Advancing DPR Acceptance:
13-02 Update: Research Findings
Challenge at our Doorstep
February 18, 2015
Mark Millan
Dave Metz
Patsy Tennyson
The WateReuse Research Foundation
The WateReuse Research Foundation conducts and promotes
applied research on the reclamation, recycling, reuse, and
desalination of water.
More Information
www.watereuse.org/foundation
Research Reports
www.watereuse.org/foundation/publications
1
A Few Notes Before We Get Started…
 Today’s webcast will be 90 minutes.
 There are 1.5 Professional Development Hours available.
 A PDF of today’s presentation can be downloaded when you complete the survey at
the conclusion of this webcast.
 Links to view the recording and to download the presentation will also be emailed
later.
 If you have questions for the presenters, please send a message by typing it into the
chat box located on the panel on the left side of your screen.
 If you would like to enlarge your view of the slides, please click the Full Screen
button in the upper right corner of the window. To use the chat box, you must exit
full screen.
2
Today’s Presenters
Mark Millan
Data Instincts
Dave Metz
FM3
Patricia Tennyson
Katz and Associates
3
2014
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov
Literature Review
Agency IDIs
Legislator IDIs
Health Professionals IDIs
Special Interest Groups
Focus Groups
Public Surveys
State Level Comm Plan
Community Level Comm Plan
Focus Group Methodology
• Four two-hour moderated discussions with City of San
Diego and Santa Clara County residents
• Held April 28 and 29, 2014
• One group of men and one group of women in each
location
• Otherwise designed to reflect the demographic
diversity of the local population, with a mix of ages,
ethnicities, partisan affiliations, and socioeconomic
statuses
• Those with detailed knowledge of recycled water, or
who work in related occupations, were screened out
from participation
6
Telephone Survey Methodology
• Telephone survey of 1,200 randomly-selected voters:
– 600 in the City of San Diego
– 600 in the Santa Clara Valley Water District
•
•
•
•
Interviews were conducted via landline and cell phones
Survey conducted June 4-11, 2014
Interviews in English and Spanish
The margin of sampling error is +/-2.8% at the 95%
confidence level
– Margins of error for population subgroups will be higher
– Some percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding
• Selected comparisons to statewide June 2014 survey
conducted for the California Water Foundation
7
Outline of Presentation
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Context for Attitudes on Water
Issues
Perceptions of Recycled Water
Initial Attitudes Toward Potable
Reuse
Identifying Persuadables
Impact of Messaging
Conclusions
8
9
Concern about the drought in target
communities runs very high.
I'd like to read you some problems facing your area that other people have mentioned.
Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious
problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in your area.
Ext./Very
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. DK/NA Ser. Prob.
^The statewide drought
37%
^The adequacy of local water supplies
to meet future demands
20%
Waste and inefficiency in local
government
20%
Jobs and the local economy
33%
29%
15%
The quality of public education in local
schools
32%
19%
The amount people pay in local taxes
15%
Q2. ^Not Part of Split Sample.
28%
27%
25%
20%
26%
31%
25%
^Drinking water quality 10% 16%
0%
41%
29%
22%
40%
14% 6%
78%
14% 7%
53%
15% 7%
49%
47%
18%
21%
8%
44%
24%
7%
40%
26%
48%
60%
80%
100%
10
The consensus that California is in a severe drought is
greater than at any time in the past decade.
“California is currently in the middle of a severe drought.”
Strng. Agr.
Smwt. Agr.
May 2014
Smwt. Disagr.
Strng. Disagr.
73%
July 2013
20%
34%
May 2010
27%
November 2009
32%
36%
35%
August 2009
June/July 2008
39%
October 2007
41%
August 2002
20%
Data from June 2013 FM3 Statewide Survey
6%
66%
28%
23%
9%
5%
63%
32%
7% 5%
71%
24%
5%
77%
18%
10% 5% 66%
29%
8% 7%
72%
21%
73%
24%
61%
31%
17%
32%
32%
25%
40%
15%
19%
33%
36%
0%
10%
37%
34%
13%
12% 12%
20%
60%
Total Total
Agree Disagr.
93%
6%
17%
36%
40%
March 2009
DK/NA
11%
80%
8%
100%
11
In fact, a plurality of voters statewide now
sees water supply issues as a “serious crisis.”
