What does the Great Lakes Compact mean for water conservation?

Seven years in the making, the Great Lakes Compact went into effect last December after successfully passing through the legislatures of the eight Great Lakes states and Congress. This historic, multistate agreement outlines a regional approach for sustainably managing the waters of the Great Lakes.

A central component of the compact is its ban-with limited exceptions-on diversions of Great Lakes water to points outside the Great Lakes basin, an area defined by the lakes and land that drains into them. This piece of the compact has received considerable attention, particularly in Wisconsin, where the city of Waukesha is on track to become the region’s first out-of-basin community to apply for an exception to the diversion ban.

The Great Lakes Compact bans diversions of Great Lakes water to points outside the Great Lakes basin, with limited exceptions, and requires the use of conservation programs within the basin. The Great Lakes basin is defined by the five lakes and land that drains into them. Eight states and two Canadian provinces have land in the basin. ~courtesy Great Lakes Commission

Perhaps equally significant but less discussed is a compact component that requires the Great Lakes states to implement water conservation programs in areas within the basin. In Wisconsin, Governor Jim Doyle wants to go even further: he has called for a conservation program for the entire state.

“Many communities that rely on groundwater are already reaching the limits of their water supply, and finding additional water sources will be expensive,” said Jeff Ripp, water conservation coordinator at the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC). “Conservation is the cheapest source of new water.”

Wisconsin’s Conservation Program

Under the compact, each state designs its own in-basin conservation program and decides if the program will be voluntary or mandatory. However, the program’s objectives must be consistent with agreed-upon regional objectives. The states have until December 2010 to develop their objectives and implement their programs. Wisconsin served as a pilot case and already finalized its objectives last December (see sidebar). The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Wisconsin Department of Commerce, and PSC were in charge of the development process.

Next, the DNR must write the rules detailing the nuts and bolts of how the program will work. The agency must submit a draft to the state Legislature by December 2009.

Todd Ambs, DNR’s Water Division administrator, said Wisconsin is moving toward using a tiered program of increasingly rigorous conservation requirements-ranging from voluntary to mandatory-for water users (water utilities, industries, agricultural operations, etc.). Users will be ranked based on their location and water use-for example, small, out-of-basin users will be in a less rigorous tier than highly consumptive in-basin users or out-of-basin users with approved diversions.

The program’s most rigorous mandatory requirements will be enforced through a permitting process. Water users will need to obtain a permit for new or increased in-basin withdrawals averaging 100,000 or more gallons of water per day over 30 days, and in the process demonstrate they are meeting the program’s conservation requirements. Large-scale industrial or irrigation operations and water utilities serving more than 1,000 customers are among the types of users with this level of water usage.

The city of Milwaukee’s water utility and other in-basin users that existed as of the compact’s effective date and surpass the 100,000-gallon threshold also will need a permit, but their existing use and capacity will be grandfathered in, said Ambs. However, these users would still be subject to any mandatory requirements deemed necessary in the future as the cumulative impacts of withdrawals and diversions around the basin are assessed, or if they want to expand their existing capacity.

Users with approved diversions will need to demonstrate they are returning all water back to the basin, said Ambs.

The DNR is still developing the specific quantitative standards upon which the program’s conservation requirements will be based.

 

  
Domestic includes indoor and outdoor household uses such as drinking, bathing, flushing toilets, and lawn watering. Agriculture — non-irrigation includes water used for livestock and aquaculture. Public use and loss includes, among other things, water used in public parks or for fire control, and water lost from water main breaks and distribution systems. Although thermoelectric power generation uses the most water in Wisconsin, little of this water is consumed, meaning most of it is returned to the natural system after use. (Water for thermoelectric power is used in generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators, according to the USGS, and one of the main uses of water in the power industry is to cool the power-producing equipment.) The water use in Wisconsin with the highest rate of consumption is agriculture. See wi.water.usgs.gov/data/wateruse.html#reports for more information. Source: U.S. Geological Survey data

The Look of Conservation

So what might water conservation look like for Wisconsin users? “It’s not one-size-fits-all,” said Ripp. “There are many types of users, so to be very effective, it has to be locally driven.”

Water utilities in some communities, for example, could choose to implement conservation rate structures for residential water use, said Ripp. Under such structures, a water utility could charge you a few cents more per 1,000 gallons if you use more than a to-be-determined volume of water over a given period. The idea is the more you use, the higher the rate. Many utilities today use a rate structure that is just the opposite, with rates decreasing as water use increases. “Out West they’ve been using [conservation] rate structures for years,” said Ripp.

For agricultural and industrial users, “best management practices” or BMPs likely will be important, said Eric Ebersberger, DNR’s Water Use Section chief. BMPs include things like using efficient irrigation techniques or reusing water within manufacturing processes. Ebersberger said that by reducing water use, large-scale operations also reduce their energy use-and boost their savings. “It costs a lot of money to pump water,” he said.

Both Ebersberger and Ambs said that conserving now gives the region an opportunity to avoid a water crisis later. “The good news about this part of the country is that we can sustainably manage the Great Lakes. We feel confident we can do that in a way that provides water for environmental protection and economic development,” said Ambs. “We don’t have to face the difficult choices that places like Arizona, Colorado, and California have to face.”

Jennifer Yauck is a science writer at the Great Lakes WATER Institute. GLWI (glwi.uwm.edu) is the largest academic freshwater research facility on the Great Lakes.

Look to future issues of the Compass for more following the Waukesha diversions issue.

In 2007…

The average residential household in Wisconsin used about 160 gallons of water per day.

The Milwaukee Water Works pumped an average of 114,719,699 gallons of water per day.

The Cudahy Water Utility pumped an average of 3,974,121 gallons of water per day.

The Soldiers Grove Municipal Water Utility pumped an average of 46,071 gallons of water per day.

Source: Public Service Commission data

WISCONSIN’S CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES

1) Improve monitoring and standardize data reporting among state and provincial water conservation and efficiency programs.

2) Adopt and implement supply and demand management to promote efficient use and conservation of water resources.

3) Guide programs toward long-term sustainable water use.

4) Develop education programs and information sharing for all water users.

5) Develop science, technology, and research.