Ashley HydeJessica FrogleyEnglish 201010 December 2011Proposal Paper Proposal: Tax benefit for water conservation Utah is one of the five fastest growing states in the nation, and it shares a border with thefour other fastest growing states. From 1990 to 2000, Utah’s population increased by more than510,000 people to over 2.2 million. In 2011 Utah reached 2.9 million people. The populationwill more than double to nearly 5 million by 2050. Within the Wasatch Front, the population is1.7 million in a 80 mile radius. That is 40 miles to Ogden which is North Salt Lake Valley. To40 miles south from Salt Lake to Provo. As Utah’s population increases, so will the demand forUtah’s limited water resources. (Utah.gov) If Utah’s residential and industrial water demands swell at the same rate as its populationgrowth, the state is headed for big trouble. To compound this mounting crisis, Utah is the seconddriest state in the nation. Most of the state is classified as a “desert,” receiving less than 13inches of annual precipitation. Since 1999, Utah suffered through a severe droughts. Utahansalso have the second highest water use rate in the nation. Utahans consume about 293 gallonsper person per day, over half of which is used to water lawns. Utah is in a progression to an unsustainable situation. Where the water resources arebeing used up faster than replenishment can accrue(Cooper). Think of some environmentallyunfriendly choices people make everyday. Spraying off a sidewalk instead of using a broom,
washing their cars by hose multiple times a week. The biggest one seen is people water theirlawns during the wrong part of the day. When the water will evaporate faster than it gets to thelawn. This occurs when people do not having an efficient watering system, so that it sprays thesidewalk and not the lawn. This is seen by people everyday in residential areas. This proposal for a tax credit for people who take a social responsibility and transformtheir lawns into a beautiful water wise Utah landscape. This tax benefit is an allowablededuction on a tax return intended to reduce a taxpayers burden while typically supportingcertain types of commercial activity (Merriam-Webster.com). This would be a incentive forUtahans to transform their laws. A tax benefit allows some type of adjustment benefiting ataxpayers tax liability. The credit should cover the costs associated with installing a water wiselandscape or systems in the taxpayer’s residence located here in Utah. A water conservation system is a system or series of components or mechanisms that aredesigned to provide for the collection of rainwater or residential graywater. Graywater iswastewater generated from domestic activities such as laundry, dishwashing, and bathing.Graywater reclamation is the process by which households make use of gray waters potentialinstead of simply piping it into overburdened sewage systems with all the black water thatcontains fecal matter and urine. A water wise conservation system includes a system that iscapable of storing rainwater or residential gray water for future use and reusing the collectedwater for the same residential property. There will be some easy steps to start the water wise landscaping, but do not concederthem disadvantages. The water wise tax credit for the people of Utah is not a difficult thing toget started for their residential area. A project this big seems like it would not be an easy thing to
do, with the help of local professionals and specialist to help the project will pay off in manyways. As well as getting the funds to pay for the entire cost up front. It is estimated that for each1,000 square foot of landscape area converted from irrigated to non-irrigated the cost would be athousand dollars. The benefits of implementing a tax credit for Utahans will help invoke people to getinvolved in water conservation in a more serious manner. Tax benefits provide an advantage tothe taxpayer while typically benefiting another entity. It will make it easier for people to helpwater conservation on a day to day basis with out doing anything after the instillation. This willallow more people to help save their environment. Nothing can live without water, if Utahans can reduce per-capita consumption of water25 percent by 2050, they will conserve the equivalent of over 500,000 acre-feet of water peryear. That is more water than can be held in Jordanelle Reservoir and Deer Creek Reservoircombined, and more than any water project in Utah has developed.Estimated annual water use and annual cost of water, sewage and landscape maintenance beforeand after. Before After Savings Water Use 81,437 51,723 29,714 (gal) Water Cost $200.00 $133.00 $67.00 Sewage Cost $141.00 $95.00 $46.00 Maintenance $660.00 $423.00 $237.00 Cost
Before After Savings Overall Cost $100,100 $651.00 $350.00Source: http://water.utah.gov/brochures One acre-foot equals approximately 326,000 gallons, enough to fill a football field to adepth of one foot or to supply the water needs of an family of five for a year. The average familyin Utah (3.2 pph) uses about two-thirds of an acre-foot. (utah.gov)The benefit of improving water use efficiency is the lowering of demand and the ability to cost-effectively stretch existing water supplies. Conservation can result in saving considerable capitaland operating costs for utilities and consumers. With the increased concern of climate change,water wise conservation take on a particular importance. For many people water wise desert landscaping brings to mind nightmarish visions ofhuge cacti, red rocks and cattle sculls. When done right a water wise desert landscaping issimply a set of principles that encourages other people to step in. When it comes to the executionof landscaping water efficiency people in Utah really never come through. This has become areal issue in Utah, for decades people have thought that water is an abundant source, with the lastfew years in drought people have seen this to be wrong. Benefits of water wise• Lowers consumption of imported or ground water• More water available for other domestic and community uses and the environment• Less time and work needed for maintenance effort, with gardening simpler• Less stressful, little or no lawn-mowing.
