Amending AB2882

Last month, I blogged on California's AB2882, which has "conservation pricing" in the title. Unfortunately, the law says

Revenues derived from allocation-based conservation water pricing shall not exceed the proportional cost of service attributable to the customer's parcel...

Now, if price is anchored to cost of service, it's unlikely to rise high enough to get many people's attention.

(My rule of thumb is that about 20 percent of people conserve because it's the right thing to do, and 80 percent conserve because it's expensive NOT to. It's just a guess, but look around and compare the number of vegetarian, bike riding, no kid, book reading types to the number of meat eating, car commuting, TV watching folks with kids. 20 percent is GENEROUS!)

Anyway, I propose that AB2882 be amended to read "the proportional cost of reliable service," which means service that will not result in rationing.

That's because higher prices will reduce demand AND provide funds for repairing/upgrading infrastructure, recycling water, etc.

Bottom Line: People want water when they turn on the tap, and they want that water to be of high quality. Given that Californians now pay about $3 for 750 gallons, raising prices (my usual prescription: some for cheap, pay lots for more) is politically, economically and engineeringly [new word!] acceptable and feasible -- especially if the alternative is RATIONING!