Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Research papers
Identifying Water Price and Population Criteria for Meeting Future Urban Water
Demand Targets
PII: S0022-1694(17)30723-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.10.047
Reference: HYDROL 22327
Please cite this article as: Ashoori, N., Dzombak, D.A., Small, M.J., Identifying Water Price and Population Criteria
for Meeting Future Urban Water Demand Targets, Journal of Hydrology (2017), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jhydrol.2017.10.047
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Identifying Water Price and Population Criteria for Meeting Future
1
Corresponding author: Negin Ashoori, Postdoctoral Scholar, Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Stanford University
473 Via Ortega, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Email: nashoori@stanford.edu
2
David A. Dzombak, Hamerschlag University Professor and Department Head, Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
3
Mitchell J. Small, H. John Heinz Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Engineering
Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract
Predictive models for urban water demand can help identify the set of factors that must be
satisfied in order to meet future targets for water demand. Some of the explanatory variables
used in such models, such as service area population and changing temperature and rainfall rates,
are outside the immediate control of water planners and managers. Others, such as water pricing
and the intensity of voluntary water conservation efforts, are subject to decisions and programs
implemented by the water utility. In order to understand this relationship, a multiple regression
model fit to 44 years of monthly demand data (1970-2014) for Los Angeles, California was
applied to predict possible future demand through 2050 under alternative scenarios for the
explanatory variables: population, price, voluntary conservation efforts, and temperature and
precipitation outcomes predicted by four global climate models with two CO2 emission
scenarios. Future residential water demand in Los Angeles is projected to be largely driven by
price and population rather than climate change and conservation. A median projection for the
year 2050 indicates that residential water demand in Los Angeles will increase by approximately
1
36 percent, to a level of 620 million m3 per year. The Monte Carlo simulations of the fitted
model for water demand were then used to find the set of conditions in the future for which water
demand is predicted to be above or below the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 2035
goal to reduce residential water demand by 25%. Results indicate that increases in price can not
ensure that the 2035 water demand target can be met when population increases. Los Angeles
must rely on furthering their conservation initiatives and increasing their use of stormwater
capture, recycled water, and expanding their groundwater storage. The forecasting approach
developed in this study can be utilized by other cities to understand the future of water demand
in water-stressed areas. Improving water demand forecasts will help planners understand and
Keywords Water demand forecasting; Urban water management; Regional climate impact;
1. Introduction
water supply system (Zhou et al., 2002; Herrera et al., 2010; Cai and Rosegrant, 2002). Effective
water use (Ruth et al., 2007; Zhou et al., 2000; Milano et al., 2013), as well as how water
consumers react to changes in water prices and conservation efforts. Effective water demand
forecasting leads to better informed water management decisions (Bougadis et al., 2005;
2
Water demand forecasting can be especially beneficial for semi-arid regions that are
impacted by frequent droughts (Zhou et al., 2000). Globally, increases in water withdrawal in
addition to competing demands for water resources allow for an environment in which future
California experienced one of the worst droughts in its history between 2012-2017 with
record high temperatures and record low precipitation (Hanak et al., 2016). Over 80% of water
consumption in California is for the agricultural sector, whereas 17.6% is for residential,
commercial, and industrial use (Wilson et al., 2015). The continuous five years of drought
impacted all water sectors from urban to agriculture. The agricultural sector was greatly
impacted by the drought as farmers had a 50% decrease in surface water allocation in 2015,
which forced them to rely on limited groundwater. In the urban sector, water use was cut by
Drought conditions in California are a concern in Los Angeles, since almost 90% of its
water is imported (LADWP, 2010) and a majority of the water supply is from snowmelt runoff in
Sierra Nevada, where warming climate and changes in precipitation patterns have decreased
supply reliability (NOAA, 2015; Jeton et.al., 1996; Roy et al., 2012). The city of Los Angeles
obtains its water from five sources: Los Angeles Aqueduct (originating from Eastern Sierra
Nevada), Colorado River Aqueduct, California State Water Project (SWP), local groundwater,
and recycled water (LADWP, 2015). Further information on the water sources supplying Los
Angeles is provided in Table A2 of the Appendix. The Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power (LADWP), which is solely responsible for providing water to over 4 million Los Angeles
residents, purchases water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD)
when supplies are limited (MWD, 2010). The population served by LADWP has increased by an
3
annual growth rate of approximately 1.3 percent from 1980 to 2010. The population of Los
Angeles is expected to grow by 0.4 percent annually in the next 25 years and reach 4.5 million in
2035 (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Increases in population will exacerbate the effects of limited
Significant progress has been made in recent years in understanding the causes, severity,
impact and trends in the global distribution of drought events (Mishra and Singh, 2010; Wada et
al. 2011; Wilhite, 2016). As in other cities and regions, the capacity to anticipate and respond to
drought events in Los Angeles has evolved over time, with intertwining trajectories of population
growth, water law, water supply acquisition, treatment, pricing, and voluntary or mandatory
Variations in climate have an impact on both the sources of water and water demand by
consumers (McFarlane et al., 2012; Pulido-Calvo et al., 2012). Prior studies on its effect on water
demand show that increases in temperature and decreases in precipitation lead to increases in
water demand (Chang et al., 2014; Parandvash and Chang, 2016; Guo and Shen, 2016; Balling
and Gober, 2006; Polebitski et al., 2011; Jain et al., 2002; Rodrguez-Daz et al., 2007).