Water wise plants in appropriate planting design, and soil grading and mulching, takesfull advantage of rainfall retention. When water restrictions are implemented, by municipality orwater costs, water wise plants will tend to survive and thrive, while more ornamental plants maybe unable to adapt. Increasing block rate structures most effectively communicate value and encourageefficient use when compared to other types of rate structures. Through an increasing block ratedesign, the unit price for water increases as the volume consumed increases, with prices being setfor each “block” of water use. People who use low or average volumes of water are charged amodest unit price and rewarded for conservation; those using significantly higher volumes payhigher unit prices. Utah communities use a wide variety of water rate structures, ranging fromefficiency-based designs to rate structures that promote little or no efficient water use.Some have incorporated increasing block rate designs, but have set the block prices and volumesin ways that do not effectively promote efficient water use. Although some Utah cities and townshave made progress in developing and instituting efficiency-based rate structures, the resultsfrom this analysis indicate that most still have much room for improvement.(Western ResourceAdvocates) Many people feel like their day to day choices do not have a great affect of the watercircus that Utah is facing. Leave the hose on it is their bill anyway, what is a few house ofrunning the sprinklers giving the millions of people who water everyday. These are the thoughtswhich turn up in the heads of real people when they make everyday choices. The moral case forthe claim that various people in Utah ought to take strong action on water conservation is fairlyeasy to see.
What is much harder to spot is the moral demand for individual action, for makingconscious wise choices when it come to water conservation. One thing which gets in the way isthe thought that nothing an individual does can possibly matter that much so why botherconcerning water? People think that they are doing good and not being good when they takecertain steps to conserve water. They have a better Utah in mind but not a better character. Theylittle disaster is the possibility that they cannot really do any good at all. The little water wise actions people make can make no real difference at all, but peoplestill ought to undertake them. Society all together have a moral obligation which depends on thedemand of consistency in thoughts and actions of being water wise, on the reason they have forthinking what they do about governments and what obligations they have, as well as the sort oflife people hope to lead. (Garvey)Reasons for this conclusion can have a lot of relevant consequences in them• Consequences having to do with the Earth• Large scale social change• Avoiding the suffering of human beings and every living thing on Earth.Even though many of those consequences have nothing to do with a single persons sprinklersystem. The reasons can be bolstered by a persons consistent position in the rest of theirprojects, the rest of their water wise choices. Society choosing to take action with water wiseand live in a certain water wise way, a consistent way with various judgements, principles, andfacts, will make a difference, nevertheless is the right thing to do.
Work Cite1.Western Resources Advocates. “Water Rate Structures in Utah: How Utah Cities Compare Using This Important Water Use Efficiency Tool” January 2005. Web. 12 Oct 20112. Garvey, James. “Climate Change and Casual Inefficiency: Why Go Green When it Makes No Difference” EBSCOHOST. web. 12 Oct 20113. Week, Jennifer. “Water Shortages.” CQ Researcher, 18 June 2010: 529-52. 12 Oct 20114. "Tax." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, 2011. Web. 12 Oct 2011.5. Stout, Linda. “Collective Visioning: How Groups Can Work Together for a Just and Sustainable Future.” 45.5. 2011. Masterfile Premier. EBSCO. Web. 12 Oct 20116. Cooper, Mary H. “Pollution and the Environment.” CQ Researcher. 17 July 1998. Web. 12 October 2011