Water cost blues! Are you surprised?

When the original MWP was introduced to the public in 2002 the recommendation to taxpayers was as follows:

“The GVWU is proposed as a stand-alone water utility that will service the entire Greater Vernon region (including the City of Vernon, District of Coldstream, and parts of Electoral Areas B, C, and D). GVWU will also provide bulk water under contract to parts of the Township of Spallumcheen. It is proposed that the utility be established as a service of NORD and governed under the Greater Vernon Services Commission. The GVWU will assume the responsibility of supplying and distributing water to both domestic and irrigation customers within the designated service area.”

“The regional water strategy, that has been adopted, is to separate the existing combined water system over the next five years and construct a new water treatment plant in the Middleton Mountain area in the same time frame. This water treatment plant would be supplied by both raw Kalamalka Lake water and raw Duteau Creek water. It will ultimately supply all of the domestic water demands in the Vernon region.”

This proposal was endorsed by experts, including peer reviewers, politicians and the public as they voted for the proponents in the 2002 local elections.

The consultants also explored the economic feasibility of treating all of the water at Duteau Creek regardless of how it would be used. Their conclusion is presented below:

“On an average annual basis, about 80% of the water use in the existing NOWA combined system goes to irrigation. The remainder is for domestic use. The quality of water used for potable purposes must be improved to meet the water quality goals. The question is therefore – is it better to treat all of the water or is it better to separate the irrigation and domestic functions and treat only the domestic supply?

The major factor in this decision is cost. This was investigated using an economic analysis technique known as “life cycle costing”. The results clearly show that water system separation to create a domestic water system and an irrigation water system, has a clear economic advantage over the long-term. Based on a 50-year lifecycle cost analysis, the cost to implement and operate a separated water system is about $149 million. The cost for a combined water system, over the same period and providing the same domestic water quality, is about $198 million – some $49 million higher!”

Guess which option was accepted by the politicians of the time? You got it. It was the one estimated to be $49 million higher. And you wonder why our water costs are going through the roof? We must choose another alternative! More later.

****************************************************************************