Laserfiche WebLink
Section 2 <br />Conservation and Efficiency Technical Roundtable <br />Table 2-2 What are the Projected Long-term Savings from Conservation Alternalives7 <br /> Estimated Potential Water Potential Water Potential Water <br /> Implementation Savings Range - Savings Range • Savings Range - Estimated cost range of <br /> or Penetration Per Customer Entire Program Entire Program program per AF of Expected durability of <br />Measure Level by 2030 (kgatlyear) {kgallyear) (aflyear) Savings ($!AF) savings SourceslDocumentation <br />Metering of all utility Very few <br />customers customers in <br /> Colorado are not <br /> metered in 2005 <br />May go after some <br />of the same <br />savings. These <br />should not be <br />summed to <br />calculate total <br />potential savings. <br />TOTAL (not including duplicates) 93,543,335 • 286,943 - <br /> 149,509,612 458,618 aflyr <br /> kgallyr <br /> POTENTIAL Weighted Average Cost <br /> SAVINGS (not Per AF of Savings <br /> including <br /> duplicates) <br /> 372,780 aflyr $10,6141af <br />FOOTNOTES <br />Penetration rates and potential water savings are designed to be realistic, but conservative estimates based on implementation across the entire state over the next 25 years. These estimates do not take into <br />consideration new products and technologies that are entering the market even today such as high efficiency toilets and super high efficiency clothes washers. Substantial changes in irrigation practices are also <br />expected in the next quarter century. It is quite possible, even likely, that actual savings vall be higher than projected. <br />Conservation savings, unlike Vaditional supply options, must be rigorously verified and maintained through ongoing public education and social marketing efforts. For conservation programs to be successful, <br />citizens and businesses alike must understand that water is valuable and should not be wasted. <br />Other measures not listed above <br />Municipal ordinances <br />Municipal codes and ordinances can be used as a tool to increase implementation of cost effective conservation savings. These tools can be effective and encrouraging conservation in several areas, <br />Landscape ordinance <br />Landscape ordinances can reduce outdoor demands in new construction by establishing guidelines and requirements for landscape and irrigation s}stem installations as currently exist for other building trades. <br />Providers can limit lost opportunities by establishing standards since incremental costs for proven methods and technology are often minimal in a new installation. Retrofit on sale ordinances requires properties <br />that sell to retroft fixtures to current standards. This method of increasing participation is used in many regions already to insure that properties comply with smoke alarm requirements. <br />Retrofit on salelresa4e ordinance <br />Retrofit on sale or resale requirements often Includes a rebate to help fund the requirement. Local building officials can require more efficient fxtures than the national or state codes mandate. In this manner, a <br />community may choose to require 1.1 gallon per Flush toilets he installed rather than the standard 1.6 gallon per flush toilets and use the savings to extend water supply.. <br />2-1 D <br />DRAFT VLArI <br />51SW5121FUW~ OEIIVERABLE~CONS 6 £F'F 5='.53 CONSERVATION 8 EFFICIENCY la-0].000 <br />