Consider the headline: “Three wealthy water districts consume the lion’s share of local water.” Actually, no. Those three communities have about 25K total population. Their two counties have 2.7 million people. The difference between those communities using 3.5x more water than average, per capita, adds a couple percent to the total water use. That’s not the lion’s share, and it pales in comparison to adding 25% to the population, which is what Gavin Newsom’s 3.5 million new homes by 2025 would have done.

It’s possible to have a reasonable debate over how much water usage is reasonable for someone with a large yard. But that doesn’t change the larger water picture, and the impact that more housing will have.

This article's headline buys into a narrative being pushed elsewhere and takes it to an extreme. Indeed these 3 water districts are responsible for tiny fraction of the overall use between two counties, not the lion's share. But the comparisons are nearly meaningless. Purissima Hills used 1.75 mgd year before last. Stanford University used 2.5 mgd, but the reason Stanford was that low is because RECLAIMED water from secondary sewage isn't counted. It's used for irrigation, which is the bulk of the usage for Los Altos Hills and most places. If it WERE true that the lion's share were being used, then an extension to provide secondary sewage water reclaimed to LAH would be in order! But it's not. The stats make it look like Stanford is low, but that's based on claiming 32,000 residents, most of whom are residential students in dorms. They aren't even there the full year. So the per resident number is really meaningless for Stanford.

Compare San Mateo to Santa Clara County. Both used about 75 mgd in the BAWSCA report. But the population served is very different. BAWSCA members total 584,000 residents in Santa Clara County, far less than the county as a whole. San Mateo BAWSCA members' residents seem to equal that entire county, around 750,0000. SO it would appear that San Mateo County uses 20% less water per resident than Santa Clara County residents in the report. That extra 15 mgd in Santa Clara County seems more meaningful than the usage by the 3 water districts singled out.

Indeed, it's worth considering that the secondary sewage water for irrigation is produced by ALL the residents but it is used only by a couple of cities--Palo Alto and Mountain View, who happen to be near the bay and the treatment plant, plus Stanford University. This extra irrigation water source ALONE is enough to account for the difference in usage per capita compared to other cities.

Wonderful article on water usage! Thanks.