Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"I <br />';.'1 <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />The Economic Setting <br /> <br />". .~ <br /> <br />year to prevent contamination of groundwater by pesticides, nitrates, toxic <br />chemical, and petroleum spills. Other studies show that households place a <br />far higher value-as high as $1,500 per year-on protecting groundwater. <br /> <br />;~.<I <br />.-:~ <br />loA <br /> <br />Water-Conservation Values. Water can be conserved in multiple ways. <br />For example, urban residents and governments can change landscaping <br />practices and increase the use of plants that require less water, or farm <br />businesses can install water-saving irrigation systems for their crops. The <br />cost per af of water conserved by such practices can vary, from nearly zero to <br />several hundred dollars. An illustration ofthe potential for water <br />conservation comes from Intel Corporation. According to company records, <br />the company's water-conservation programs have successfully reduced Intel's <br />daily water consumption by 2.131 million gallons per day (mgd), or about 6.5 <br />afper day. To accomplish these savings, Intel has made capital expenditures <br />totaling $3 million (Intel intends to expand the program to $4.77 million). <br />Amortization of these expenditures translates them to an annual cost of <br />$488,236, indicating that the annual cost of increasing the supply of water <br />available to other users is $207 per af. <br /> <br />Albuquerque initiated a city-wide conservation campaign in June of 1994. <br />Since that time, numerous steps have been taken to educate the public on <br />wise water usage. In 1996, the City implemented a low-flush toilet rebate <br />program. A residential water audit was planned to begin in late 1996. The <br />cost and effectiveness of these efforts remain to be determined. <br /> <br />:;; <br />.~- <br /> <br />Market Distortions from Federal Programs. All of the values described <br />in the preceding paragraphs are heavily influenced by federal investments, <br />especially those of the BuRec and the Corps of Engineers (CoE); regulatory <br />actions, such as those of the Environmental Protection Agency and Fish & <br />Wildlife Service, and the numerous programs that affect human activities in <br />the Basin. In effect, these federal expenditures have altered the prices that <br />all consumers pay for the Basin's water-related goods and services. In some <br />instances, the price distortions occur through deliberate action, such as <br />reducing the costs of federal projects allocated to irrigators. In others, they <br />occur because a federal project, regulation, or program affects a bundle of <br />goods and services, many of which have free-rider characteristics. A dam <br />built to provide water for irrigation, for example, also can affect the risk of <br />flooding for homeowners in the floodplain, the availability of recreational <br />opportunities, and the integrity of the ecosystem. Furthermore, flood <br />protection for one parcel in the floodplain also is available to its neighbors, <br />and society as a whole generally shares access to the recreational <br /> <br />(')294i} <br /> <br />63 <br />