Reductions in precipitation increase water usage for outdoor landscaping, whereas increased
temperatures increase outdoor usage associated with swimming pools. Additionally, increases in
temperature increase evapotranspiration rates. For example, Los Angeles loses 128 cm per year
due to evapotranspiration, which can decrease recharge rates (LADWP, 2010). For Los Angeles,
the projected increase in temperatures from 2030-2050 vs. 1950-1999 using an average model
developed through the World Climate Research Programs Coupled Model Intercomparison
Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), which uses 34 global climate models (GCMs), ranges from 1.12-
2.52C (LADWP, 2015). With climate change likely to intensify drought severity in Southern
4
California (Cheng et al. 2016; Berg and Hall, 2017) and other regions, integrated assessments
that consider a broad range of scientific, engineering, economic and social processes are needed.
and Harhay, 2010), water withdrawals in California are projected to exceed 100% of the
precipitation that is available in the state by 2050 (Roy et al., 2012). This will impact the
allocated water Los Angeles receives from the Los Angeles Aqueduct, California State Water
Project, California State Water Project, and local groundwater. For example, Luo et al. (2017)
used a VIC hydrologic model to simulate the hydrology of California, Nevada, and parts of Utah
to show how precipitation and temperature anomalies impacted the 2012-2015 California
drought. Results indicated that precipitation deficits produced extreme agricultural drought
California. The multi-year drought which started in 2012 reduced the amount of water supplied
from the Los Angeles Aqueduct. Therefore, LADWP relied on other imported water from MWD,
which is the most expensive water source for LADWP. These price changes increased residential
water prices in Los Angeles, which influenced users to use less water. Increases in price, as well
as the mandatory conservation measures, resulted in a 22% reduction in water demand between
There are various methods currently used to reduce water demand in Los Angeles,
including water pricing and conservation programs (LADWP, 2010). Previous studies have
analyzed the relationship of conservation and water pricing and have seen that people are
responsive to price increases (Rinaudo et al., 2012; Renwick and Green, 2000). For example,
Renwick and Green (2000) showed that a 10% increase in pricing policies in eight different
water utility regions in California decreased demand by 1.6%. The study also showed that
5
households were more likely to respond to price increases in the summer months due to the
capability of reducing outdoor water use. For Los Angeles, alterations in pricing began in 1993
when tiered water pricing was introduced which involved an increased fee for water use above a
certain allocated Tier 1 level. The tiered water price structure in Los Angeles has been shown to
exert downward pressure on water demand (Ashoori et al., 2015). Tiered water pricing provides
a monetary incentive to customers to reduce their water use. As of April 2016, single-family
although multi-family households still have a two-tiered rate structure. These tiered pricing
structures were implemented to reduce the impact of water supply variability and population
growth (LADWP, 2015). In addition to water pricing structures, conservation methods have been
implemented in Los Angeles since 1990 to reduce water demand (LADWP, 2010). During
previous drought years in Los Angeles, such as 2012-2017, consumers lowered demand through
voluntary measures. Between 2013 and early 2016, water demand decreased by nearly 25%
(Hanak et al., 2016). Through investing in various conservation programs and measures, such as
installation of water efficient household appliances and mandatory outdoor watering restrictions,
LADWP has been able to keep water demand levels low despite a 1.3% annual growth in
To prepare for future impacts of drought and population growth, the City of Los Angeles
has examined ways to reduce per capita water use by an additional 25 percent by 2035 through
conservation incentives, education, and action campaigns (Sustainable City pLAn, 2015). The
implementation of the Sustainable City pLAn has led LADWP to set target water demand goals.
The citys water efficiency goals are mainly to reduce dependency on imported water supplies
6
The objective of this study was to apply a multiple linear regression model for water
demand in Los Angeles (Ashoori et al., 2016) to project residential water demand until 2050
under various scenarios for the governing factors (climate change, population growth, pricing
structures, and conservation levels). The study uses the projections to assess the potential to meet
2035 water use targets considering potential changes in water price and population. The multiple
linear regression model for water demand was calibrated to data for the period 1970-2000, cross-
validated for the years 2001-2014, then refit for the full period 1970-2014 to provide maximally-
informed parameter estimates for the future projection period (2015-2050). The study analyzed
the likelihood of reaching the Sustainable City pLAn water demand target 2035 goals under
changing population and price, which are the main factors impacting water demand in Los
Angeles. Preceding studies have focused on modeling factors that impact water supply and
demand (Babel et al., 2007, Gaudin, 2006), but none have projected future water demand under
various future scenarios in Los Angeles to meet water demand targets. Contributing factors to
urban water demand, such as climate change, population growth, pricing and conservation are
determine an envelope of residential water demand possibilities for the future as well as to
analyze the probability that future water demand targets can be met. Through water demand
forecasting, water planners can make more informed decisions regarding supply management in
residential water demand in the service area of LADWP and forecasting them, approaches for
sustainable management of the supply system can be identified. This model forecasting approach
can be applied to other water stressed regions that are impacted by climate change and
population growth.
