The dollars and $ense of municipal water conservatio

693 views

Published on

Jim parks - PowerPoint Presentation from the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation Districts Inaugural Texas Panhandle Water Conservation Symposium

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
693
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
119
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The dollars and $ense of municipal water conservatio

  1. 1. Panhandle Water Conservation Symposium The Dollars and $ense ofMunicipal Water Conservation Jim Parks, Executive Director North Texas Municipal Water District February 8, 2012
  2. 2. Major North Texas Water Providers
  3. 3. NTMWD Raw Water Supply Sources
  4. 4. Development of Conservation Plans 2003 Began workshops with Member City staffs – Consensus Approach 2004 NTMWD’s Model Conservation Plan Adopted by District 2005 Implementation of Plans by Cities
  5. 5. Implementation Challenges City Issues Most cities adopted their own version of NTMWD’s Model Plan Citizens wanted local & regional consistency in Plan requirements  Inconsistency caused confusion & relaxation of strategies City Ordinances / HOA rules / Enforcement  Often conflict with conservation goals
  6. 6. Implementation Challenges NTMWD Issues Public Awareness Campaign  Targeting the right audience  Proper messaging  Delivery method  Media overlap of service areas  High cost of broadcast messaging Level of Planning Uncertainty  No assurance during dry periods that conservation levels will hold
  7. 7. Implementation Challenges NTMWD Issues Business Case  Wholesale contract developed to support regional economic growth  To change rate methodology requires all 13 cities to agree  Budget developed based on cost of service to meet Cities Maximum Annual Demand  Fixed cost represents 75% of water rate  Variable costs unspent are rebated back to cities each year  Cost saving benefit to cities served results from cost avoidance of raw water development, pumping, treatment and distribution costs  Lower wholesale cost of service may encourage more use not less
  8. 8. Dollars & $ense of Conservation Cost AvoidanceRaw Water Development Pumping Treatment Distribution Benefit $325/af $60/af $300/af $120/af $805/af Potential Savings  $4.5 Million (2020) - $9.7 Million (2030)
  9. 9. Lessons Learned and Path Forward Take advantage of conservation gains during drought Create more separation between Conservation plan & Drought plan Bring all water users to the table Make the Business case for conservation
  10. 10. Lessons Learned and Pathforward Continue efforts to develop conservation implementation tools and programs Continue efforts to secure a statewide public awareness program
  11. 11. Questions

×