Which of the following would you say best describes the
current shortage of water supplies in California:
A serious crisis
48%
A significant problem,
but not a crisis
43%
A minor problem
7%
Not really a
problem at all
1%
All/None/DK/NA
1%
0%
15%
30%
45%
Data from June 2013 FM3 Statewide Survey
60%
Total Crisis/
Significant
Problem
91%
Demographic
%
% of
Group
Crisis Electorate
All Voters
48%
100%
Very Liberal
63%
13%
Small Media Market 62%
14%
Liberal Democrats
58%
22%
Liberals
57%
29%
HH Income
57%
14%
Under $30,000
Central Valley
57%
13%
Environmental
57%
12%
Volunteer
Environmentally
56%
26%
Engaged
Very Farm
56%
24%
Dependent
Women Ages 18-49 56%
19%
Independents
56%
13%
Ages18-49
Ages 30-39
56%
12%
Ages 75+
55%
11%
12
Voters recognize the existence of a “new
normal,” with or without climate change.
Because of climate change,
California should expect to be in a
drought for the foreseeable future –
it’s the “new normal,”
Strongly agree
31%
Somewhat agree
32%
Somewhat disagree
16%
Strongly disagree
16%
DK/NA
California should expect to be
in a drought for the foreseeable
future – it’s the “new normal.”
Total
Agree
63%
30%
34%
Total
Disagree
33%
15%
17%
4%
0%
Total
Agree
64%
Total
Disagree
32%
4%
15%
30%
Data from June 2013 FM3 Statewide Survey
45%
60%
0%
15%
30%
45%
60%
13
Voters have generally positive attitudes
toward their water agency…
Would you say that you have a generally favorable, neutral,
or unfavorable opinion of your local water agency?
SCVWD
San Diego
Somewhat favorable
20%
11%
Somewhat unfavorable
8%
Very unfavorable
Neutral
9%
0%
20%
18%
27%
Total
Unfavorable
20%
37%
Don't know/NA
Q1.
Total
Favorable
34%
14%
Very favorable
40%
60%
Total
Unfavorable
6%
4%
2%
Total
Neutral/
DK/NA
46%
Total
Favorable
45%
42%
7%
0%
20%
40%
Total
Neutral/
DK/NA
49%
60%
14
…particularly with the agencies’ performance delivering
high quality tap water, charging reasonable rates and
providing a dependable water supply.
I am going to read you several different aspects of the service provided by your local water
agency. Please indicate whether you are very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat
dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with that aspect of your water agency’s service.
Very Sat.
Smwt Sat.
Smwt. Dissat.
Providing a dependable, reliable
water supply
48%
Providing high quality tap water
21%
Q3.
34%
15%
0%
37%
39%
20%
40%
7%
Total Total
Sat. Dissat.
Don't Know
39%
35%
Responding to customer questions
or concerns
Charging reasonable rates
Very Dissat.
88% 11%
6%
13% 12%
71% 25%
34%
56% 11%
19% 15% 12% 54% 34%
60%
80%
100%
15
Most voters do not drink water
straight from the tap.
Thinking about the water that you drink at home, do you most often drink?
Tap water that is filtered in your home,
either at the sink, through the
refrigerator, or through a pitcher
45%
Unfiltered water
straight from the tap
21%
Bottled water
31%
Total Not
Tap Water
76%
Other/
DK/NA
3%
Q4.
16
Of those who do not drink tap water,
safety and taste are the most significant
reasons they avoid it.
I am going to read some reasons other people have given for not usually drinking
water directly from the tap. Please indicate whether each item is a major reason why
you don’t drink unfiltered tap water, a minor reason, or not a reason.
Major Reason
Minor Reason
Not a Reason
DK/NA
Major/
Minor
Reason
Safety or health concerns about
tap water
46%
25%
29%
71%
Poor taste or smell of tap water
45%
25%
29%
70%
It's more convenient to drink
filtered or bottled water
30%
0%
20%
20%
40%
Q5. Asked only of those who do not drink straight tap water (76% of Sample)
49%
60%
80%
50%
100%
17
Focus Group Comments on Tap Water
SUNNYVALE MALE: I remember when I
was young, the doctor was surprised
because I actually had kidney stones and I
was only like 21. They told me not to drink
tap water because of the calcium and all the
minerals, so that’s why I’ve chosen bottled
water ever since.
