P2
POLICY REPORT
PHYSICAL SERVICES
Date: May 4, 1995
Dept. File No. conserv
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: General Manager of Engineering Services
SUBJECT: Water Conservation
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT the City continue with its proactive water
conservation advocacy and that the temporary Systems
Analyst (Water Conservation) be made a regular
position, subject to job evaluation by the General
Manager of Human Resources.
B. THAT the General Manager of Engineering Services report
back with options for an ultra-low-flow (ULF) toilet
rebate program.
C. THAT the Water Shortage Response Plan, contained in
City of Vancouver By-law 7109, be in effect each year
from June 1st through September 30th.
COUNCIL POLICY
The City water system operates as a utility, with costs recovered
through its water rates. Single-family and duplex dwellings pay
an annual flat charge for water; all other customers pay for
water based on consumption.
In March 1993, Council approved the hiring of a systems analyst
for a two-year period to coordinate water conservation programs.
In March 1993 and March 1994, Council adopted the GVRD Water
Shortage Response Plan to regulate lawn watering during the
summer months.
Council has also supported water conservation through actions
such as mandating ultra low-flow (ULF) toilets for new
construction, and a variety of other actions.
SUMMARY
In May of 1993, the City appointed a systems analyst to design
and implement water conservation strategies. The Engineering
Services Department was requested to report back on this
initiative after a period of two years. This report describes the
water conservation activities that have been carried out in the
last two years, describes how the raising of awareness of water
conservation issues has impacted on per capita consumption, and
also describes current projects and potential future initiatives.
The report also examines the impact of water conservation on
sewage treatment costs and the financial implications of the
program with regard to both sewage treatment and water purchase
costs. Financial support from other levels of Government for
water conservation projects is also discussed.
PURPOSE
This report outlines the activities carried out by the water
conservation analyst over the past two years and recommends that
the position and the program continue. In addition, this report
proposes that Engineering Services investigate options for ULF
toilet rebates for existing homes, and that the Water Shortage
Response Plan be implemented annually hereafter.
BACKGROUND
In May 1993, the City hired a water conservation analyst to
initiate and carry out demand management (conservation) programs.
Funding for this position was to be reviewed after two years. The
analyst carries out the functions of administration of the Water
Shortage Response Plan (WSRP), public education, school
programming, retro-fit installations and analysis,
industrial/commercial audit workshops, water audits of Municipal
buildings and works yards, and liaison with the Park Board and
other City departments. The analyst is also engaged in developing
new initiatives, such as a demonstration low irrigation garden
and a rain barrel rebate program. In addition, the analyst has
obtained funding from the Federal and Provincial governments to
support these initiatives.
Our water supply system is limited by its reservoir and delivery
capacities, while our population continues to grow. Increasing
supply capability (new reservoirs, raising existing dams) is
costly, both financially and environmentally. In addition,
municipal wastewater treatment costs will soon be based on flow
volumes (expected to be in effect by 1996), and Vancouver's flow
share will be 46.5% of the regional total, at present demand
rates. The City also pays for the amount of water it uses; our
1995 water bill from the GVRD will be approximately $14 million.
Potential cost savings from sewer flow reduction and decreased
water purchases are very significant.By pursuing demand
management strategies we will reduce supply requirements. In so
doing, we reduce sewer flows, reduce repairs to infrastructure,
and reduce the City's water bill. All of these reductions have a
positive financial impact. As described later in this report,
these cost savings are already exceeding the City's cost of its
water conservation program, and have the potential to increase
substantially.
DISCUSSION
Attached as Appendix I are updated "Water Conservation
Initiatives", describing our current conservation programs and
their status. In summary, our work to date has included the
following:
Commercial/Industrial customers
- Water audit workshops;
- Removal of declining block rate structure;
- Fees imposed for air conditioning systems that don't recycle
their cooling water.
Residential customers
- Pilot plumbing retro-fits (Musqueam, False Creek, and Zone
490) and data collection;
- Lawn sprinkling restrictions (implementing and enforcing the
Water Shortage Response Plan);
- Water use tips sheet; City News articles (with the Tax
Notice);
- Demonstration Xeriscape (low irrigation) garden*;
- Rain barrel rebate program*.
Elementary school students
- 1994 & 1995 School Play tour (The A2Z of H20);
- Scientist in the schools;
- Environmental calendar.