7
2. Methodology
The projections of water demand in this paper build on our previous analysis of the main factors
influencing water demand in Los Angeles (Ashoori et al., 2016). A multiple linear regression
(MLR) model for Los Angeles water demand was developed which includes conservation level,
population, price, temperature and precipitation as the explanatory variables and total monthly
water demand as the dependent variable. Further information on model development can be
found in Ashoori et al. (2016). Data on monthly residential water demand, Tier 1 pricing, and
conservation estimates from 1970 to 2014 were obtained from LADWP. The MLR model was
calibrated and cross-validated with these data. In the analysis that follows, the MLR model is
used to project water demand under alternative future scenarios of population, climate, pricing,
and conservation.
The MLR model for monthly water demand, with Tier 1 price, population, conservation
Mt =
(1)
where Mt, the monthly water demand in Los Angeles (m3) is the dependent variable, and the
other coefficients and variables are as given in Table 1. Other candidate variables, such as
median household income, Tier 2 water price, and drought index values that included
8
evapotranspiration rates, were investigated but their influence on fitting of historical water
demand data were either not statistically significant or were removed from the regression due to
collinearity. Cross validation of the model was performed for model evaluation. The cross
validation model was developed using water demand data from 1970-2000 and tested on the
dataset from 2001-2014. Results from the cross validation and calibration statistics from the
model are provided in the Appendix. There are various methods for adjusting multivariate
regression analysis results for the presence of autocorrelation (Bence, 1995). In this paper, the
use of cross validation, and the good performance of the model under it, provides assessment to
ensure that the estimates of the model are not significantly biased. As seen in Table 1, five
variables were ultimately used in the MLR model and to project under various scenarios for
Table 1 Descriptions of the explanatory variables in the MLR model of Los Angeles, California
residential water demand
Variables in Description Units Abbreviation Fitted P-values Units of values
the Model values+
Precipitation Total monthly cm RM 0.077* m3/cm
precipitation
Temperature Average monthly C TM <0.001** m3/ oC
temperature
Price Tier 1 price $ WP1 <0.001** m3/$
Low^ CL <0.001** m3
Medium^ CM <0.001** m3
High^ CH <0.001** m3
+ fitted beta values determined from historical data (1970-2014) (Ashoori et al., 2016)
** Indicates the coefficient is significant at the p=0.01 level
*Indicates the coefficient is significant at the p= 0.10 level
^
Indicates categorical dummy variables. Each conservation level is individually compared to very low levels of
conservation
9
Substitution of the fitted values of Table 1 into Equation 1 yields:
Mt (m3) =
(2)
The coefficients in the model are all statistically significant, and can be interpreted as
follows. For climate variables, a one-centimeter increase in precipitation would decrease water
demand by 74,600 m3 per month and a one-degree Celsius increase would increase residential
water demand by 1.36 million m3 each month. As for population, each additional person
contributes 27.8 m3 to the Los Angeles monthly water demand. For price increases, a one-dollar
per m3 increase in Tier 1 water price would decrease water demand by 12.3 million m3 per
month. For conservation, the three conservation levels yielded separate water demand
coefficients. Compared to a baseline of very low levels of conservation, a low conservation level
decreases water demand by 5.49 million m3 per month, a medium conservation level decreases
monthly water demand by 8.76 million m3, and a high conservation level decreases monthly
The model represented in Equation (2) was used to estimate water demand for different scenarios
of climate change, population growth, pricing structures, and conservation methods from 2015-
2050. A summary of the scenarios developed is presented in Table 2. In this study, three
scenarios were developed for each of the four factors in the MLR model for water demand:
population, Tier 1 water price, precipitation, and temperature. Additionally, four scenarios for
10
temperature co-vary, combined scenarios were developed for these two variables. In total, 108
scenarios were generated for the model inputs and water demand forecasting for Los Angeles.
selected considering certain combinations of the explanatory variables. The low-bound scenario
estimates water demand for the case in which population and climate remain constant while price
and conservation efforts are maximized. The low-bound scenario projects water demand under
the best case scenario for minimization of water demand. For the baseline scenario, projections
for the variables are estimated to be in line with what has been predicted for Los Angeles by
LADWP (2010). Finally, a high-bound scenario for water demand was developed to analyze
water demand increases given maximum population growth and climate change (with increased
temperature and decreased precipitation), while keeping Tier 1 price and conservation at a
minimum. Although the high-bound scenario shows the upper level of water demand for the
various conditions of population, Tier 1 price, climate, and conservation, water availability
limitations in the future are likely to stimulate additional mandatory water conservation methods
that would reduce the likelihood of such an extreme outcome. Possible feedbacks between future
available water supply, climate change, population change, and pricing and conservation
decisions provide a high priority for ongoing research, but remain highly speculative (Dawadi
and Ahmad, 2013; Larson et al., 2015; Sampson et al., 2016; Gober et al., 2017). Our effort to
identify the critical factors for future outcomes and the manner in which they could co-occur in
meeting, or failing to meet, water demand objectives, represents an important first step for
11
Table 2 Summary of bounding scenarios for projecting residential water demand in Los Angeles,
California from 2015-2050
Low-bound Scenario Baseline Scenario High-bound Scenario
1
Data for projections of baseline population were obtained from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (2010)
2,3
Data for projections of climate variables were obtained from the California Energy Commission, Cal-Adapt data source
All other scenarios were chosen to reflect historic and potential future bounds
It is acknowledged that the influence of the explanatory variables on water demand in the
future could be altered by structural changes in water supply or housing infrastructure, evolving
perceptions and behavior, or other factors. Other investigators have developed water demand
models with higher geographic resolution for residential demand, with consideration of factors
such as sociodemographic profile and landscape use (Panagopoulos, 2014; Baerenklau et al.,
2014; House-Peters et al., 2011). However, the projections that follow are based on data
available and provide a baseline against which other modeling assumptions can be compared.
