Intervention Reduces Water Usage
2005 In-Home Water Conservation Project wrap up
By Danielle Supercinski & Janie Harris (jharris@ag.tamu.edu, 979-847-8865), August 2005
Since 1992, significant water saving equipment has been available for households to reduce the amount of water used inside their homes. Research has shown that households can save as much as 25 gallons per person per day with water conserving equipment and behavioral changes.
A recent in-home water conservation study conducted January through April of 2005 in Hidalgo, Star, Webb, Pecos and Val Verde Counties shows the effectiveness and impacts that three types of intervention had in reducing the average amount of water a household uses each month.
A water education program was conducted by county Extension agents in each of the five counties. Families were then contacted to inquire of their interest in participating in the study. County Extension agents in each of the five counties selected three families to participate in a focused water conservation program, equaling 15 households in all. The participating families provided their previous water bills to determine baseline water use during the past year.
The households were broken up into three groups: Household A, Household B and Household C. The families were randomly selected to be in one of the three household groups. Household A received only the focused education on in-home water conservation. Household B received the water conservation education along with an in-home audit and recommendations for specific changes. Household C received the education, audit and recommendations for changes, plus retrofitting or replacement of toilets, shower heads and faucet aerators. The goal is to determine effectiveness of the three levels of intervention.
As the project progressed from January through April, each family provided their water bill to the county agent who then forwarded the data to the Extension Housing Specialist for analysis. The results are shown in Figure 1.
The retrofitted households were originally expected to show the most water savings, however Household A showed the most water savings. Total combined water savings for the 15 families (three families in each of the five counties) were valued at approximately $4,900.
The plan is to repeat the project research in the counties that participated during 2005 with three additional counties participating. This would increase the participants from 15 households to 24 households. Perhaps a repeat of this study will better validate the data.
At the end of the study, each of the households in groups A and B had the option of having the water saving equipment installed free of charge in their household.
