Guest comment
By James W. MacLaren, P.Eng., Consulting Engineer
The price of water and sewage services in Ontario municipaiities
Much has been written about
provements and storm and combined
vation will reduce actual household
the municipal stake in water
sewer overflow control, the increase
conservation and the Great
would be substantially more. Currently the Ontario Ministry of the Environment is suggesting that the needed annual capital improvements with respect to municipal water and
consumption by as much as 20 percent. Typical household bills for water only will range from $400 to $430 per annum by the end of the century. In respect to sewerage charges, the American Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies estimates that typi cal household costs for sewage service only will increase from S190 per annum to $615 by 2000 and $2,000 perannumby 2010 — this despite the impact of con
Lakes clean-up. Widely ranging estimates have been prepared on the relative costs to householders
and
municipally-located
industries
within Ontario towns and cities to effect the needed remedial actions.
Because of a rudimentary and ad hoc
policy in the setting of municipal water rates, customer charges for water and sewer services vary widely. Many On tario municipalities levy fees for water
servation which does not reduce the cost
and sewer services at fixed rates and
of combined sewer overflow control, storm water management or system re
rarely with reference to all costs. More
habilitation.
than a million customers in Ontario
These household costs are staggering and suggest the average Ontario house holder will be paying two to three times
municipalities enjoy water and sewage services on a flat rate(unmetered basis). The capital and operating costs of water supply and wastewater systems are generally covered by an amalgam of in tergovernmental grants, tax revenues, development charges, fixed levies and
current costs for water and sewer ser
sewage services plus urban runoff con
vices over the next 10 to 15 year period despite the introduction of water con servation, Municipally served industry and commerce will suffer even greater percentage increases with the removal of the declining block rate. Enough of procrastination! If we want Ontario municipal consumers to continue to support environmental up grading of water resources and their
trol and rehabilitation will cost at least
conservation,then we must tell them the
one-half billion dollars a year more in
real price of sustainability. The Great Lakes Water Quality Ag reement called for all municipalities in cluding those of Ontario to meet BATEA** standards by the end of 1982 and for the parties involved to "provide financial resources to ensure prompt
fees based on recorded use.
The most common pricing formulae for metered customers employ declin ing block rates — the greater the quan tity used, the lower the rate. The cost of wastewater services is often recognized by a surcharge on water billings, but more frequently as an assessment on rateable property values.
capital spending over current levels for
As a result, here in Ontario in 1990-92,
the foreseeable future. These increased
it has been estimated by Environment Canada and the MISA* Advisory Com mittee that actual household charges for water supply and sewage services aver aged $225 per household per year (2.6
expenditures of course imply increased operating costs as well, so the com pounding impact on household rates over the period equates to about a 4 per cent increase annually, or a household rate of$750 annually by the end ofthe 20 year period. The MISA Advisory Committee has
persons per household)and if all appli cable costs had been accounted for, the
charge would have been $335 per household.Similarly, moderately-sizedindustrial-commercial customers paid about 50 cents for 1000 litres that would increase on a real-cost basis to 67 cents
per 1000 litres. These higher charges based on an annual family income ofapproximately $57,000 (1990) for Ontario represent about 0.6 percent of household income and compare to a stated figure by the Ministry of Energy of 2.6 percent for energy use within the home. The US Environmental Protection
Agency indicated that in the same ge neral period, water and sewage services were equating to $375.00 per household per year or 1.0 percent of gross U.S. an nual household income. EPA indicated
that these charges would increase to $625 per year based only on increased waste water controls. The indications
were that with safe drinking water im82
indicated to the Minister ofthe Environ
ment that a compounding rate increase of 7 percent annually would be more appropriate, resulting in a household charge of$1,300 per annum at the end of
twenty years or 2.3 percent of current household income levels.
These represent wide discrepancies on household impacts — $750 versus $1,300 annually and the public's desire for environmental improvement as stated in recent polls could be materially dampened if it is made aware of these higher but disparate costs. Recent corroboration of the scale of
construction of needed facilities,"
Ten years later, neither the eight Ame rican states nor the Province of Ontario
have achieved this pollution control ob jective nor have they arranged for its financing nor do they agree on the cost of the road ahead.
Surely,Ontarians deserve better treat ment than this. The Ontario Round Table on the Environment and the
Economy has in its September 1992 Re port on "Restructuring for Sus tainability" made it clear that we must achieve sustainability by "instituting systems of full-cost accounting","edu cating people on environmental issues" and "redesigning government systems" to recognize the complex,subtle and per vasive inter-connectedness of the envi
ronment, the economy and society. So these increases can be found in pub lished United States data. An analysis of let's do it. the impact of the Safe Drinking Water Act on US municipal water charges sug *Municipal industrial Strategy for Abate gests that household rates for water only ment, will increase by 100 percent by 1999, **Best Available Treatment Economic even though the impact of water conser ally Achievable, Environmental Science & Engineering, January 1993