facebook-pixel

Letter: Conserving water saves money

(Leah Hogsten | Tribune file photo) Taxpayers can expect to foot up to 72 percent of the controversial Lake Powell pipeline's costs, according to University of Utah economists who analyzed repayment models developed in support of the billion-dollar-plus proposal to pipe Colorado River water from Glen Canyon Dam, above, 140 miles to St. George. Officials from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) began a two-day site visit in southern Utah Tuesday, examining the 139-mile route of the proposed Lake Powell pipeline, Sept. 20, 2016.

I moved to Utah from Minnesota, the Land of 10,000 Lakes. I came for the rivers and mountains, and so was motivated to protect them.

So, recently I sat in on a legislative committee meeting to hear about a water conservation bill, House Bill 143. This bill would require water suppliers simply to study how to reduce water use to 175 gallons per person per day.

I’m shocked to learn the Utah Division of Water Resources opposes HB143. Instead, it prefers to use $5 billion in taxpayer spending for the Lake Powell pipeline and Bear River development. They justify this ridiculous spending by ignoring the fact that water conservation is the cheapest source of new water, because Utah’s water use is the highest in the United States!

This is an outrageous conflict of interest from our state water agency, which wants to save less water and opposes water conservation. They are greenwashing with lip service about the importance of water conservation, while working to advance unnecessary, destructive and expensive infrastructure projects.

In Minnesota, we value water. Yet here, in the driest state, we waste it.

Utahns need HB143 and water conservation.

Jon Carter, Millcreek

Submit a letter to the editor