One of the major factors affecting the consumption of residential water is whether or not the distribution system is metered. Water use in metered areas is significantly lower than in flat-rate areas, primarily because of the impact of metering on lawn-sprinkling. Peak demands, hourly and daily, tend to be very much lower in the metered areas, a fact that is of great importance in planning water systems. Household use (inside uses such as flushing and cooking) is relatively constant as between metered and flat-rate areas.
There are many examples of how universal metering affects the use of water. In Kingston, N.Y., a universal meter installation program was initiated in 1958. By 1963, with 98 percent of the system metered, average water use had decreased from 5.47 to 4 million gallons per day, even though the number of services had increased from 7,800 to 7,935. When Philadelphia completed universal metering between 1955 and 1960, demand for water declined from 370 mgd to 327.8 mgd (11 percent). In 1955, approximately 73 percent of the water services were metered; hence, metering was estimated to have reduced demand among the unmetered users by at least 28 percent. Another example is Elizabeth City, N.C., where, in 1931, universal metering of an originally flat-rate system reduced average consumption from 1.8 to 0.3 mgd. Although demands later increased slightly, per capita consumption as of 1946 was still lower than for the period prior to 1931.
The future scope for this particular form of adjustment to water shortage, however, is somewhat limited; most municipalities in the United States have already installed individual water meters. There are some notable exceptions. For example, only 25 percent of the water users in New York City are metered, though in a recent report the former water commissioner of the city estimated that complete metering would reduce consumption by 125 mgd, or approximately 10 percent of average daily use in the early sixties.
From Drought and Water Supply, by Clifford S. Russell, David G. Arey, and Robert W. Kates, published for RFF by The Johns Hopkins Press, 1970.
A version of this article appeared in print in the June 1971 issue of Resources magazine.