SUNNYVALE FEMALE: I can’t describe it. It’s
kind of like an earthy, kind of almost metallic kind
of taste. I don’t know if it’s just because I started
drinking the filtered and bottled water that it
tastes worse. I used to be able to kind of
crossover and now I just can’t.
SAN DIEGO FEMALE: I’m
concerned about carcinogens,
because I don’t know what’s in there
and I don’t know [what will happen]
in decades from now... like you say
you’ve been drinking it since you
were a little girl.
SUNNYVALE FEMALE: The other
thing is when they put chloramine in
the water. The fact that it could
dissolve a goldfish overnight really
concerned me. That really bothered
me that I would be giving this to my
family.
SAN DIEGO MALE: This water quality is maybe potable, but that doesn’t mean it is really
great for you. It doesn’t mean that it will kill you right away, but there may be long-term
casualties involved. Some of these dissolved minerals. It does have dissolved minerals in
there. No one is going to really be able to say this water is dangerous because it might take
20 years or 30 years to really have an effect on you.
18
Bottled water drinkers have a number of
misperceptions of its quality.
I am going to read you a list of reasons why people think bottled
water is safer than their tap water. Please tell me whether you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Strg. Agree
Swmt. Agree.
Bottled water is sealed and
protected
Smwt. Disagr.
Strg. Disagr.
DK/NA
31%
10% 6%
51%
The bottled water source is safer
than my tap water
44%
Bottled water is tested before
being bottled
Bottled water must meet stricter
quality standards than tap water
40%
0%
20%
Q6. Asked only of those who drink bottled water (31% of Sample)
81%
16%
14% 6% 6% 73%
21%
34%
13% 7%10% 70%
20%
27%
16% 12% 5% 67%
28%
29%
35%
40%
Total
Total
Agree Disagree
60%
80%
100%
19
20
Most voters are at least somewhat familiar
with recycled water.
Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
Very familiar
Total
Familiar
46%
73%
26%
Somewhat familiar
Total Not
Familiar
14%
27%
Not too familiar
13%
Not at all familiar
Don't know/NA
0%
0%
Q7.
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
21
Familiarity also increases with age,
though modestly.
Recycled Water Familiarity by Age
Total Familiar
Total Unfamiliar
Don't Know/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65-74
75+
18-49
50+
65+
(% of
Sample) (16%)
(16%)
(18%)
(29%)
(11%)
(10%)
(50%)
(50%)
(21%)
7. Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
22
There is a very strong correlation with
education; familiarity rises with educational
attainment.
Recycled Water Familiarity by Education
Total Familiar
Total Unfamiliar
Don't Know/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
High School
Educated
(% of
Sample)
(15%)
Some
College
Education
Four-year
College
Graduates
PostGraduate
Educated
Some
College or
Less
Four-year
College or
More
(23%)
(35%)
(26%)
(38%)
(61%)
7. Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
23
Men indicate greater familiarity
than do women.
Recycled Water Familiarity by Gender
Total Familiar
Total Unfamiliar
Don't Know/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Men
Women
(48%)
(53%)
7. Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
24
Generally speaking, Latinos had the lowest
level of familiarity with recycled water…
Recycled Water Familiarity by Ethnicity
Total Familiar
Total Unfamiliar
Don't Know/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Latinos
AfricanAmericans
Asians/
Pacific
Islanders
Whites
(16%)
(6%)
(12%)
(56%)
7. Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
Voters of Color
(39%)
25
…and respondents interviewed in Spanish had
drastically lower levels of awareness.
Recycled Water Familiarity by Language of Interview
Total Familiar
Total Unfamiliar
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
English
Spanish
(93%)
(8%)
7. Are you familiar with the concept of recycled water?
26
Focus Group Comments on Recycled Water
SAN DIEGO MALE: I think a lot of
people think it is not clean. I think that is
false. There are treatment plants that
process that type of water and they go
as far as recycled water, they were
transforming it from human waste, liquid
waste, to drinkable water. I saw the
process where it goes through
something called reverse osmosis
where even viruses and bacteria are
removed and it is so pure that it would
be corroding to your system.
SUNNYVALE FEMALE: I don’t think I would
drink it. I’d use it for my laundry though. I’d use
it for my laundry or dishwashing, but I don’t
think I would drink it.
