Laserfiche WebLink
<br />o Dl 0 83 <br /> <br />Dr aft - 9/ 8 1 <br /> <br />TABLE 1 <br /> <br />Utility Fulfilled Demand at Different Levels of Confidence <br /> <br /> Per Capita Demand <br /> (Gallons per capita per day) <br />Confidence Le vel 1975 1980 1990 2000 2010 <br /> 96% 208.8 211. 1 214.3 218.1 221. 6 <br /> 90% 203.2 205.4 208.5 212.2 215.6 <br />50% (average) 187.9 190.0 192.9 196.3 199.4 <br /> <br />As explained in Chapter 5, this study assumes that demand <br />, <br />for municipal treated water will average 200 gallons per capita <br /> <br />per day throughout the state. Table 1 shows this to be reason- <br /> <br />able. Although this amount will not apply equally well in all <br /> <br />regions it provides the most realistic figure for two reasons. <br /> <br />First, the Platte and Arkansas Hydrologic Regions accounted for <br /> <br />I <br />"'=' <br /> <br />87.1 percent of Colorado's estimated 1979 population. They <br /> <br />include the entire Front Range Corridor where water consumption <br /> <br />features of various areas are highly similar. Because of its <br /> <br />uniformity and predominance in terms of population, the charac- <br /> <br />teristics of this area are the most reasonable to apply state- <br /> <br />wide. Second, this estimate of 200 gcd is based on the broadest <br /> <br />data available. If anything, it is likely to overstate the <br /> <br />demand for water, and thus provide "worst case" illustrations, as <br /> <br />it is unl ikely that per capita lawn acreage in other regions will <br /> <br />be greater than that prevalent in the Denver area. Moreover, it <br /> <br />is likely that per capita consumption will drop in the Denver <br /> <br />area in the next two decades in response to rising water prices, <br /> <br />metering, higher population density, increased environmerit~i <br /> <br />2 <br />