Plan, Las Vegas, 2009, p.16 In urban water use, hotels, retail and industry are often marginal users. Hotels : tight regulations. Recycled water. Main user : residential. Idea: specifically target this segment

3. Policies : how did cities secure access to the resource? Need to secure reliable access. Groundwater. Massive water schemes: Las Vegas: Lake Mead Phoenix : Lake Havasu, Salt River San Francisco : Hetch Hetchy Canal Los Angeles : Los Angeles Aqueduct San Diego : Colorado River Aqueduct Central Arizona Project (CAP), Phoenix. Lasserre Hoover Dam on the Colorado, creating Lake Mead Lasserre

Los Angeles Aqueduct, 1913 (prolonged to Lake Mono, 1940) State Water Project: California Aqueduct, 1960s Colorado River Aqueduct, 1941 Massive water diversions, California Local project State project Federal project All American Canal, 1940 Central Valley Project, 1950s water-come-from/

Colorado : a river now completely transfered, dammed and harnessed But tough competition with agriculture -> Legal system of prior appropriation Groundwater decline Resource not infinite -> Need to control demand

Several tools designed to encourage conservation by residents Education and communication Fiscal : -Rebates on water bill for xeriscaping and drip irrigation -Rebates on dual flush/low flush toilets -Rebates on low-water use appliances -Rebates on special car wash Regulation : -Regular washing garage alley or car forbidden -Daytime watering prohibited -Summertime watering regulation -Emergency regulation during drought -Water police Tarification : -Incremental and progressive tarification. Cheap basic service : for 50 l/pers/day, family of 4 : 5 $/month Bill increases and can reach up to 300 $/month Despite this, water supply very tight ; drought since 2010… Xeriscaping (SNWA)

3. Urban Water management in Canada : the land of plenty ? Environment Canada 2005 Consumptive use (2006) : Agriculture 57% Industrial 20% Thermoelectric 14% Residential 9% 3.1. Water use structure

Again, residential use often represents bulk of municipal use But what’s the problem in Canada ?

Average value masks diversity of local situations

3.2. Scarce water in Canada? Water is overall abundant in Canada, however : Dryer regions, like the Prairies Recurrence of dry summers lately (climate change) Vulnerability of the domestic segment, main user of urban water in Canada Cost of producing and treating a lot of water Demand increase forces the construction of new and costly plants for drinking water production and used water treatment – Peaks : pool fill-up in April; summer watering (again, outdoor use…) – impacts of climate change on sewers (unitary -> need for dual system; urban planning to be reviewed, at a cost)

Increasing investments because of the pollution of the resource – agriculture, industrial, municipal Production of drinking water: in Québec, no political will to apply principle of polluter-payer … about to change? Law on water 2009  Production of drinking water: in Québec, no political will to apply principle of polluter-payer … about to change? Law on water 2009 Legislation introduces tighter regulations and norms on drinking water  Financial responsibility rests on municipal governments…

Occasional scarcity of water, going to happen more often in summer with climate change: real problem, but over short periods. Depends also on use habits. The fundamental problem for cities is: fiscal  fiscal (principle of consumer-payer), and of  public finances : who pays for the production, treatment and distribution systems  much more than increase of volume  Idea of water tarification to finance production and manage demand expansion

3.3. In Canada, what tarification ? 100 % of Canadians pay for their water 55% pay with a non-incentive tarification : – 43% : fixed tariff included in municipal taxes – 12% : decreasing volumetric tarification 45% pay with an incentive tarification : – 36% : flat volumetric rate – 9% : progressive tariff In 1999, consumption was 70 % higher when there were flat monthly rates than where tariffs were based on used volume.

1998. Environment Canada, 2012

Pricing water : a difficult policy to implement Cost of installing meters (± 300 M $ only in Québec) Door opened to privatization ? Issue of minimal basic water use. Necessity to have a price structure high enough to be incentive. How is it possible to legitimize it… – If the problem is about public spending in nature, and not resource management – And if the production of drinking water not very costly (between 23 and 55¢/m³ with infrastructure depreciation)?