SUNNYVALE MALE: I have a
vision of water that’s kind of like
gray with soapy bubbles on top.
SUNNYVALE MALE: The water
has gone through some kind of a
chemical treatment before it
reaches us, so the awareness
that it’s not the purest is what
comes to my mind.
SUNNYVALE MALE: I feel
it’s a good practice
because it is being used in
other countries as well.
27
Focus Group “Mind Map” for Recycled Water
Necessary (7)
Sustainable (5)
Future (4)
Better for
environment (4)
Recycle (4)/Reuse
(3)
Drought (4)
Responsible (4)
Helpful (3)
Cost-effective (3)
Less waste (2)
Our children (2)
Useful (2)
Smart (2)
Increased water
supplies (2)
Increase jobs (2)
Reduce fresh water
use (2)
Reclaimed (2)
Good practice
Intelligent use of
resources
More water
No new water
Climate change
Clean
Safe
Improves water
quality
Process
Funny taste (6)
Quality
Smell
Ground
contamination
Caution
Unknown content
Unnatural
Bathing with two
people
Unpleasant
Pointless
Brown grass/dead
trees
Questionable
Weak/poor will
suffer
Taking away from
environment
Oil
Conservation (7)
Dirty (10)
Un-potable (6)
Unsafe (6)
Drainage/
wastewater (4)
Grey water (4)
Unhealthy (3)
Toilet waste (3)
Leftover
particles/
sediment (3)
Sewer (2)
Not pure (2)
Diseased (2)
Soapy (2)
Gross
Children at risk
Toxic
Will not drink it
Somewhat clean
Used
Grimy
Someone else’s
germs
Unsanitary
Other Concerns
Gardening (5)
Lawns (5)
Landscaping (4)
Not for drinking (3)
Wash laundry (3)
Car wash (3)
Agriculture (3)
Flushing (2)
Large scale
projects
Big trucks
For showers only
Cisterns
Limited
Irrigation
Pool
Pressure washing
Sink to lawn
Good for plants
Don’t mix with
fresh supply
Sprinklers
Golf courses
Shopping centers
Industrial use
Safety
Non-potable uses (2)
(Combined Results from All Groups; #’s Indicate Frequency With Which Terms Chosen)
Expensive/cost (9)
Source (5)
Technology (4)
Educate people (4)
Filtered (3)
Processed (2)
Research (2)
What chemicals?
How long?
Storage
Available
Reservoirs/lakes
Revenue source
Possible
Testing
Treatment
Allay fears
Mechanical
systems
Plumbing
Some already do
this
Must be done
wisely
Short/long term
goals
Pre-used
For profit/greed
Fines
Confusing
Misunderstood
Biofilters
28
Among those familiar with recycled water,
most support its use.
Do you support or oppose recycling water for
local reuse on a community-wide scale?
Strongly support
47%
Somewhat support
31%
Total
Support
78%
Total
Oppose
15%
8%
Somewhat oppose
7%
Strongly oppose
Don't know/NA
7%
0%
10%
20%
Q8. Asked only of the 73% familiar with recycled water
30%
40%
50%
29
Voters statewide rank expanded use of
recycled water among their highest priorities.
I’m going to read several different approaches to addressing California’s water supply
issues. Please tell me whether you generally support or oppose each approach.
Strng. Supp.
Smwt. Supp.
Using water more efficiently for farming
and agricultural purposes
Smwt./Strng. Opp.
DK/NA
81%
Total
Supp.
16%
97%
Conserving more water
76%
21%
97%
Capturing rainwater for local use
75%
21%
96%
Cleaning up contaminated groundwater
69%
25%
94%
Increasing sustainable, local water
supplies
68%
27%
95%
Expanding the use of recycled water
68%
26%
94%
0%
Data from June 2014 FM3 Statewide Survey
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
30
Locally, voters approve of all potential uses of
recycled water… except drinking.
I am going to read you a list of potential uses for recycled water. Please indicate
whether you consider each item to be a completely acceptable, somewhat acceptable,
somewhat unacceptable, or completely unacceptable use for recycled water.
Comp. Acc.
Smwt. Acc.
Neutral
Smwt. Unacc.
