Every so often and we get frenzied about the water crisis, vowing to reduce our water consumption, increase water reclamation, and search for other sustainable supplies. Then we turn our attention somewhere else and forget all about changing our water use habits. If we keep doing the same thing, it is inevitable that the crisis will become a catastrophe. That’s when we’ll really pay attention, but by then our options will be far less attractive than they are today.

Many of Arizona’s counties already face gaps between supply and demand (meaning that they’re importing water, drawing groundwater at unsustainable levels, or both). In the three-county area (where some 85 percent of Arizonans live), there will be a water shortfall beginning well before the mid-century.

And that’s the best-case scenario: it doesn’t assume any changes in the amount of water Arizona gets from the Colorado River (which accounts for well over 40 percent of the state’s water supply). Yet the New York Times reported Monday that “Barring a sudden end to the Southwest’s 11-year drought, the distribution of the river’s dwindling bounty is likely to be reordered as early as next year because the flow of water cannot keep pace with the region’s demands.” That would reduce the amount of water Arizona gets from the Colorado River and bring the three-county area’s “day of reckoning” home much sooner.

http://www.arizonaic.org/blog/297-is-arizona-water-crisis-headed-toward-catastrophe

Come to think of it – this would be similar to cap & trade … you set a target level for your reservoirs, and keep raising the price of water (on an annual basis) if they are too low, and lower the price if they are too high and/or water is running through the system underutilized.

In most systems, small residential users are charged a much higher rate for water than larger users. This makes some sense because the distribution networks (pipes, fireplugs, tanks, pumps, telemetry etc) has to be maintained regardless of how much water is used – but the kind of market I’m talking about would largely level that effect, making the larger users of water pay rates more similar to what houses already pay.

There would still be lawns and golf courses – just not nearly as many.

Also, please define “gouge”.

~Rhaco