2.2.1 Population
Los Angeles is the second largest city in the United States, with the LADWP service population
being 3.9 million in 2015 (LADWP, 2015). Since 1980, the population of Los Angeles has
12
increased at an average annual rate of 1.3% (LADWP, 2010). With a projected population of 4.5
million by 2035 (US Census Bureau, 2010), it is imperative to estimate quantitatively the
increase in water demand due to population growth, recognizing that other factors, such as
conservation efforts and pricing strategies, can alleviate the impacts of population and climate on
water demand (Babel et al., 2007). The three scenarios selected for population projections result
from varying assumptions of growth in Los Angeles. The low-bound scenario population
projection assumes that population stays constant at 3.9 million after 2014. The baseline scenario
provides for an incremental increase of 20% in population by 2050, meaning the population
would reach roughly 4.7 million by 2050. The high-bound population scenario assumes
population will increase by 40% during the projection period, giving a population of 5.4 million
by 2050. These three scenarios encompass a broad range in the spectrum of potential population
With the likelihood of future increases in water prices in Los Angeles, it is useful to investigate
how consumers will react and how pricing will affect total water demand (Billings and Jones,
2011). Various price scenarios were developed in order to represent possible changes in Los
Angeles water price in the future. Three scenarios were established using 2014 Tier 1 LADWP
prices as the starting reference price. The 2014 Tier 1 water price was $1.56 per m3 (LADWP,
2013). Therefore, in the low-bound scenario the Tier 1 rate was maintained at this constant value
from 2015 to 2050. The baseline scenario for price provides for a 50% incremental increase in
price from 2015 to 2050, whereas the high-bound scenario increases the Tier 1 water price by
13
100% from 2015 to 2050 (i.e., by a factor of 2). All values for water prices were readjusted for
2.2.3 Climate
The climatic variables temperature and precipitation have an effect on short-term seasonal
changes in water demand. Los Angeles residents, which include single and multi-family
households use over 30% of their water for outdoor purposes (LADWP, 2010). That use
fluctuates depending on the temperature and amount of precipitation in the region (LADWP,
2010). Projections of precipitation in the southwestern United States in 2050, made from an
ensemble of 16 global climate models, indicated decreases in precipitation for most of the
models (Roy et al., 2012). As parametrized in the MLR model, this leads to an increase in water
demand, most likely for outdoor uses such as landscaping, as noted above. Climate change
effects on water supply are also likely to be crucial to the sustainability of the Los Angeles water
system (Ashoori et al., 2015), but this study focuses solely on the impacts of climate change on
water demand.
In order to develop three scenarios for climate encompassing both temperature and
precipitation, two different methods were employed. A bootstrap technique was initially used to
generate temperature and precipitation inputs for a climate scenario in which there is no change
in the current climate (a low change scenario). The bootstrap procedure involved re-sampling the
joint monthly temperature and precipitation dataset with replacement. The dataset used included
the 1970-2014 monthly values for temperature and precipitation in Los Angeles. For the two
14
additional scenarios, four different climate models were used (California Energy Commission,
2015):
The climate models were analyzed using two different climate scenarios (A2, B1) for
temperature and precipitation in Los Angeles. The A2 scenario assumes continuously increasing
global population and economic growth whereas the B1 scenario assumes the introduction of
al., 2000). Predictions for each model and scenario were obtained from the California Energy
Commission, Cal-Adapt data source (California Energy Commission, 2015). For each climate
scenario the average of the four different models was calculated and used in the projection.
Further information on the climate models can be observed in Table A3 and A9 in the Appendix.
Together, the three scenarios provide a broad range of estimates for the effect of climate on
water demand.