Gardening and landscaping
77%
Irrigation
66%
Household uses, such as laundry,
showers, and dishwashers
34%
Drinking water 12%
0%
22%
20%
Q9. Asked only of the 73% familiar with recycled water
31%
10% 14%
40%
Total
Unacc.
93%
4%
18%
90%
5%
20% 7%
86%
5%
8% 12% 15%
64%
26%
34%
54%
DK/NA
15%
72%
Industrial uses
Total
Acc.
Comp. Unacc.
40%
60%
80%
100%
31
Voters are confident that it is possible
to treat recycled water to
drinking water quality standards….
Do you believe that it is possible to further treat recycled water used
for irrigation to make the water pure and safe for drinking?
No
23%
Yes
62%
Q10.
Don't
know/NA
14%
32
. . . but even those who believe that do not
necessarily accept the idea of potable reuse.
Acceptability of Recycled Water for Drinking by
Belief in its Feasibility
Total Acceptable
Total Unacceptable
Neutral/DK/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Think it is Possible to Recycle
Water for Drinking
(% of
Sample)
(65%)
Do Not Think it is Possible
Don't Know/NA
(22%)
(13%)
9e. I am going to read you a list of potential uses for recycled water. Please indicate whether you consider each item to be a completely
acceptable, somewhat acceptable, somewhat unacceptable, or completely unacceptable use for recycled water. Drinking Water
33
34
Description of IPR Provided
One approach is indirect reuse of recycled
water for drinking. Indirect reuse of recycled
water involves taking wastewater that comes
from the sewer system; treating and purifying
it to high standards; and then adding it back
to groundwater, reservoirs, or rivers, lakes
and streams. From there, it is treated again,
as all water supplies are, before being sent to
homes and businesses for all purposes –
including drinking.
11. Would you support or oppose indirect reuse of recycled water in your community?
35
A majority of voters support indirect reuse of
recycled water for drinking.
Would you support or oppose indirect reuse of
recycled water in your community?
Strongly support
Somewhat support
28%
Somewhat oppose
13%
Strongly oppose
Don't know/NA
Total
Oppose
18%
31%
7%
0%
Q11.
Total
Support
62%
34%
10%
20%
30%
40%
36
Description of DPR Provided
One approach is direct reuse of recycled
water for drinking. Direct reuse of recycled
water involves taking wastewater that comes
from the sewer system; treating and purifying
it to high standards; and then sending it
directly to homes and businesses for all
purposes – including drinking.
13. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
37
Initially, most voters oppose
direct potable reuse.
Would you support or oppose the direct reuse
of recycled water in your community?
Strongly support
16%
Somewhat support
Somewhat oppose
Total
Support
24%
40%
Total
Oppose
36%
54%
17%
Strongly oppose
Don't know/NA
7%
0%
Q13.
10%
20%
30%
40%
38
This is particularly true when the idea of DPR is
introduced AFTER voters have heard about IPR.
DPR Introduced First
Strongly support
Total
Support
43%
19%
Somewhat support
24%
Somewhat oppose
17%
Strongly oppose
35%
Don't know/NA
DPR Introduced After IPR
24%
Total
Oppose
51%
18%
38%
Total
Oppose
56%
7%
6%
0%
Total
Support
37%
13%
20%
40%
60%
0%
20%
13 by Split. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
40%
60%
39
Women express a higher degree of
discomfort with DPR than do men.
Initial DPR Support by Gender
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Men
Women
(48%)
(53%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
40
The youngest voters are comfortable with DPR,
but support declines with age.
Initial DPR Support by Age
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65-74
75+
18-49
50+
65+
(% of
Sample) (16%)
(16%)
(18%)
(29%)
(11%)
(10%)
(50%)
(50%)
(21%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
41
Combining these variables, women over 50
stand out as key opponents.
Initial DPR Support by Gender by Age
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
Men
Women
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
18-49
50+
18-49
50+
(24%)
(23%)
(25%)
(27%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
42
GOP voters also have significant initial
reservations.
Initial DPR Support by Party
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Democrats
Independents
Republicans
(44%)
(32%)
(25%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
43
Though a small sub-sample, African Americans
have more reservations than others.
