A bit windy, wouldn't you agree?

[bcoop]

Everyone's talking about north Texas. This is a north Texas site...in north Texas, lawn watering accounts for way more water usage than 4-6%. All you're doing is picking data that fits your argument so you can "win".

Everyone else is right with respect to north Texas. If you want to talk about California start another topic, but don't call people wrong and based on data of an entirely different topic.

Lawn watering in Texas needs restrictions and there's no doubt about that. People are completely stupid about it and growth has been much too rapid with every new lawn having a sprinkler system.

lol, who is trying to "win" anything? We're having a discussion.

[Ruffdaddy]

lol, who is trying to "win" anything? We're having a discussion.

You're obviously not in the same discussion as everyone else...but somehow still trying to argue...with irrelevant data. Lol

[bcoop]

You're obviously not in the same discussion as everyone else...but somehow still trying to argue...with irrelevant data. Lol

I think your reading comprehension fails you, yet again, as happens so frequently with you. but that's just my opinion.

[racrguy]

You're obviously not in the same discussion as everyone else...but somehow still trying to argue...with irrelevant data. Lol

If residential water use is commonly in the 5-10% range across the country, I wouldn't say his data was irrelevant. Not accurate for sure, but you can derive certain things based on patterns with proper refinement once the data comes in.

[Ruffdaddy]

I think your reading comprehension fails you, yet again, as happens so frequently with you. but that's just my opinion.

Oh no I fully comprehend that you're arguing that outdoor watering in north texas is a minimum effect because of data from CA. Or are you totally off topic?

If residential water use is commonly in the 5-10% range across the country, I wouldn't say his data was irrelevant. Not accurate for sure, but you can derive certain things based on patterns with proper refinement once the data comes in.

Most north Texas cities put the water usage on non essential outdoor watering at 30% or more...so yes its irrelevant data if you're trying to prove that watering has a miniscule impact on lake levels.

[racrguy]

Oh no I fully comprehend that you're arguing that outdoor watering in north texas is a minimum effect because of data from CA. Or are you totally off topic?



Most north Texas cities put the water usage on non essential outdoor watering at 30% or more...so yes its irrelevant data if you're trying to prove that watering has a miniscule impact on lake levels.

I'm interested to hear who/what is saying this. Have any references?

[Rick Modena]

I'm interested to hear who/what is saying this. Have any references?

Hes just arguing to argue. Some would call that "trolling"...

[SlowLX]

Didn't say it was. I simply made the point that residential water consumption is a drop in the bucket compared to other uses, which you argued.

Seems pretty pointless to impose tight restrictions on residential, when total residential consumption pales in comparison to the largest consumers of water. Those efforts would have more meaningful results if they were spent on the largest users of water.

http://texasstatewaterplan.org/#/demands/2010/state
Municipal water demand (residential and commercial) is far from miniscule especially in DFW where our population is projected to continue growing faster than other parts of the country. Municipal demand for this region alone accounted for 8.5% of the state's total demand in 2010 and is projected to account for 13% of the state's total demand in 2060.

[racrguy]

http://texasstatewaterplan.org/#/demands/2010/state
Municipal water demand (residential and commercial) is far from miniscule especially in DFW where our population is projected to continue growing faster than other parts of the country. Municipal demand for this region alone accounted for 8.5% of the state's total demand in 2010 and is projected to account for 13% of the state's total demand in 2060.

As Sgt Beavis said, the DFW area is home to some 7 million people, which represents ~30% of the population of Texas, I wouldn't say that 8.5% usage is out of line.

[SlowLX]

As Sgt Beavis said, the DFW area is home to some 7 million people, which represents ~30% of the population of Texas, I wouldn't say that 8.5% usage is out of line.

Keep in mind that was just DFWs municipal impact on statewide demand. BCoops assertion was that local water use isn't large enough have a serious impact compared to the state's agricultural demands. Municipal water demand accounts for 27% of the state's total demand and is projected to baloon to 38% of total demand by 2060. The irrigation industries (large scale farms) are projected to reduce their overall demand significantly over the next 50 years. Increasing conservation efforts on commercial and residential users would have one of the largest impacts on water savings especially in DFW where municipal demand accounts for almost all water use in our region.