2.2.4 Conservation
Los Angeles water conservation methods can be categorized into voluntary, mandatory, and
market-based strategies (Maggioni, 2015). Since the 1990s, LADWP has implemented various
conservation methods and analyzed their impact on water demand. These conservation tools
have helped reduce per capita water use in Los Angeles (LADWP, 2010). The amount of water
15
demand in Los Angeles is influenced by consumer engagement in conservation, and modeling
that relationship is critical to future water planning management. LADWP is expected to increase
conservation activities in the coming decades (LADWP, 2010). In order to show its impact on
the overall water demand, four scenarios were established. The very low level conservation
scenario estimates zero water conservation after 2014. In the regression analysis, the other three
conservation levels (low, medium, high) were individually compared against the very low level
of conservation. The coefficient of each conservation level was then used to project water
Figure 1 depicts each of the explanatory variables in the MLR model and their assumed or
[FIGURE 1]
All projections were modeled in Tableau (Chabot et al., 2003), a software tool used for
interactive data visualization. Users are able to choose from the various model scenarios for
price, population, climate models, climate scenarios, and conservation levels in order to visualize
In order to analyze if projected water demand will meet LADWPs 2035 target reduction of 25%,
a Monte Carlo simulation was performed using the probability distribution of the variables.
16
Three values for population and price were fixed in the multiple linear regression equation for
2035. A Monte Carlo simulation of all other inputs: conservation, temperature, and precipitation,
as well as the regression residual, was run with 10,000 simulations. Values generated were
inputted into the multiple regression. The probability of simulations in which water demand did
Projections of total monthly urban water demand in Los Angeles for 2015-2050 were developed
using the various scenarios for population, water pricing, conservation methods, and climate. The
MLR model forecasting results indicate that price, population, temperature, precipitation, and
conservation levels all were significant in impacting projected water demand. As shown in
Figure 2, the monthly MLR model, used to project water demand from 2015 to 2050 (Figures 3-
5), closely follows the actual monthly water demand in Los Angeles during the period for which
the model was fit, 1970-2014. The R2 for the model was 0.72 indicating that 72% of the
variability in the historical monthly water demand is explained by the explanatory variables.
Further assessment of the performance of the forecasting models measures of accuracy can be
seen in the Appendix (Legates and McCabe, 1999). The figure also shows the expected monthly
variation in water demand. High demands are seen in hot, dry summer months, whereas low
demands are typical for cooler, wetter winter months, as seen in the fluctuation of temperature
and precipitation from historical data in Figure A1 in the Appendix. Historically, Los Angeles
receives on average 36 cm of precipitation each year, with most of it occurring between late
December to early March (LADWP, 2015). Additionally, highest temperatures are observed in
17
the months of July-September. This high and consistent degree of monthly variation is one
reason why a strong weather-climate signal can be identified in the historical water demand
record for Los Angeles, allowing relatively confident prediction of the effect of possible future
[FIGURE 2]
Figure 3 shows projections of water demand from 2015-2050 with a focus on the effects
of different population scenarios. As seen in Figure 3, the water demand under high population
growth, is estimated to vary from 710 million m3 to 1.10 billion m3 in 2050 depending on the
other variables in the analysis. The solid lines in Figure 3 indicate the 50 th percentile of the
forecasting, whereas the dashed lines depict the 25th and 75th percentile ranges of the forecasting
scenario. The medium population growth yielded an estimate of 450-840 million m3 in 2050. For
the case of no population growth the range of values for 2050 water demand in Los Angeles is
[FIGURE 3]
demand. Figure 4 shows the varying scenarios of water demand in Los Angeles under changes in
Tier 1 water pricing. The results for each of the three water price scenarios indicated with
different colors fall into three distinct groups. The groupings are caused by the somewhat larger
impact of population in the model. The model results indicate that population stability and
18
increases in price can drastically reduce water demand, by as much as 230 million m3 per year in
the future (i.e., nearly half of current use). Without the regulation of Tier 1 price, the potential
range of water demand shifts upward from 200-870 million m3 in 2050 to 360 million to 1.10
billion m3 in 2050.
[FIGURE 4]
The effect of climate on water demand in the projections is not as significant as that of
population and price. In Figure 5, water demand projections for the three scenarios of climate
change are shown with consideration of baseline scenarios of population, price, and
conservation. What can be observed is a small increase in water demand under the A2 climate
scenario compared to the B1 and no change scenarios. The difference between no change in
climate and the A2 climate scenario in 2050 is 28 million m3 per year. Therefore, a 5% increase
in water demand could be attributable to climate change by 2050, under baseline scenarios of
population, price, and conservation. Although it appears that changes in climate will not have a
major effect on future water demand in Los Angeles, climate change is likely to have a strong
influence on the overall water supply system, which relies primarily on water from outside the
city of Los Angeles (Ashoori et al., 2015). Further information on the climate, population, and
[FIGURE 5]
19
Shown in Table 3 are the projected values for residential water demand in Los Angeles
between 2015 and 2050 for bounding scenarios representing the extreme low and extreme high
outcomes, with a middle (baseline) scenario included for comparison. The total monthly water
demand projected for Los Angeles for 2015 is in the range of 450-600 million m3. However, the
plausible range of forecasted water demand expands considerably, extending from 196 million
m3 to 1.09 billion m3 for 2050 under changing scenario values of population, price, climate, and
conservation.
Table 3 Total projected residential water demand* in Los Angeles for the period 2015-2050
The baseline scenario, which is perhaps the most likely scenario due to LADWP price,
conservation, and population projections (LADWP, 2015), yields an increase in water demand
from 460 million m3 to 620 million m3 per year by 2050. This is equivalent to an increase of
36%. From this analysis, it is seen that future water demand is expected to be largely driven by
price and population rather than climate change. Conservation can decrease water demand and
20
climate change can cause modest increases, but their long-term effects are small compared to the
large potential impacts of population growth and pricing policies in the LADWP service region.
