The price of tap water in the United States varied greatly from city to city in 2021. One of the most expensive cities for tap water in the U.S. is San Francisco, where one cubic meter costs an average of **** U.S. dollars per cubic meter. In comparison, citizens in the Arizona state capital of Phoenix paid, on average, **** U.S. dollars per cubic meter. This is roughly ** percent lower than the U.S. average. Rising water bills in the U.S. Over the past decade, water bills in the U.S. have increased considerably in a number of major cities. In Austin, Texas, water bills rose by *** U.S. dollars between 2010 and 2018, an increase of *** percent. The sharp rising costs has left many in the United States with unaffordable water bills, especially in low income areas in cities such as New Orleans, Cleveland, and Santa Fe. U.S. water crisis One of the reasons for the rising water bills in the U.S. is the aging and deteriorating water infrastructure. In addition to rising bills, outdated treatment plants with leaking pipes have resulted in harmful toxins and chemicals contaminating drinking water. A number of highly populated cities in the U.S. have been found to have high concentrations of PFAs in tap water, exposing millions of people to potentially unsafe drinking water.

An average U.S. family of four pays about ***** U.S. dollars for water every month as of 2019, if each person used about 100 gallons per day. The price index of water and sewage maintenance have increased in recent years as infrastructure continues to age across the United States.

Setting water rates

Cities that have increased prices in water, generally use the increased rate to improve infrastructure. Families generally pay a fixed charge every month which is independent of water consumption, and a variable charge which is related to the amount of water used. Higher fixed charges are more commonly used to ensure revenue stability due to increased pipe repair costs, however, it reduces the incentive to conserve water and may punish households that use less water.

Water prices worldwide

Water prices vary across the countries and cities due to the various processes that are used to assign a price. Utilities generally set a water rate or tariff based on costs of water treatment, water storage, transport, wastewater treatment and collection, and other administrative operations. On the other hand, direct abstraction of water from sources such as lakes, is usually not charged, however, some countries require payment based on volume or abstraction rights.

The cost of providing safe, reliable water services in the United States is increasing for utilities and their customers, raising questions about the scale and scope of water affordability challenges. How we measure and understand water affordability is debated. Here, we developed an open and repeatable approach that calculates five affordability metrics, including a new metric that combines affordability prevalence and burden along a continuum. We calculated these metrics for multiple volumes of water usage (from 0 to 16,000 gallons per month) using rate data available in 2020 at the scale of census block groups and service areas. We applied this approach to 1,791 utilities in four states (California, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Texas), which cumulatively serve 72 million persons. We found 77% of utilities had more than 20% of their population below 200% of the federal poverty level, suggesting widespread poverty contributes to affordability challenges for many utilities. Minimum wage earners spend more than a day of labor per month to pay water bills for relatively low usage (4,000 gallons per month) in 67% of utilities, but upwards of 3 days of labor at higher volumes (12,000 gallons per month) in 29% of utilities. Depending on how much water a household uses, our results suggest a tenth to a third of households are working more than a day each month to afford their water bills. We developed an interactive data visualization tool to bring greater transparency to water affordability by allowing users to explore affordability at the block group and utility scale at different volumes of usage. The underlying data in the visualization tool can be expanded and updated over time, further increasing the transparency and understanding of water affordability in the U.S. ... [Read More]

Seattle, Washington was the city with the highest price for wastewater treatment from the selection a selection of U.S. American cities, with almost 22 U.S. dollars per 1,000 gallons. On the contrary, El Paso, Texas reported the lowest price per 1,000 gallons of wastewater for around 2.8 U.S. dollars.

The water resources in Tennessee are likely to be stressed in the future by factors such as population increase, urban and suburban development, climate change, and other competing demands. Water-resource managers and policy makers will need accurate water-use data for regional water-supply planning including infrastructure investment, conservation, and cost-recovery strategies. Quantifying public-supply and self-supplied industrial water use and relating the use to effects on -water resources and natural hydrologic systems; is important for the public and policy makers. This dataset includes public-supply water-use and self-supplied industrial water-use information for the State of Tennessee in 2010. Public supply refers to water that is withdrawn by suppliers to furnish water year round to at least 25 people or has at least 15 service connections (U.S. Geological Survey, 1978). To assess public-supply water use in Tennessee, data were collected and analyzed for public-supply water systems active between January 1 and December 31, 2010. The public-supply water systems included investor-owned water companies, private water companies, municipal water departments, regional water authorities, residential developments, mobile-home parks, homeowner associations, and institutions such as schools and prisons. Self-supplied industrial water use refers to surface-water and groundwater withdrawals by facilities with total usage values greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons per day (gal/d) (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 2015) with mean withdrawals greater than or equal to 10,000 gal/d. To assess self-supplied industrial water use in Tennessee, data were collected and analyzed for industrial-water users active between January 1 and December 31, 2010. Industrial facilities use water for purposes such as fabrication, processing, washing, diluting, cooling, or transporting a product; incorporating water into a product; or for sanitation needs within a manufacturing facility (Maupin and others, 2014). Other industries that use large amounts of water produce commodities such as chemicals, food, metals, paper, or refined petroleum. References Maupin, M.A., Kenny, J.F., Hutson, S.S., Lovelace, J.K., Barber, N.L., and Linsey, K.S., 2014, Estimated use of water in the United States in 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1405, 56 p. [Also available at http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/cir1405.], Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 2015, Water Withdrawal Registration Program: Nashville, Tenn., Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, accessed July 2015 at http://www.tn.gov/environment/article/wr-wq-water-withdrawal-registration-program, and U.S. Geological Survey, 1978, Public water supply, chap. 11.C of National handbook of recommended methods for water data acquisition—Chapter 11—Water use: U.S. Geological Survey, accessed December 17, 2013, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/chapter11/chapter11C.html.

