Every day lately, it seems like news comes out of Los Angeles about yet another sinkhole appearance or water main failure. In fact, on just one Tuesday in October, the city experienced the following calamities (source: Los Angeles Times)
* The rupture of a 12-inch steel water main on Mulholland Drive, that sent water gushing onto surrounding streets and homes
* A break in a 6-inch cast-iron water main, that caused a sinkhole and spit mud and debris out onto surrounding streets
* A pipe break at a major intersection, that lifted up asphalt and forced the closure of said intersection for extensive repairs
Three in one day may not seem unusual for a large metropolitan area, but 18 similar incidents in October, combined with an additional 44 in September, brought the tally to an eye-popping 62 significant leaks since September 1. Residents were concerned, and city officials were quick to point out that despite the unusual rash of water main bursts this fall, the situation in Los Angeles is about par for the course for the city (and most urban locations throughout the country). According to the Los Angeles Times, “The city’s 7,200 miles of pipe are not actually leaking more than usual—in fact, the number of leaks, about 1,400 a year, is down from the past.” But the leaks are still significant—having caused more destruction and wasted more water than is normally expected from leaks and main breaks of this magnitude.
So what can cities like Los Angeles do to mitigate these losses and protect against future occurrences?
One solution is to follow the International Water Association’s (IWA) water loss guidelines, as set out by the Water Loss Task Force, created by the IWA in 1996.
Under these guidelines, the first step involves the creation of standard water balance using international terminology. In other words, a water audit should be performed to determine “the major components of water consumption and water loss.” The next step is to develop performance indicators for water utilities. One of these indicators involves the measurement of “non-revenue water.” Non-revenue water is the difference between the amount of water released into the distribution systems and the amount customers are billed for using. Finally, a community or municipality should develop strategies to reduce water loss through leak management, including improving the speed and quality of repairs, pressure management, and active leak control.
So what do you think? Are these guidelines “doable?” Is there a better way? And can the promised ARRA funding for infrastructure improvements make these daily pipe-bursts a thing of the past?