However, during periods of extreme drought water consumers are capable of conserving an
increased amount of water due to mandatory restrictions (LADWP, 2010). Additionally, new
conservation methods implemented in Los Angeles can reduce water demand stress that is due to
multi-year droughts. For example, in 2015, the mayor set new conservation goals for Los
Angeles residents to reduce water use by 20% by 2017 and they have already reduced water
demand by 22% from 2007-2015 (Sustainable City pLAn, 2015). Exploring the long-term and
short-term changes in behavior to drought and water demand changes is important to investigate.
Such information will lead to improved forecasts and better solutions for future water demand
management.
LADWP is investing in water conservation and local water supplies to reduce dependency on
imported water supplies and to increase future water sustainability. One main target for LADWP
is to reduce residential water demand by 25% by 2035. As shown in Figure 6, the probability of
meeting the 2035 LADWP water demand target decreases significantly with increased
population.
[FIGURE 6]
Without population growth, the probability that projected water demand for Los Angeles will
meet the 2035 water demand target for LADWP is 84.1%. Increases in price will ensure a 100%
21
chance of meeting the water demand target. However, with a 20% increase in population, the
probability of reaching the target drops. Without the influence of an increased price per m3 of
water, there is only a 3.1% chance of meeting the 2035 target with a population of 4.7 million.
LADWP predicts that their service area population will reach 4.4 million by 2035 indicating the
probability of reaching their water demand targets are difficult without increases in Tier 1
pricing, conservation, and alternative local water sources (LADWP, 2015). Even with doubling
of price, the impact of a 20% increase in population will not ensure a 100% probability of
reaching the target. That probability drops significantly to 0% once population increases by 40%.
In order to prepare for increasing population, as well as for unreliability of imported water
supply, LADWP and Bureau of Sanitation are investing more resources into conservation
(Hagekhalil et al., 2014). With approximately 39% of total water demand being for outdoor
water use (LADWP, 2015), LADWP can better reach their 2035 target through limitations on
outdoor water consumption. These include less water intensive landscapes, restricting times of
watering, and increasing the usage of rainwater tanks. Other cities have greatly reduced water
use through outdoor water restrictions. For example, in Melbourne, Australia, outdoor watering
is prohibited between the hours of 10am to 8pm and has contributed to reducing total water use
The outcomes of this forecasting will assist decision makers in Los Angeles to plan for
future impacts of water demand. The methodology employed to forecast residential water
demand in Los Angeles can be applied to other water supply systems as well.
22
4. Conclusions
Management of water demand is important to the future sustainability of the Los Angeles water
supply system and other systems in arid regions. As uncertainty is present in future climate
forecasts, population estimates, pricing structures, and conservation methods, water planners
must direct their attention to long-term strategies that are robust under a range of scenarios. In
this study, the total monthly residential water demand in Los Angeles during the period of 2015-
2050 was projected across various scenarios of population, water pricing, climate, and
conservation levels. Three future scenarios of climate, population, and price as well as four
scenarios of conservation levels were developed based on historical trends. The maximum total
water demand is projected to occur when population increases, climate becomes drier and hotter
under a A2 climate model, and price and conservation efforts remain stable. For this case the
projected maximum residential water demand in 2050 is estimated to be 1.09 billion m3, a 139%
increase from the 2014 water demand of 460 million m3. However, in the more likely baseline
scenario, water demand is estimated to be 620 million m3 per year in 2050 indicating that water
demand will increase by 36% from 2014. The study results indicate that changes in population
and price in Los Angeles are expected to play a bigger part in influencing future water demand
than climate change and conservation programs. Understanding the importance and future
pathways of the factors affecting water demand will be a key step in ongoing planning for a
The study also examined the probability of reaching the 2035 LADWP water demand
target reduction of 25% under changing population and price, which are the main factors
impacting water demand in Los Angeles. The Monte Carlos simulation results showed that any
increase in population will significantly decrease the likelihood of reaching the 2035 water
23
demand target, even with increasing water prices. For example, without the influence of an
increased price per m3 of water, there is only a 3.1% chance of meeting the target with a
population increase of 20%. In order to prepare for increased water demand, Los Angeles must
expand their conservation initiatives, and increase their local water supply, such as stormwater
capture, recycled water, and expanding groundwater storage, and further restrict outdoor water
use.
This study is novel in analyzing how forecasted scenarios of population growth, climate
change, price, and conservation methods, can impact water demand in Los Angeles as well as
understand their capacity to enable reaching LADWP water demand target. However, future
research on water demand differences between single and multi-family households, as well as the
impact of socioeconomic status, can be beneficial in understanding the role of land use and
The modeling approach in this study can be utilized by other cities to understand the
the influence of population, climate, and consumer behaviors due to water prices and
conservation efforts in order to make informed water management decisions. The approaches
used to develop the water demand forecasting model and its application to evaluate future water
demand targets can be used in decision-support tools to provide information that will lead to
better solutions for future water demand management in water-stressed areas such as Los
Angeles.
