Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.34. <br /> <br />The Land and Water Fund of the Rockies <br /> <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />Meeting Water Demand Without Gunnison Water <br /> <br />This is very expensive water. We repeat our belief that there is nowhere near <br />120,000 AFA of water available to transport to the Front Range from the Gunnison. <br />As quantities of water available from the Gunnison are reduced below 120,000 AFA, <br />costs per-acre-foot are correspondingly higher. <br /> <br />When compared to conservation strategies that cost as little as $10 per acre- <br />foot saved, '" imported Gunnison water is an unappealing economic choice. Even <br />when more expensive supply-side efficiency strategies are considered, importing <br />Gunnison water appears to be the least economic choice. <br /> <br />B. Alternatives for Meeting Front Range Water Demand <br /> <br />The 1999 Report of the Metropolitan Water Supply Investigation ("MWSI") set <br />the foundation for increasing the efficiency of Denver Metro water use through an <br />exploration of available supply-side options."5 When we refine these options and <br />consider incremental conservation measures that were not included in the original <br />study, we see that the Front Range can meet its foreseeable needs without the need <br />for large new trans-mountain diversions.''" <br /> <br />1. Overview <br /> <br />The MWSI reports that water demand in the Denver metropolitan area at <br />"build-out" could reach 877,000 AFA by 2045-enough water to quench the thirst of <br />3,269,000 people.'" Because water providers have a "reasonably certain future sup- <br />ply" of 763,000 to 802,000 AFA, there is a future unmet need of 75,000 and 114,000 <br />AFA."" The MWSI, however, concluded the Denver metro area could make up this <br />shortfall and safely meet its projected water demand in 2045-without any large new <br />trans-basin diversions-by relying on the following creative supply-side options: <br /> <br />. Conjunctive use (making use of groundwater storage): 60,000 AFA <br />. Reuse of water (re-treating municipal waste water): 120,000 AFA <br />. Interruptible supply (dry-year leases of water from irrigators): 190,000 AFA <br />. Other system integration opportunities: 20,000 AFA <br /> <br />The MWSI set the "floor," not the "ceiling," for the Denver area's future water <br />options. The recommendations of the MWSI should be supplemented to present the <br />Denver metro area with an even wider range of options for meeting future water <br />demand. <br /> <br />First, the MWSI expressly did not examine potential savings from additional <br />water conservation."" Water conservation figures in the MWSI-assumed to be <br />159,900 AFA by 2045-rest on an extrapolation of only expected savings from conser- <br />vation programs in place at the time of the study.''" As explained in detail below, <br />additional conservation measures (inverted rate structures, rebates for Xeriscaping, <br />appliance replacements, and more), some of which were implemented during the <br />summer of 2002, have the potential to reduce metro-wide water demand by an addi- <br />tionall00,000 AFA or more on a sustained basis without affecting quality of life. <br />