[finfinfin]

> Residential water use has plummeted in the west. Some areas, like vegas, use less water than the 70s, not accounting for population changes.

What's the point of this argument? Vegas population has increased more than 10x since the 70s, why would we not account for population growth when discussing the usage of a limited resource?

[kory]

I think you misunderstood. Vegas uses less water in total than in the 70s, in spite of the population difference.

[noobermin]

Does this include the suburbs of Las Vegas? A quick google search gives a report that the whole state of Nevada as a whole has increased their water use (edit: at least for domestic usage). This is in line with most of the population moving out of city centers as people moved into the suburbs that has happened for the last few decades.[0]

Anyway, the fact that the water use of the state as a whole has increased throws out any suggestion that "here, this one segment of the state has decreased their usage" as if that is a serious argument against the rise of water consumption being an issue.

[0] It's a report with data until 1995 but lucky for us it compares levels with 1970 and it did increase significantly EDIT: sorry, figure 1-3

http://water.nv.gov/programs/planning/stateplan/documents/pt...

[finfinfin]

I find this very hard to believe. Do you have any links to official state data?