Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7.3 <br /> <br />actual irrigation and ideal irrigation, as shown on Figure 7-1. Ideal sprinkling was calculated <br />based on such variables as (1) irrigatable area, (2) temperature, (3) r>linfall, and (4) monthly <br />, crop coefficients for grass. The dynamic impacts of metering are illustrated on Figure 7-2. <br />This diagram shows actual sprinkling as a percent of cumulative ideal sprink1ing before and <br />after metering. <br /> <br />Skeptics state that meters initially reduce the quantity oi water consumed, but that <br />over time water users will begin using more water until a new equihbrium is reached at a <br />level that approaches. the original use. Mr. Hanke's study refuted this hypothesis. Only two <br />of the studied routes, 37 and 79, showed a slight recovery in the ratio of actual sprinkling <br />use to ideal sprinkling. All other routes reflected falling ratios. <br /> <br />Study results showed small changes in water use (elasticity) due to income, but larger <br />changes in water use due to higher utility bills. <br /> <br />In addition, interior (domestic) consumption was reduced sharply after metering as <br />customers altered their activities in response to what Mr. Hanke referred to as "a positive <br />water price" (Figure 7-3). The average interior use in the metered rate period was 36- <br />percent lower than in the flat rate period. The trends for interior use were similar to those <br />for exterior use. Interior demand did not gradually increase after its initial drop (at the stan <br />of metering). <br /> <br />Change in interior use based on income, according to Mr. Hanke's data, was <br />extremely low. However, it was shown that the change in interior water use, based on price <br />was very high. <br /> <br />7.1.5 Rata Structure <br /> <br />In January 1988, water conservation pricing went into effect for all of Boulder's <br />customers. An increasing block rate structure was approved in which the more a customer <br />used, the more he paid (per unit volume). The increasing block rate structure was <br />established to more equitably distnbute the costs for providing peak demand services to high <br />water use customers. Block 1 pays for the base costs of operation, Block 2 pays for the costs <br />of operating ~...lrmg" facilities, and Block 3 pays for the cost of additional raw water supply <br />and treatment facilities for extraordinary use. This structure allows the City to discourage <br />water wastt. . ~d abuse by segregating excessive users and charging them according to the <br />burden they place on the system. The basis for developing a customer's Block 1 <br />consumption is each customer's average winter consumption (A WC). That is, a CUStomer <br />will pay Block 1 prices as long as his consumption .stays at or bClow his AWe. Block rate <br />. 2 is based on consumption that is greater than AWe, but less than or equal to 400 percent <br />of AWe. Block rate 3 is based on all consumption greater than 400 percent of AWe. <br />