S2_ConservationEfficiency - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 2 Conservation and Efficiency Technical Roundtable Though not discussed by the TRT, CWCB believes that there may be a significant risk to water providers in delaying the implementation of identified projects and processes and other water supply development that will be ultimately needed even with successful implementation of water conservation. Competition for scarce supplies, cost escalation of water supply development, and the increasing difficulty in permitting projects suggest that delays in implementation may result in the inability to develop the project at a later date. 6. Water conservation implementation should be implemented concurrently with structural water supply development. Effective conservation programs make other supply alternatives, such as agricultural transfers and new reservoirs, more palatable to all parties, including utility customers, agricultural water users, environmental and recreational interests and citizens, businesses, and local government in neighboring river basins. The "Gap" TRT should formulate alternatives, including a "conservation-oriented alternative" for addressing needs in specific "gap" areas, i.e., where there is awell-defined likely shortfall by 2030. Future efforts could involve formation of a sub-committee, made up of some members of both the Conservation and the Gap TRTs and perhaps some members of the inter-basin compact roundtables. These members could work together to clarify how "current" (2000), more recent (2006), and expected levels of water use will be factored into the "gap" analysis, especially for areas of the state expected to experience rapid growth or to face difficulty in meeting demand. This information should also be provided to the interbasin compact basin roundtables. 8. Both water conservation and structural projects need to be implemented now, since both take time to implement and produce the desired reduction in demand or increase in yield. Structural projects take time to permit and construct and conservation takes time for market penetration. An issue not discussed by the TRT, but identified in the SW SI Report is that the implementation of M~eI conservation will result in some reduction in wastewater and lawn irrigation return flows. It is likely that even without additional conservation, M~eI water providers will continue to increase their use of legally consumable return flows, whether from lawn irrigation or wastewater efIluent. This will inevitably result in reduced supplies to downstream agricultural users who have benefited from these increased flows over the past 40 years. The Role of the Colorado Water Conservation Board and other Stakeholders 1. It is not the intent of the CWCB that the implementation of water conservation measures should interfere with the justification or permitting of needed structural water supply projects. As part of the adoption of the SWSI, the CWCB adopted the following mission statement: Following the lead of local water suppliers, the state will monitor long-term water needs, provide technical and financial assistance to put the necessary plans, projects, and programs in place to meet those needs, and foster cooperation to avoid being forced to make trade-offs that would otherwise harm Colorado's environment, lifestyle, and economy. The CWCB, throughits OWCD, should continue to take a statewide role in promoting water conservation and drought planning. CWCB intends to continue to be proactive in drought planning by implementing an update to the drought and water supply assessment survey and studying the impacts of climate variability on water supply. 3. The CWCB should continue to provide grants to water providers for the development of water FINAL DRAFT 2-27