Initial DPR Support by Ethnicity
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latinos
(% of
Sample)
(16%)
AfricanAsians/
Americans Pacific Islanders
(6%)
(12%)
Whites
Voters of Color
(56%)
(39%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
44
Though support for DPR increases with education, even
highly-educated voters are opposed…
Initial DPR Support by Education
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
High School
Educated
(% of
Sample)
(15%)
Some
College
Education
Four-year
College
Graduates
PostGraduate
Educated
Some
College or
Less
Four-year
College or
More
(23%)
(35%)
(26%)
(38%)
(61%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
45
…and the impact of education seems to be
primarily among men.
Initial DPR Support by Education by Gender
Total Support
Non-College Educated
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
College-Educated
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Men
Women
Men
Women
(19%)
(19%)
(28%)
(33%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
46
Those with positive attitudes toward their water
agency are more accepting of DPR.
Initial DPR Support by Water Agency Favorability
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Total Favorable
Total Unfavorable
Neutral/DK/NA
(40%)
(13%)
(47%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
47
Interestingly, those who actually drink
unfiltered tap water are more accepting of DPR.
Initial DPR Support by Primary Source of Water at Home
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Unfiltered Tap Water
Filtered Tap Water
Bottled Water
Other/DK/NA
(21%)
(45%)
(31%)
(3%)
(% of
Sample)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
48
Even many of those who believe in the
feasibility of recycling water for drinking
initially decline to support DPR.
Initial DPR Support by Belief in Recycled Water Safety
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Yes
No
DK/NA
(63%)
(23%)
(14%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
49
Parents have more concerns about DPR than do
those without children at home.
Initial DPR Support by Children at Home
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don't Know/NA
60%
40%
20%
0%
(% of
Sample)
Have Kids at Home
No Kids at Home
(28%)
(70%)
13 Total. Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
50
A desire for an expanded water supply is the
primary motivation for DPR supporters.
Why would you SUPPORT direct reuse of recycled water for drinking in your community?
Drought/Lack of clean water supply
44%
Conservation/Good use of resources/Better
than wasting water
Trust water quality/filtering
process/guidelines
Recycled water has been used previously
here/other places
Makes economic sense; inexpensive/will
lower water rates
There is no reason to oppose
(no reason not to)/The right thing to do
6%
It’s necessary
6%
26%
20%
7%
7%
The technology exists to do so
2%
Recycled water is safe/clean
1%
It would be good to use for
gardening/irrigation
1%
0%
10%
Q14a. Open end; Responses grouped; Asked of direct potable reuse supporters only
20%
30%
40%
50%
51
Verbatim Comments from
Direct Potable Reuse Supporters
Because I think that the Water Authority
would have guidelines on the water
quality and as long as the water met that
guideline I would not have a problem.
Because you can purify it. It might
sound gross, but definitely can be
cleaned properly for drinking.
The water is purer than what we
are getting out of the reservoirs.
It’s the right thing to do, the
morally correct thing to do.
If we have no choice, and it’s
safe and good for the
environment, and keeps the
water bills low, then I’m okay.
Because water is a very valuable
resource, and we need to use
every last bit of it to supply water
in the San Diego area.
Because things are so far advanced that you can do anything with wastewater.
I’ve lived on a boat, and we’ve made water out of salt water, and we recycled
waste water and used it to clean the boat.
14a. Why would you SUPPORT direct reuse of recycled water for drinking in your community? Open end; Responses grouped; Asked of direct
potable reuse supporters only
52
Disbelief in the efficacy of the treatment
system is the biggest obstacle.
Why would you OPPOSE direct reuse of recycled water for drinking in your community?
Don’t trust filtering process/system
40%
26%
It would be unhealthy/unsafe to drink
Just don’t want to/feel comfortable drinking it
19%
Don’t want to drink “sewer water”
10%
Don’t know enough about it
7%
3%
Concerned of more chemicals in water (used to clean it)
“Human factor”; potential for human error/negligence in
water treatment
No process is 100% effective/Some pathogens/toxins
can never be removed (includes medications)
Lack of available test/study/research results
2%
Will taste bad
2%
3%
3%
Too expensive
1%
Don’t trust city officials to ensure water quality
1%
0%
10%
Q14b. Open end; Responses grouped; Asked of direct potable reuse opponents only
20%
30%
40%
50%
53
Verbatim Comments from
Direct Potable Reuse Opponents
It’s a mental thing. The idea that it was
once sewage…it’s a mental thing that
you have to get over.
I just want to be sure that the water district
filters it enough to drink. I don’t trust the
water district to do that correctly.
