If the total cost of water ...

Published by

If the total cost of water was charged for water use, the price would be high enough to justify alternate water systems. Since water is subsidized and under priced, alternate water water systems have no "ROI". Skewed baselines make skewed judgment even when impecable logic and accounting are applied. So, "facts" as they are, or the selling price of water is what is skewed. As a result, alternate water systems are screwed. In the end, the water industry is cheated effective systems being applied.

Please challenge me on my "logic" and or "facts" on this I am open to more "facts" .

1 Comment

Thanks for chiming in Greg... You hit on an issue that's changing thanks to the work of firms like Trucost and CDP. In fact, a comment shared by Trucost in last week's State of Green Business Report captured the current issue perfectly: When the disappearance of a commodity means the disappearance of all of your revenues, its perceived value increases substantially.
We are in the process of making the case for water investment based on the cost of overlooking such investments (Flint, California), and the benefits accrued to firms who are making such investments today:
Plumbing Manufacturer International shows water savings of 20-30% when WaterSense solutions replace existing showerheads and toilets.
Auto manufacturers who were able to reduce their water use in the painting process by 30% were able to keep costs the same while water prices rose.
A global marketer who reengineered its direct mail program to leverage Google's drive and targeted adwords program has increased its efficiency while cutting 25 tonnes of print production and requisite water (for paper). They also saw a 30% cost savings.
GreenBiz is a great source for a number of these case studies... They're not easy to come by, but today's tech allows us to measure and manage what we couldn't previously monitor, so more case studies should be forthcoming!

Published by

Permalink