Bill Overview
Title: Water Efficiency, Conservation, and Sustainability Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes multiple grants that support activities to incentivize efficient water use by customers of public water systems, reduce water losses and leaks in water systems, and promote the adoption of water-efficient plumbing codes.
Sponsors: Rep. McNerney, Jerry [D-CA-9]
Target Audience
Population: People relying on public water systems worldwide
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill targets individuals who rely on public water systems for their household and business water supply.
- Globally, access to public water systems is widespread, but the focus will be on regions with existing infrastructure for water delivery.
- The bill will benefit areas affected by inefficiencies in water use, which is a global issue due to increasing water scarcity and population growth.
Reasoning
- This policy will primarily impact individuals and businesses who actively manage water use within a public water system. In the US, nearly all citizens are connected to such systems, thus the policy has a wide potential impact, albeit with varying degrees of directness.
- To paint a realistic picture, interviews will include a mix of rural and urban inhabitants, small business owners, individuals in regions prone to water scarcity, and some who may not see significant changes.
- The policy budget constraints imply that while the target is vast, not every system can be overhauled immediately. Initial focus may be on regions with the greatest inefficiencies or those most critical.
- Wellbeing assessments will take into account potential bill savings, water availability improvements, and possible disruptions during the implementation phase.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will lead to better water management and conservation in our area.
- Efficient water use is critical here given how water-scarce the region is.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Restaurant Owner (Miami, Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy helps lower my water bills or improve efficiency, it'll be nothing but beneficial for my business.
- I hope it's implemented swiftly and doesn't disrupt daily operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Urban Planner (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a necessary step towards sustainable urban development.
- Reduction in water loss could save cities money and improve public infrastructure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
High School Teacher (Austin, Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Teaching students about water efficiency aligns perfectly with my curriculum goals.
- I hope this leads to more community involvement and awareness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Retired (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Lower utility bills would significantly ease my living expenses.
- I hope the changes won't raise costs initially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Civil Engineer (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This provides a solid framework for future water infrastructure developments.
- Implementing water-efficient systems can set a positive example globally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Graphic Designer (New York City, New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might not notice much change personally, but I see the broader societal benefits.
- It's comforting to know we’re working towards less waste.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Farmer (Toledo, Ohio)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Water conservation is crucial for our agriculture.
- Programs that conserve water can ensure longer-term sustainability for farmers too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Plumber (Houston, Texas)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I anticipate this policy could increase work demand significantly.
- New plumbing standards may mean more retrofitting work, which would help local economies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Casino Manager (Las Vegas, Nevada)
Age: 48 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Investments in water efficiency can enhance our corporate responsibility profile.
- There's potential for cost savings, which would benefit our operations significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 2: $1600000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1900000000)
Year 3: $1700000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 5: $2000000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2400000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The extent of participation by local water systems will strongly influence overall costs and savings.
- State and local compliance with new plumbing standards may vary, affecting the uniformity of impact.
- Long-term sustainability outcomes depend on consumer behavior and the longevity of implemented measures.