Water supply and sanitation in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States: Water and Sanitation
Data
Water coverage (broad definition) 100%
Sanitation coverage (broad definition) 100%
Continuity of supply (%) high
Average urban water use (l/c/d) 260 (only in-door residential use)
Average urban water and sanitation tariff (US$/m3) 0.50
Share of household metering very high
Annual investment in WSS US$ 25/capita/year [1]
Share of self-financing by utilities High
Share of tax-financing Low
Institutions
Decentralization to municipalities Yes
Water and sanitation regulator Yes (multi-sector at state level)
Responsibility for policy setting Shared, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture
Sector law No
Number of service providers 54,000

Water supply and sanitation in the United States is provided by towns and cities, public utilities that span several jurisdictions and rural cooperatives. About 15 million Americans are served by their own wells. Public water supply and sanitation systems are regulated by state-level regulatory commissions and the EPA. Water consumption in the U.S. is the highest in the world and water tariffs (rates) are the lowest in developed world.

Contents

[edit] Access

Urban (80% of the population) Rural (20% of the population) Total
Water Broad definition 100% 100% 100%
House connections 100% 100% 100%
Sanitation Broad definition 100% 100% 100%
Sewerage 95% 33% 83%

Source: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (2004) [2] Access to improved water supply and sanitation in the United States is universal. However, access to improved sanitation is provided through different technologies depending on local circumstances. 83% of households are served by sewers (95% in urban areas and 33% in rural areas) and the remainder is served by on-site sanitation systems such as septic tanks.[3]

[edit] Water use

According to a 1999 study by the AWWA Research Foundation residential end use of water in the United States is equivalent to more than 1 billion glasses of tap water per day.[4] According to the same study 58% of water is used outdoors (gardening, swimming pools) and 42% indoors. Other sources indicate that outdoor use is only 25% of total residential water use.[5].

A leaking tap.
A leaking tap.

Daily indoor per capita water use in a typical single family home is 69.3 gallons (260 litres). Overall use falls into the following categories:

These figures do not include water use in offices and commercial establishments, which is significant. Overall, per capital water use in the United States is about twice as high as in Europe (see water use in France, water use in Germany and water use in the UK).

[edit] Water sources

About 90% of public water systems in the U.S. obtain their water from groundwater. However, since systems served by groundwater tend to be much smaller than systems served by surface water, only 34% of Americans (101 million) are supplied with treated groundwater, while 66% (195 million) are supplied with treated surface water.[6]

Few U.S. cities pump water from sources clean enough not to require filtration plants (see water purification). The major exceptions are New York City, Boston, San Francisco, and Portland, Oregon.[7] These cities have water sources with a high degree of natural purity. New York City's water supply, for example, is fed by a 2,000 square mile watershed in the Catskill Mountains. Because the watershed is in one of the largest protected wilderness areas in the United States, the natural water filtration process remains intact and filtration plants are unnecessary.[8]

[edit] Service quality

For more details on this topic, see Water quality.

There seems to be no comprehensive source of information on water supply and sanitation service quality in the United States.

[edit] Water quality

In almost all cases water supply is continuous, under good pressure and in conformity with the norms of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). However, there are at least three aspects of drinking water quality that are of some concern in the United States.

Pharmaceutical substances. Pharmaceutical substances that are not regulated under the Act are an issue of concern. They have been found in tiny concentrations in the drinking water of several US cities affecting at least 41 million Americans, according to a five-month inquiry by the Associated Press published in March 2008 report. According to the AP report, researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals.[9]

Lead. Another issue of concern is lead in drinking water. Typically, lead gets into drinking water after the water leaves the treatment plant. The source of lead is most likely pipe or solder in older service connections or older plumbing inside homes, from which lead leaks into the water through corrosion.[10] In Washington, DC these concerns have led to a $408 million program carried out since 2004 to replace lead service connections to about 35,000 homes. The effectiveness of the program has, however, been put in qustion in 2008 by WASA, the city's utility.[11]

Disinfection by-products. Disinfectants such as chlorine can react with natural material in the water to form disinfection by-products such as trihalomethanes. Animal studies indicate that none of the chlorination by-products studied to date is a potent carcinogen at concentrations normally found in drinking water. According to Green Facts, there is insufficient epidemiological evidence to conclude that drinking chlorinated water causes cancers. The results of currently published studies do not provide convincing evidence that chlorinated water causes adverse pregnancy outcomes.[12]

[edit] Sanitation quality

Sanitation service quality is mixed, and sewer backflows into homes as well as combined sewer overflows into creeks and streams remain a problem. Wastewater treatment plants are operated satisfactorily in most cases. Discharges of wastewater are governed by the Clean Water Act.

[edit] Billing accuracy

The accuracy of billing remains a problem for some utilities. Possible sources of overbilling are inaccurate metering (such as metering of air when a tap is left open during a service interruption and the returning water pushes air through the meter) and miscategorization of users in a higher and more expensive consumption category, if a single bill is issued covering a lengthy period and if the utility uses increasing-block tariffs.[13] There are no statistics on the prevalence of inaccurate billing in the US.