Public Facilities
- Irrigation workshops for Park Board employees*;
- Water Audit and retro-fit Manitoba Yard;
- Audit City Hall with recommendations to Housing &
Properties;
- Audit Vandusen Gardens & Jericho playing fields*
Public Relations/Communications
The press and TV have been very interested in our activities,
especially the school tour, the lawn watering restrictions, and
the rain barrel program. The school show has also attracted the
attention of the BC Water & Waste Association, the PNE, the
Journal of Commerce, and many other municipalities. This
coverage raises people's awareness of water conservation and has
a positive impact on their consumption patterns. We are also
transmitting water conservation information using the Internet-
Home Page system through the City's Communications Division.
* Presently being developed, for implementation this spring
and summer.RESULTS TO DATE
The first two years of the City's water conservation program have
been very successful. While water consumption varies from year
to year, depending on summer weather and industrial activity,
there has been a significant reduction in per capita water
consumption, as shown in Figure 1.
In 1991, consumption was
down somewhat, because
of a cool summer, and in
1992 it was reduced
further by a total
sprinkling ban.
However, in 1993 and
1994, consumption
declined further, to the
lowest level of per-
capita water consumption
in 25 years, with
sprinkling regulations
and a proactive water
conservation program
(rather than a
sprinkling ban).
Decreased consumption
figures, despite less
restrictive sprinkling
restrictions, indicates
increased public
awareness and
participation in water
Figure 1
conservation.
Historically, the City's per capita consumption has been higher
than the regional average. This difference is also being
reduced. In 1991, the City's per capita consumption was higher
than the Regional average by 10%, but by 1994 the difference was
reduced to 4.5%. See Table 1.
Table 1
ŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸ
Per Capita Consumption Vancouver vs Region
(Imperial gallons per day)
YEAR VANCOUVER GVRD % DIFFERENCE
1991 159 145 10
1992 151 138 10
1993 143 133 7.5
1994 141* 135 4.5
* This translates to a reduction of 4 gal/cap/day compared to
1993 - if increase in GVRD per capita is taken into account.
Ref: B.C. Stats/GVRDFeedback about the City's initiatives has
been positive from the public, industry, and other municipalities
and government agencies. School children, parents, and teachers
were extremely enthusiastic about the play, "The A2Z of H2O", and
return bookings for this year's updated version are strong. Most
callers to our Water Conservation Hotline (873-7350) are
supportive of the water conservation program, and often request
that the City be more aggressive with its implementation.
Industry representatives who attended our Water Audit Workshop
understand why the declining block rate structure was removed,
and are implementing changes to reduce their water consumption
(and thus their water bills). We have also been very successful
at obtaining cost-sharing and funding from senior governments, as
shown in Table 2.
Table 2
ŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸ
Senior Government Water Conservation Funding Received To Date:
Agency Amount Program
Environment Canada $15,000 Industrial Audit Workshop
" $20,000 Xeriscape Demonstration
Garden
" $9,000 Irrigation Audits
(Vandusen, Jericho Park)
Provincial Revenue
Sharing $10,000 Water Conservation Study
(Retrofits)
BC21 PowerSmart $20,000 HomeSmart Retrofit (490
Zone at 1st/Rupert)
ŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸ
In addition, we have an application pending with the "BC21
PowerSmart Special Projects" program, to expand our rain barrel
pilot program. The application met BC21's water conservation
criteria, and a detailed proposal was submitted on their request.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
As shown in Figure 1, per capita consumption declined in 1994,
and we have reached the lowest level of per capita consumption in
25 years. This decrease in consumption compared to 1993
translates to annual savings in water purchase costs from the
GVRD of $320,000. This savings alone is more than double the
cost of the conservation program.
In the near term, potential cost savings from sewer flow
reductions (due to water conservation) are also great. For
example, based on GVRD cost allocation for sewage treatment
plants, a reduction of 4 gal/cap/day in Vancouver's average daily
flow would result in an annual savings of $250,000. Table 3
shows the total stats and savings.
Table 3
ŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸ
Water Conservation Costs/Savings
Annual Costs (1993-1994) Annual Savings
(Numbers based on a savings of
4 gal/cap/day) See Table 1.
Programs/Materials $100,000 Water Purchase savings $320,000
Staffing $ 61,000 Sewer flow reduction $250,000*
Total $161,000 $570,000
Government Funding $ 50,000
Total City Costs $111,000 Savings $570,000
* Projected future savings based on GVRD cost allocation by
flow for sewage treatment plants (at 2.8% reduction).
ŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸ
Areas of activity which are raising the public's awareness of
wasteful practices, such as public education, public relations
and sprinkling restrictions are expected to realize greater
economic benefits gradually over a longer term, thus much greater
long term savings are anticipated. Also, benefits in delaying
system upgrading projects will be accrued over the long term,
with associated cost benefits.
The City will, however, need to be aggressive in promoting water
conservation, since most customers are unmetered, and, thus, do
not receive a direct economic incentive to reduce their
consumption.
1995 PROGRAMS AND FUTURE INITIATIVES
If Council chooses to continue with the City's proactive water
conservation program, the Water Conservation Analyst's efforts
for 1995 will include the following :
- Implement the Green Barrel pilot program, approved by
Council February 21, 1995, to distribute 1000 rain barrels
to citizens for approximately $60 each (50% of cost).
- Coordinate design and installation of demonstration
xeriscape (low irrigation) garden at City Farmer, with
Environment Canada funding.
- Design & implement Park Board irrigation workshops to train
summer staff about conservation issues and irrigation
efficiency.- Present the updated "A2Z of H2O" play to
Vancouver elementary schools and Science World.
The play now also incorporates information about
stormwater pollution and catchbasin marking. We
will also investigate opportunities to market the
play to other municipalities, at a small surcharge
to recover production costs.
- Complete the 490 Zone retrofit (1800 homes in the vicinity
of 1st & Rupert) with our BC21 partnership, and begin
evaluating all pilot retrofit results.
- Prepare promotional materials such as environmental
calendars, film shorts, mall displays, press releases, etc.
- Coordinate the City's participation in the WSRP, and its
enforcement.
With respect to retrofit programs, preliminary results have
generated concerns about the long term reliability and acceptance
of methods such as toilet retrofit devices. Because
approximately forty percent of indoor water consumption is
attributable to flushing toilets, it is important to find an
effective method to reduce this water demand. Effective July 1,
1994, Council mandated the installation of ULF toilets in all new
homes constructed in Vancouver. Although this generated some
concerns in the building industry about cost and performance, the
water savings will be significant over the long term, when the
stock of old toilets is gradually replaced. In order to
accelerate this replacement, we recommend that the Water
Conservation Analyst also investigate options for rebate programs
or other incentives to promote ULF installations in existing
homes. In addition to cost/benefit analyses, this investigation
would include consideration of performance information from
Permits & Licenses on the units which have been installed under
the mandatory program; the industry's progress on developing and
certifying new models; and the appropriate timing to introduce a
rebate or incentive program. The General Manager of Engineering
Services is seeking feedback from Council on whether to proceed
with investigating options for ULF rebate programs.
WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE PLAN
The City continues to coordinate its summer sprinkling
regulations with the GVRD and its member municipalities, as
outlined in the GVRD's Water Shortage Response Plan (WSRP). For
1995, the WSRP regulations remain unchanged from 1994, with twice
per week sprinkling permitted unless a severe water shortage is
predicted (see Appendix II).
In past years, the implementation dates have varied slightly to
coincide with weekends at the end of May and September. Because
the sprinkling restrictions have proven to be very effective at
reducing water consumption and educating people about the
importance of water conservation, it is felt that they should be
implemented yearly for the foreseeable future. The GVRD Board
recently approved a recommendation that the dates be fixed at
June 1st through September 30th each year, to simplify annual
implementation. Engineering Services supports the ongoing
sprinkling regulations, and recommends that Council approve their
implementation from June 1st through September 30th each year,
until further notice. City of Vancouver By-law 7109 (the "Water
Rationing By-law") provides Council this authority without
revision.
CONCLUSIONS
The first two years of the water conservation program have been
very successful. Through continued efforts we can significantly
reduce per capita consumption and, hence, continue to impact
positively on the City's costs for water supply. These efforts
can include the ongoing implementation and enforcement of the
Water Shortage Response Plan, and the advocacy work, inter-
departmental coordination, technical investigations, and
conservation program development by the Water Conservation
Analyst. This work would be funded from water rates through the
Waterworks Operating Budget, but these costs (and substantially
more) would be recovered through water purchase cost-savings,
City and District system upgrading deferrals, sewage treatment
cost reductions, and outside program funding. As the benefits
significantly outweigh the costs, the General Manager of
Engineering Services recommends that these programs be continued.
* * * * *