Action Needed to Save Water

Water conservation is much talked about in San Diego County, but too often as more of an abstract ideal than a necessity.

Little more than public-awareness campaigns and voluntary efforts have been tried up to now--even though the county imports 85% to 90% of its water. When a drought in Northern California resulted in a plea for a voluntary cutback of 10%, residents reduced water consumption by only 4%. And, although water officials call for conservation, they are also quick to say that we have plenty of water, which weakens the message.

That’s changing. The city of San Diego will be making a major investment in water reclamation, building several plants to treat waste water to a level where it is clean enough to be used for landscaping, parks and golf courses. The city also has plans to start offering water-saving shower and toilet devices to homeowners, maybe later this year, and is considering a rebate plan to get homeowners to install more efficient “ultra-low-flow” toilets.

But the rate of change must quicken.

Recently, the Sierra Club has been trying to get a water-conservation plan included in the settlement of the sewage treatment lawsuit filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency against the city. The Sierra Club believes that requiring all existing, as well as new, homes to install ultra-low-flow toilets and water-conserving shower heads and faucets, will not only save water but also could save substantial sewage-treatment costs and might even eliminate the need for the proposed South Bay treatment plant.

The proposal has met with resistance, especially the group’s desire for a cap on the amount of sewage that could be treated by the Point Loma plant. The concerns are understandable. Regardless of how worthy the water-conservation goal, it might not make good legal sense to include such a plan as part of the suit settlement.

But combining water conservation with sewage treatment has considerable merit, as the city recognizes with its water-reclamation plan.

And the Sierra Club makes good arguments in favor of a mandatory plan to install water-conserving devices.

The devices don’t require changing our habits. We can still take 15-minute showers, yet use less water. And conservation plans that don’t require life-style changes are more likely to succeed.

They will also pay for themselves in savings on the water bill and the electric or gas bill. (It takes less energy to heat less water.) And they could eventually help keep sewer rate increases down. (Using less water means there is less waste water to pump and treat.) However, rebates would still be needed to ease the financial burden.

State law will require ultra-low-flow toilets in all new buildings as of 1992. San Diego, probably the most water-vulnerable county in the state, cannot afford to wait that long.

Local elected officials should be pushing ahead now to require water-conserving toilets, shower heads and faucets on existing as well as new businesses and homes. If the eager acceptance of recycling is any indication, San Diegans may be more ready than their leaders think.