I think there are educational barriers
which will put people back to
drinking bottled water, which is bad
for the environment.
There is a chance of unintentional
violations of the process that might
cause contamination.
I oppose direct reuse of
recycled water. Chemicals
from industry can leave toxins
in the water.
I would like to see other cities in the
U.S. implement it first. At this time, I
don’t think it is 100% safe.
I would only oppose it for drinking. I don’t think science has the right answers
for purifying it for drinking at this time.
12b. Why would you OPPOSE direct reuse of recycled water for drinking in your community? Open end; Responses grouped; Asked of direct
potable reuse opponents only
54
Safety concerns drive reservations
about direct potable reuse.
I am going to read you a list of concerns some members of the public have
expressed about direct reuse of recycled water for drinking. Please tell me
whether you personally agree or disagree with that concern.
Strg. Agree
Swmt. Agree.
Recycled water may include
contaminants
Smwt. Disagr.
38%
Recycled water may fail to meet
water safety standards
34%
33%
32%
Recycled water may taste bad
23%
30%
The concept of recycled water just
makes me uncomfortable
25%
25%
0%
Q16.
20%
Strg. Disagr.
40%
Total
Total
Agree Disagree
13%12%
72%
24%
16% 15%
66%
30%
52%
38%
49%
49%
22%
22%
60%
DK/NA
16%
10%
27%
80%
100%
55
56
Though they are initially opposed, voters quickly
become more comfortable with direct potable
reuse after information about safety.
Do you support or oppose direct reuse of recycled water in your
community for all household purposes, including drinking?
Initial Support
After Safety
Information
After Messages
75%
Total Oppose
54%
56%
Total Support
40%
39%
59%
36%
60%
45%
30%
Don’t Know/NA
7%
15%
5%
5%
0%
Q13 Total/Q18/Q20.
57
Segmenting the Population by
Consistency of Support for DPR
 Consistent Support: Voters who
consistently indicated they would
support direct potable reuse of recycled
water.
 Consistent Oppose: Voters who
consistently indicated they would
oppose direct potable reuse of recycled
water.
 Swing: Voters who do not fall into any
of the other categories – remaining
consistently undecided or switching
positions.
Consistent
Support
38%
Consistent
Oppose
32%
Swing
31%
The following slide shows demographic
groups that disproportionately fall into one
category or the other.
58
Demographic Profiles of the Segments
Consistent Support
Swing
Consistent Oppose
38% of the Electorate
31% of the Electorate
32% of the Electorate
Ages 18-29
Ages 75+
Interviewed in Spanish
Independents Ages 18-49
Women Ages 50+
African-Americans
Independent Men
Non-College Educated Women
High School Educated
College-Educated Men
Whites
Republicans
Men Ages 18-49
Santa Clara
Republicans Ages 50+
Democrats Ages 18-49
Democratic Women
Republican Women
Democratic Men
Republican Women
Republican Men
Ages 18-49
Interviewed in English
Republicans Ages 18-49
Use All/Mostly Cell Phone
Women
Women Ages 50+
Men
Ages 50+
Latinos
Interviewed on Cell Phone
College-Educated Women
Voters of Color
Renters
Ages 50-64
Use All/Mostly Landline
HH Income $50,000-$100,000
Have Children at Home
Have Children at Home
San Diego
Post-Graduate Educated
Ages 65+
59
60
Focus group participants preferred “purified
water” or “certified water” as descriptors.
(Participants Allowed to Select Up to Three From List)
DPR Names
Purified Water
Certified Water
Advanced Treated Water
Renewed Water
Recycled Drinking Water
Refreshed Water
New Water
Supplemented Natural Water
Cyclical Water
Blended Drinking Water
Reused Potable Water
Reclaimed Water
Reused Water
Renovated Water
Rescued Water
Sunnyvale
13
10
6
3
3
4
1
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
San Diego
14
12
5
4
3
1
2
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
Total
27
22
11
7
6
5
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
61
Among “purified water” names,
“advanced purified water” was best.
(Participants Allowed to Select One From List)
“Purified Water” Names
Sunnyvale
San Diego
Total
Advanced Purified Water
8
10
18
Purified Water
7
6
13
Purified Recycled Water
0
3
3
Purified Wastewater
0
1
1
SUNNYVALE FEMALE: “Advanced” means they
took that extra step. It’s not just purified water, it’s
advanced which sounds better to me.
