Laserfiche WebLink
Steve Harris - You almost have to go provider by provider and examine the numbers. This comes <br />down to the boards decisions. We need information from the state demographer, climate variability, <br />and a discussion on safety margins. <br />Kathleen Curry - We need look at this in the broader context the west slope needs to see that <br />efficiency is being maximized. <br />Eric Hecox - I think there are two different discussions occurring - one examining gpcd numbers <br />and one on the methods to get there. <br />Eric Kuhn- I think we need to look at the methods that focus on using the minimum amount that <br />you need, this is not a one size fits all. <br />Rita Cr uilpton - There cannot be one used statewide for gpcd - we need to focus on methods. <br />Stan Cazier - The best methodology is pricing. <br />Wayne Vanderschuere - Need to be careful about behavioral versus technical responses to <br />conservation. People may get used to paying a higher price and usage could increase. <br />Eric Wilkinson - Different service providers have different characteristics. A provider won't sell <br />unless it's a technical savings vs. a behavioral change. If you are looking at M&I conservation it <br />doesn't make a difference if you have a dual system or not. They think the water supply through the <br />dual system doesn't have an impact because it is cheap water. Dual system water is being applied in <br />an inefficient manner in some cases. There needs to be a paradigm shift - it is still an outside water <br />use. We will be going down the wrong path if we suggest numbers and not best management <br />practices. <br />Harris Sherman - There needs to be more discussion on new growth and densities that go with it. <br />We will have 2.5 million additional residents by 2030 and close to 2 million more by 2050 which is <br />a near doubling of the population in 42 years. In terms of density along the Front Range could water <br />use be reduced density considerations? <br />Rod Kuharich - It is clear that higher density development has impact on water use - 50% of water <br />use is outside. The indoor use is reasonable and the consumptive use is a fraction of this. South <br />Metro has begun to focus on irrigation and this is where we are focusing - rates will have an <br />impact. Water providers can only go so far and then the land use decision makers need to be <br />involved. <br />Eric Kuhn - Transmountain diversions are a 100% consumable. With reuse a transmountain <br />diversion is a huge bang for the buck with reuse. A 50AF supply could be a 100AF or 200AF <br />supply. Commitment to reuse is that critical - how far you reuse is important. <br />Dan Birch - In the area of the gap area I would like the last gallon versus the first gallon to <br />transbasin water.