Acknowledgements
24
The authors thank Simon Hsu and Priscilla Gonzalez of the Los Angeles Department of Water
and Power for providing data used in this study. Support for this work was provided by a
Institute U.S. Environmental Sustainability Fellowship to Negin Ashoori. The Fellowship was
supported by a grant from the Colcom Foundation, and by the Steinbrenner Institute for
Environmental Education and Research. The work was also supported by the Hamerschlag
University Professorship of David Dzombak, and the H. John Heinz Professorship of Mitchell
Small.
References
Ashoori N., Dzombak D.A., Small M.J. 2015. Sustainability Review of Water Supply Options in
the Los Angeles Region. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. doi:
10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000541, A4015005
Ashoori N., Dzombak D.A., Small M.J., 2016. Modeling the Effects of Conservation,
Demographics, Price, and Climate on Urban Water Demand in Los Angeles, California.
Babel M., Gupta A., Pradhan P., 2007. A Multivariate Econometric Approach for Domestic
Baerenklau K.A., Schwabe K.A., Dinar A., 2014. The Residential Water Demand Effect and
Balling R.C., Gober, P., 2006. Climate Variability and Residential Water Use in the City of
25
Bence J.R., 1995. Analysis of Short Time Series: Correcting for Autocorrelation. Ecology 76(2),
628-639
Berg, N. and Hall, A., 2017. Anthropogenic Warming Impacts on California Snowpack During
Billings R.B., Jones C.V., 2008. Forecasting Urban Water Demand. American Water Works
Bougadis J., Adamowski K., Diduch R., 2005. Short-Term Municipal Water Demand
Buurman, J., Mens, M. J. and Dahm, R. J., 2017. Strategies for Urban Drought Risk
Cahill, R., and Lund, J., 2011. Residential Water Conservation in Australia and California.
https://watershed.ucdavis.edu/pdf/Cahill_Residential%20Water%20Conservation%20in
%20Australia
Cai, X., and Rosegrant, M. W., 2002. Global Water Demand and Supply Projections. Part 1. A
Chabot C., Stolte C., Hanrahan P., 2003. Tableau (computer software)
Chang H., Praskievicz S., Parandvash H., 2014. Sensitivity of Urban Water Consumption to
26
Cheng, L., Hoerling, M., AghaKouchak, A., Livneh, B., Quan, X. W. and Eischeid, J., 2016.
How has Human-Induced Climate Change Affected California Drought Risk? Journal of
Dawadi, S. and Ahmad, S., 2013. Evaluating the Impact of Demand-Side Management on Water
Fuller A.C., Harhay M.O., 2010. Population Growth, Climate Change and Water Scarcity in the
doi: 10.3844/ajessp.2010.249.252
Gaudin S., 2006. Effect of Price Information on Residential Water Demand. Applied Economics
Gober, P., White, D.D., Quay, R., Sampson, D.A. and Kirkwood, C.W., 2017. Socio-Hydrology
Modelling for an Uncertain Future, with Examples from the USA and
Grouillet, B., Fabre, J., Ruelland, D., and Dezetter, A., 2015. Historical Reconstruction and 2050
Guo, Y., and Shen, Y., 2016. Agricultural Water Supply/Demand Changes Under Projected
Future Climate Change in the Arid Region of Northwestern China. Journal of Hydrology
540, 257-273.
Hagekhalil, A., Kharaghani, S., Tam, W., Haimann, R., Susilo, K., 2014. City of Los Angeles
the Green Blue City One Water Program. ICSI 2014: Creating Infrastructure for a
27
Hanak, E., Mount, J., and Chappelle, C., 2016. Californias Latest Drought. PPIC Water Policy
Herrera, M., Torgo, L., Izquierdo, J., Perez-Garcia, R., 2010. Predictive Models for Forecasting
House-Peters L., Pratt B., Chang H., 2010. Effects of Urban Spatial Structure,
Jain A., Varshney A.K., Joshi U.C., 2002. Short-Term Water Demand Forecast Modelling at IIT
Kanpur Using Artificial Neural Networks. Water Resources Management 15, 299-321.
Jeton, A. E., Dettinger, M. D., and Smith, L. J., 1996. Potential Effects of Climate Change on
Streamflow, Eastern and Western Slopes of the Sierra Nevada, California and Nevada.
Larson, K.L, White, D.D., Gober, P. and Wutich, A., 2015. Decision-Making Under Uncertainty
for Water Sustainability and Urban Climate Change Adaptation. Sustainability 7(11),
14761-14784.
Legates, D.R., and McCabe Jr., G.J., 1999. Evaluating the Use of 'Goodness-of-Fit' Measures in
Hydrologic and Hydroclimatic Model Validation. Water Resour. Res. 35 (1), 233-241.
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), 2010. Urban Water Management Plan
2010.