Water users who cannot resolve a billing complaint with their utility are encouraged to contact their respective State Public Utility Commissions, which in many states have jurisdiction to regulate water utilities.

[edit] Responsibility for water supply and sanitation

[edit] Service provision

The California Aqueduct
The California Aqueduct
For more details on this topic, see Local government in the United States.
For more details on this topic, see List of United States water companies.

According to EPA's community water system survey 2000 there are about 54,000 community public water systems in the United States. [14] In urban areas, these systems are either managed directly by towns and cities (such as in New York City) or indirectly by water companies (public utilities) owned by towns, cities and counties. In some cases public utilities span several jurisdictions, such as in the form of special-purpose districts. Utility cooperatives are a major provider of water and sanitation services, especially in rural areas [15] Privately owned water supply and sanitation utilities operating under concessions by local jurisdictions are rare in the United States.

There are also a few large bulk water suppliers in the arid Southwest of the United States. One of them is the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) which sells treated water from the Colorado River and Northern California to its member utilities in Southern California through the California Aqueduct. 26 cities and water districts serving 18 million people are members of MWD. Another example is the Central Arizona Water Conservation district which operates the Central Arizona Project Aqueduct (CAP) which supplies water from the Colorado River to 80 municipal, industrial, agricultural and Indian customers in Central and Southern Arizona.

Approximately 15% of Americans rely on their own wells as a source of drinking water. Water from these wells is not subject to regulation by the EPA. [16]

[edit] Regulation

The economic regulation of water and sanitation service providers in the U.S. (in particular in relation to the setting of user water rates) is usually the responsibility of regulators such as Public Utility Commissions at the state level (see economic regulator). The environmental and drinking water quality regulation is the responsibility of state departments of health or environment and the EPA.[17]

[edit] Rates

Water rates (sometimes also called tariffs or user fees) in the United States are among the lowest in OECD countries. On average water rates were only $0.50 per cubic meter ($1.89 per 1,000 gallons) in 1999. [18] However, due to higher water consumption in the US water bills are about the same level as in most other OECD countries.

The average American family spends $474 each year on water and sewerage charges according to the EPA [19]. This is about the same level as in some European countries (see tariffs in France and tariffs in the UK).

Concerning rate structures, about one third of water rates are linear (the unit rate is independent of the level of consumption), one third are increasing-block rates (the unit rate increases with consumption) and one third are decreasing-block tariffs (the unit rate decreases with consumption). Decreasing-block rates offer hardly any incentive for water conservation. [20]

[edit] Financing and Investment

[edit] Financing

Financing is provided through revenues from user fees (see above), debt and grants. Most debt contracted by utilities is commercial debt, usually in the form of bonds, in particular tax-free municipal bonds. In the past substantial federal grants and other subsidies have been provided, in particular to introduce wastewater treatment in order to comply with the Clean Water Act.

[edit] State Revolving Funds

The EPA and states administrate two major State Revolving Funds (SRF) Programs. Under both programs the federal government provides "capitalization grants" to states, provided that states match those funds with a contribution of at least 20%. Federal and state resources are pooled in State Revolving Funds, which in turn provide low-cost loans and other types of assistance to utilities. Revolving funds recycle funds and thus reduce the need for federal grant funding in the future. Several states have increased the funds available by issuing bonds secured by capitalization grant funds. These bond issues have provided twice as much funding as the grants themselves. Some time before 2001 the SRF bond sector received a AAA bond credit rating from a major credit rating agency - the only segment of the municipal bond market to achieve that distinction.[21]

The first SRF, called Clean Water State Revolving Fund, aims at reducing pollution. It finances not only sanitary sewers, stormwater drainage and wastewater treatment plants, but also nonpoint source pollution control such as erosion control and wetland protection and restoration. While most of the funds have historically been directed at municipalities, homeowners and nonprofit organizations are also eligible to receive funds. On average interest rates are 2% and loans can be up to 20 years. They can fund up to 100% of project costs. Created in 1987, the program has so far disbursed more than US$ 60 billion, or US$ 4.5 billion annually in recent years. In 2006, 21 percent of funding was channeled to small communities with populations less than 10,000 inhabitants. Eligibility criteria vary by state, since states are the main administrators of the program.[22]

The second group of funds, called Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, was created in 1997 using the Clean Water State Revolving Fund as a model. It specifically targets drinking water supply infrastructure as opposed to wastewater infrastructure. A particular feature of the funds is that states can set aside a portion of their capitalization grants to fund activities including source protection, capacity development and operator certification. EPA allocates funds to states based on a drinking water infrastructure survey carried out by EPA every four years. However, every state is guaranteed to receive at least 1% of the funding. States in turn allocate funds to utilities according to a ranking that uses criteria established by law. Priority is given to eligible projects that:

  • address the most serious risk to human health;
  • are necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act; and,
  • assist systems most in need, according to State-determined affordability criteria.[23]

The program has provided nearly $9.5 billion of low-interest loans between 1997 and 2005. At least 15% of the funds are directed at small communities.

