"Slow the Flow" a Farce?

Is it possible that the entire water conservation PR campaign over the last decade or two is just greenwashing to distract us from the real issues behind water consumption?

Just a warning: what follows is partly hearsay, partly MY analysis of data, which is suspect. I'm really just playing with ideas here. I'm not expecting anyone to take any of this authoritatively. But let me know your opinions or conflicting (or supporting) data.

The 'common knowledge' in Utah is that we don't have enough water. I think most people also believe this has something to do with people watering their lawns at 4pm in the summer, letting their faucets leak and taking excessively long showers.

I wonder if this is actually true. I heard some data presented in a student report during a class this summer that purported the opposite, that claimed that things like that are not responsible for the water situation in this state. So I started doing some research.

When I started googling about water use in Utah, the first thing I came across was the Utah Rivers Council's "Rip Your Strip" program. This program is aimed at getting people to plant waterwise vegetation in the parking strip instead of wasteful lawn. They claim that 70% of water used in Utah is used outdoors, and almost half of that is used on lawns.

I kept doing more research.

Turns out, this is true.

It's also dead wrong.

First, take a look at this graph (found at www.utah.water.gov):


You can see here that indeed, nearly 70% of water use is outdoor use. But here's the catch:

It's 70% of residential use. Which is 66% of 'Total Public Supply."

Ok...so what does that mean? Well, at first glance, it seems to collaborate the public opinion of where our water goes. But...Total Public Supply is NOT total water USE!

Look at this graph from the U.S. Geological Survey (Utah Fresh Water Usage by Category, 2000):


Ok. Things get a little more interesting, no? According to this data, Public Supply makes up a whopping 13.4% of total Utah water use! So, if we were to cut our residential water use by HALF, we'd save 33% of that 13.4%. Which means we'd reduce our overall water consumption by 4.4 percent! And that's reducing our water use by HALF!!

What seems to be plain from this data is that if we REALLY want to conserve water, we should take a closer look at irrigation use, which makes up 81.1%. Any increase in efficiency here would make a HUGE difference.

But we don't. And why don't we? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the people irrigating have some of the most influence in state government?

Even worse, could it be because if we're worried about "Slowing the Flow," maybe we won't worry so much about other, much more pressing issues, like how bloody bad the air is in this valley? God forbid we actually start flipping off people driving Hummers.

Makes me wonder how many other 'public service' commercials and billboards that press popular environmental issues are bunk.

I'd just like to note one thing: I'm not saying there aren't important environmental (and water) issues. I'm just saying that we've been duped again, perhaps. Also, lawns ARE stupid and boring...so there's other reasons to 'rip your strip'... :)

Maybe we should worry more about why we build multi-million dollar pipelines to supply water to alfalfa farmers in Juab county...maybe we should be farming bioregionally, using crops that grow WELL in our climate, instead of the water-intensive crops we are currently dinking about with. Except those crops are the most profitable...especially when the water is subsidized by taxpayers!!