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), 2013. Water Resources Department
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), 2015. Los Angeles Department of
28
http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/5595df952213930462000001/attachments/
original/1430386934/LADWP_Water_System_Fact_Sheet.pdf?1430386934
Luo, L., Apps, D., Arcand, S., Xu, H., Pan, M., and Hoerling, M, 2017. Contribution of
Maggioni E., 2015. Water Demand Management in Times of Drought: What Matters for Water
McFarlane, D., Stone, R., Martens, S., Thomas, J., Silberstein, R., Ali, R., and Hodgson, G.,
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), 2010. The Regional Urban Water
http://www.mwdh2o.com/mwdh2o/pages/yourwater/RUWMP/RUWMP_2010.pdf
Milano, M., Ruelland, D., Dezetter, A., Fabre, J., Ardoin-Bardin, S., and Servat, E., 2013.
Modeling the Current and Future Capacity of Water Resources to Meet Water Demands
Mishra, A.K. and Singh, V.P., 2010. A Review of Drought Concepts. Journal of
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/index.htm
29
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2015. U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_summary.html
Panagopoulos, G.P., 2014. Assessing the Impacts of Socio-Economic and Hydrological Factors
518, 42-48.
Parandvash, G.H., and Chang, H., 2016. Analysis of Long-term Climate Change on Per Capita
Water Demand in Urban Versus Suburban Areas in the Portland Metropolitan Area,
Polebitski A.S., Palmer R.N., Waddell P., 2011. Evaluating Water Demands Under Climate
Change and Transitions in the Urban Environment. Journal of Water Resources Planning
Pulido-Calvo, I., Gutirrez-Estrada, J.C., Savic, D., 2012. Heuristic Modelling of the Water
Renwick, M. E., and Green, R. D., 2000. Do Residential Water Demand Side Management
Rinaudo, J. D., Neverre, N., Montiginoul, M., 2012. Simulating the Impact of Pricing Policies on
Rodrguez-Daz, J.A., Weatherhead, E.K., Knox, J.W., Camacho, E., 2007. Climate Change
Impacts on Irrigation Water Requirements in the Guadalquivir River Basin in Spain. Reg
30
Roy S.B., Chen L., Girvetz E.H., Maurer E.P., Mills W.B., Grieb T.M., 2012. Projecting Water
Withdrawal and Supply for Future Decades in the U.S. Under Climate Change Scenarios.
Ruth M., Bernier C., Jollands N., Golubiewski N., 2007. Adaptation of Urban Water Supply
10.1007/s11269-006-9071-x
Sampson, D.A., Quay, R. and White, D.D., 2016. Anticipatory Modeling for Water Supply
Sullivan, A., White, D. D., Larson, K. L. and Wutich, A., 2017. Towards Water Sensitive Cities
in the Colorado River Basin: A Comparative Historical Analysis to Inform Future Urban
Sustainable City pLAn, 2015. Office of the Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.
http://plan.lamayor.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/the-plan.pdf
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2010s/vintage_2011/metro.html
Wada, Y., Van Beek, L.P.H. and Bierkens, M.F., 2011. Modelling Global Water Stress of the
Recent Past: On the Relative Importance of Trends in Water Demand and Climate
Wilson, T. S., Sleeter, B. M., and Cameron, D. R., 2015. Future Land-Use Related Water
31
Zhou, S.L., McMahon, T.A., Walton, A., and Lewis, J., 2000. Forecasting Daily Urban Water
Zhou, S.L., McMahon, T.A., Walton, A., and Lewis, J., 2002. Forecasting Operational Demand
32
Figure Captions
Fig. 1. Scenario values for the five variables in the MLR model used to project water demand.
Fig. 2. Comparing actual versus fitted MLR model of monthly water demand in Los Angeles, 1970-2014
Fig. 3. Projections of water demand from 2015-2050 highlighting high, medium, and no population
growth scenarios (Horizontal line indicate 50th percentile of projections with dashed lines depicting 25th
and 75th percentiles).
Fig. 4. Projections of water demand from 2015-2050 highlighting various Tier 1 price increase scenarios
(Horizontal line indicate 50th percentile with dashed lines depicting 25th and 75th percentiles).
Fig. 5. Projections of water demand from 2015-2050 under the baseline scenario with different climate
models*
(*The baseline scenario assumes 20% increase in population, 50% increase in price, and 20% increase in
conservation.)
Fig. 6. Graph showing probability of meeting LADWP pLAn target of reducing residential water demand
by 25% as function of Population and Price in 2035. Dark blue indicates probability of meeting water
demand target; Light blue indicates not meeting water demand target.
33
34
Monthly Water Demand in Million Cubic
Meters
0
20
30
40
50
60
10
Actual
Month/Year
MLR Model
35
1.2
Water Demand (Billion Cubic Meters) Low Population Growth
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
36
1.2
Water Demand (Billion Cubic Meters) No Increase in Tier 1 Price
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
37
A2 climate scenario
B1 climate scenario
No change in climate
38
39
Highlights
Residential water demand was projected from 2015-2050 under various scenarios
Water demand in Los Angeles is projected to increase by 36% from 2014 to 2050
Climate change will increase water demand in Los Angeles by 5% from 2014 to 2050
Population growth significantly decreases chances of meeting 2035 water demand goal
Stormwater capture and recycled water for groundwater storage can help reach goal
40