[edit] Federal assistance to small communities

In rural areas, the United States Department of Agriculture provides grants, loans and loan guarantees for water supply and sanitation in small communities (those with less than 10,000 inhabitants), in addition to technical assistance and training.[24]

[edit] Investment

(information on actual investments should be added)

Investment needs

The American Water Works Association (AWWA) estimates that it will cost between $280 and $400 billion to replace the country's ageing water infrastructure.[25]

Concerning water supply, the EPA estimated in its Second Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey that $150 billion would have to be invested over a 20-year period to ensure clean and safe drinking water.[26]. EPA's clean and drinking water infrastructure gap analysis of 2002 showed that if present levels of spending do not increase, there would be a significant funding gap by 2019.

Concerning sanitation, the EPA estimated in its 14th Clean Watersheds Needs Survey that investment of US$202.5 billion is needed over the next 20 years to control wastewater pollution. This includes US$134 billion for wastewater treatment and collection, US$54.8 billiong for resolving unsatisfactory combined sewer overflows and US$9 billion for stormwater management. The states of New York and California have the largest wastewater treatment works needs, both in excess of US$20 billion. The District of Columbia has the largest per capita needs in the United States with US$ 3,670 per capita.[27]

[edit] References

  1. ^ Investments needs for water only without sanitation, according to the EPA, corresponding to US$ 7.5bn per year: see EPA Safe Water 2003, p.3 of EPA
  2. ^ WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) Joint Monitoring Program
  3. ^ WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program JMP Sanitation
  4. ^ American Waterworks Association Research Foundation (AWWARF), Residential End Uses of Water, 1999 at AWWA study The study covered 1,188 households in 14 cities over 3 years
  5. ^ World Bank, International Trends in Water Pricing and Use, 2000 at Water Consumption in the United States (lcd) World Bank
  6. ^ Environmental Protection Agency, Water on Tap, 2003, op.cit., p.7 of EPA)
  7. ^ Committee to Review the New York City Watershed Management Strategy, National Research Council (2000). Watershed Management for Potable Water Supply: Assessing the New York City Strategy. The National Academies Press. ISBN 0309067774. 
  8. ^ "2005 Drinking Water Supply and Quality Report", City of New York Department of Environmental Protection. Retrieved on 2006-07-19. 
  9. ^ * "AP Probe Finds Drugs in Drinking Water" by Jeff Donn, Martha Mendoza, and Justin Pritchard, Associated Press, March 9, 2008
  10. ^ EPA Lead in Drinking Water
  11. ^ Washington Post:Doubts on Lead Pipe Replacement
  12. ^ Green Facts:Water Disinfectants
  13. ^ A particular drastic case was reported from Florida in 2007 where a single mother received a US$ 1,500 water bill after having been billed incorrectly for over two years without knowing it Why did Indian River County woman get $1,500 water bill? accessed on Agugust 2, 2007. See also Has Sten lost his clout?, in the section called The Water Bureau blunder, for a brief mention of a similar problem in Portland, Oregon
  14. ^ EPA 2003, op.cit., p.2 of [1]
  15. ^ National Rural Water Association NRWAand US Department of Agriculture USDA
  16. ^ EPA 2003, op.cit., p. 18 of EPA
  17. ^ For a list of state departments in charge of drinking water quality regulation see National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners NARUC, accessed on Aguust 2, 2007
  18. ^ World Bank, op.cit., 2000 at Water Prices, 1999 (USS/cubic meter) World Bank
  19. ^ EPA 2003, op.cit., p. 11 of EPA
  20. ^ World Bank, op.cit., 2000in Water Tariff Structures (As share of utilities) World Bank
  21. ^ EPA CWSRF 2001 progress report p. 3 and p. 14
  22. ^ EPA Clean Water State Revolving Fund 1 and EPA Clean Water State Revolving Fund 2
  23. ^ EPA DWSRF Q&A
  24. ^ US Department of Agriculture USDA
  25. ^ American Waterworks Association atAWWA
  26. ^ EPA Safe Water 2003, p.3 of EPA
  27. ^ EPA Clean Watersheds Needs Survey and Water 21, February 2008, p. 4

[edit] See also

[edit] Internal and external links


v • d • e
Water supply and sanitation in North America
Sovereign states

Antigua and Barbuda · Bahamas · Barbados · Belize · Canada · Costa Rica · Cuba · Dominica · Dominican Republic · El Salvador · Grenada · Guatemala · Haiti · Honduras · Jamaica · Mexico · Nicaragua · Panama1 · Saint Kitts and Nevis · Saint Lucia · St. Vincent and the Grenadines · Trinidad and Tobago1 · United States
Dependencies and
other territories

American Samoa2 · Anguilla · Aruba1 · Bermuda · British Virgin Islands · Cayman Islands · Greenland · Guadeloupe · Guam2 · Martinique · Montserrat · Navassa Island · Netherlands Antilles · Northern Mariana Islands2 · Puerto Rico · St. Barthélemy · St. Martin · St. Pierre and Miquelon · Turks and Caicos Islands · United States Virgin Islands
1 Territories also in or commonly reckoned elsewhere in the Americas (South America). 2 Territories also in or commonly reckoned to be in the Pacific basin.