Paying more for conserving water

[Dreamstalker]

Coming from a region of fairly regular drought warnings/restrictions and incentives for trying to save water, this strikes me as ridiculous.

Clicky

Last year, we noticed a rate hike for using less water than our expected share. Shouldn't using less water be seen as a good thing?

That surplus can probably be piped to the Southwest, I'm sure they wouldn't mind...

[cinema guy]

Its not so much that people used less water, as the company didn't make enough money because people used less water. If the company had made a more accurate esimate of usage, they would have spent less and so not been in deficit.

However since the cost of the water doesn't just pay for the water, it pays for repairs to the infrastructure and sewage treatment, which aren't going to decrease in cost, rates will continue to rise.

If the water bill was split into a flat rate for infrastructure & sewage and a rate for water usage, then you could see the price of water drop while the fixed part of the bill increased.

Does that make sense?