Representing urban water demands economically is useful to understand how anticipated changes like population growth, conservation, water development, climate change, and environmental water demands may affect water deliveries and scarcity. Utah is the second driest state in the nation, while per capita water use is near the highest in the nation, averaging 167 gallons per person per day. This implies that creative water management will be ongoing in Utah’s future. Urban economic loss functions are estimated using residential demand functions for Utah’s Wasatch Front Metropolitan Area, which includes Logan, Salt Lake City, Ogden, Layton, Provo, and Orem urban regions. Water price, volume of water applied at that price, urban population, and price elasticity data are presented. Results show seasonal residential water demand functions and seasonal urban (residential, industrial, institutional, and commercial) economic loss functions for Logan, Ogden, Salt Lake City, and Provo metropolitan areas. Limitations to this method are outlined and discussion focuses on estimating urban water demand functions and potential economic losses input into hydro-economic models and ecological-economic models to evaluate promising solutions to Utah’s persistent water problems.

The price of one liter of water can vary depending on various factors such as geographic location, brand, packaging, and quality. This article discusses the factors that affect the price of water and highlights the importance of tap water and the environmental impact of bottled water consumption.

South Australia is one of the driest States in Australia, and hence for its subsequent development, has become vitally concerned with many aspects of desalination. Its State Government has commissioned the execution of this survey is to present... South Australia is one of the driest States in Australia, and hence for its subsequent development, has become vitally concerned with many aspects of desalination. Its State Government has commissioned the execution of this survey is to present technically and economically the proven or nearly proven desalination processes which can be applied to South Australian problems in the near future. The survey considers the processes of distillation, solar distillation, freezing, reverse osmosis, electro dialysis and ion exchange. More detailed attention is given to the processes suitable for producing quantities up to 10000 gallons per day for stock or municipal use as large scale plants for city supply will not be applicable for some years and by that time advances in technology may have resulted in improved economy. As a guide to the preliminary selection of a desalination process for a particular situation, some typical South Australian problems are considered. An indication of acceptable water qualities for different applications, and approximate treatment costs for the potential processes, are given using some data from installed desalination equipment in Australia. It is recommended that operating experience and cost data should be obtained by setting up pilot plants of the relevant small scale processes, so that accurate data and unbiased evaluation of a plant for a specific problem can be given. For the long term, information and data on large scale plants to produce millions of gallons per day for city supply should be compiled.

One key analytical tool used by the City Council and City staff is a comparison of the average costs incurred by homeowners in several cities throughout the Valley. The average charges for the current fiscal year for various cities are compared with the average costs for the current fiscal year in the City of Mesa. While some neighboring municipalities have a different resource mix than Mesa, bringing them all together allows for comparison to ensure that Mesa remains an affordable place to live, work and play. Sources include applicable Tax Year Limited Property Value, Maricopa County Assessor's Office, and Maricopa County Tax Levy and Rates page. The Average Homeowner’s Annual Cost Comparison Notes: • The City of Mesa and the Town of Gilbert are the only municipalities that do not have a primary property tax. All other revenue sources exist in all municipalities. • Estimated city sales taxes paid is based on average household expenditures from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey applied to each city’s sales tax rate. Some cities have different rates for different taxable items. Mesa does not collect sales tax on the sale of food for consumption at home. • Comparisons are determined using a standard service level for all cities. • Standard solid waste charges are for twice per week garbage (and recyclables where applicable) collection using 90 gallon barrels. Solid Waste residential charges include a Green and Clean fee for Mesa. • Other city’s environmental fees are included as applicable. • Charges are based on FY 16/17 annual average usage of 8,900 water gallons per month, ranging from 6,000 in winter to 12,000 in summer. • Wastewater charges are based on the average consumption of water during the winter months. SEE ATTACHMENT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Over the last two observations, the price per unit is forecast to significantly increase in all segments. This reflects the overall trend throughout the entire forecast period from 2018 to 2029. It is estimated that the indicator is continuously rising in all segments. In this regard, the Bottled Water, out of home segment achieves the highest value of **** U.S. dollars in 2029. Find other insights concerning similar markets and segments, such as a comparison of revenue growth in Indonesia and a comparison of per capita sales volume in Indonesia.The Statista Market Insights cover a broad range of additional markets.

Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Service Protocol: Link to the ScienceBase Item Summary page for the item described by this metadata record. Application Profile: Web Browser. Link Function: information

Monthly average retail prices for selected products, for Canada and provinces. Prices are presented for the current month and the previous four months. Prices are based on transaction data from Canadian retailers, and are presented in Canadian current dollars.

Of the selected cities shown, many of the highest tap water prices in 2021 are in European cities, with the most expensive in Moscow, Russia at 684.4 U.S. dollars per 100 cubic meters. This was followed by Vancouver, Canada where 100 cubic meters of water costed 623.2 U.S. dollars.

In Canada, retail sales of bottled water were forecast to reach around 4.46 billion U.S. dollars in 2022. This would be an increase of around 16 percent since 2018, when retail sales stood at approximately 3.83 billion U.S. dollars.

A global outlook Some of the leading bottled water companies worldwide include Nestle Waters, Hangzhou Wahaha Group Co. Ltd and Danone. Nestle Waters’ global sales totaled around 7.88 billion CHF in 2018, with the United States and Canada producing the majority of those sales. China and the United States hold the highest share of bottled water volume sales, - this is no surprise considering the size of their populations and their power of consumption. When it comes to per capita consumption, however, Mexico tops the list, with Mexican consumers drinking an average 67.2 gallons of bottled water per year.