SUNNYVALE FEMALE: It’s
advanced in what way? Like you
put ten different chemicals in there
and that’s why it’s advanced?
62
Even a basic description of the process involved
in direct potable reuse inspires more confidence.
How would you feel about using advanced treated recycled water as an
addition to the supply of drinking water, that is water treated with
ultra-filtration, reverse osmosis, and advanced oxidation?
Strongly favor
28%
Somewhat favor
34%
Somewhat oppose
11%
Strongly oppose
14%
Don't know/NA
Total
Oppose
26%
12%
0%
Q15.
Total
Favor
62%
10%
20%
30%
40%
63
Solid majorities say a variety of additional
information gives them more confidence in DPR.
I am going to read you a list of facts about direct reuse of recycled water. Please
indicate if it makes you much more confident, somewhat more confident, or it makes no
difference to your confidence that direct reuse of recycled water is safe.
Total
Much More Conf.
Smwt. More Conf.
No Diff.
DK/NA More
Conf.
The purification process produces water that is
5% 62%
30%
32%
33%
purer than bottled water
Drinking water could be tested constantly, in realtime, with online sensors
California’s drinking water standards are among
the strictest in the nation, and purified recycled
water would comply with those standards
The quality of recycled water, once it has been
purified, will be strictly monitored by the California
Department of Health
Methods regularly used to purify recycled water
include microfiltration, reverse osmosis and
ultraviolet light – similar to the purification process
involved in removing salt from ocean water
Methods regularly used to purify recycled water
include microfiltration, reverse osmosis and
ultraviolet light
0%
Q17. Split Sample
29%
34%
27%
33%
24%
41%
23%
21%
20%
63%
39%
60%
64%
35%
37%
60%
38%
32%
40%
35%
40%
60%
80%
6%
53%
100%
64
Messages about environmental impacts and the
principle of recycling resonate strongly.
Very Conv.
(ENVIRONMENT) Using recycled water is good for our environment.
The more recycled water we use, the less we have to take out of rivers
and streams and our scarce groundwater supplies. That’s good for
rivers, streams, and the fish, plants and wildlife that rely on them.
Smwt. Conv.
50%
(PRINCIPLE) We all recycle as often as we can – glass, plastic, paper,
even yard waste. It’s the right thing to do. For the same reason, we
should recycle and reuse as much of our limited water supplies as we
possibly can. Water is too valuable to be used just once.
40%
(SUPPLY) We need to consider all options to ensure a reliable and
locally-controlled supply of water for ourselves and future generations
that will not be dependent on decisions made by agencies in other parts
of the state.
33%
(DROUGHT-PROOF) Recycling water is a drought-proof way to help
ensure a reliable supply of water to meet local needs, independent of
climate change or weather in other locations.
27%
0%
20%
84%
34%
33%
41%
46%
40%
60%
73%
73%
73%
80%
19. I am going to read you some statements that have been made by supporters of direct reuse of recycled water in your community. Please
indicate whether it is very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a reason to support direct reuse of recycled water. ^Not Part of
Split Sample
100%
65
A variety of other messages are persuasive,
though less strongly compelling.
Very Conv.
(PURIFICATION) The water purification process uses state-of-the-art multistage technology and monitoring. It cleans water to a very high standard, 26%
and ensures that drinking water produced is safe and free of harmful
chemicals and toxins.
Smwt. Conv.
45%
71%
37%
69%
^
(ADOPTION) Several California communities, including Orange County,
already use advanced purification processes to produce purified recycled 31%
water suitable for drinking and household use. There have been no
problems whatsoever from this use of recycled water.
(RATES) With the economy just coming out of a recession and many
families having a hard time making ends meet, we need to make the most
of all of our water resources to avoid further rate increases. Over time, 30% 36% 66%
making better use of our existing water supplies through recycling will be
one of the best ways to keep water rates low.
(NATURAL PROCESS) The amount of fresh water on the planet does not
change. Through nature, all water has been used and reused since the
beginning of time across every river system in the world. Using advanced 28% 36% 64%
technology to purify recycled water merely speeds up a natural process –
and in fact, the water produced through advanced purification meets a
much higher standard of quality than what occurs naturally.
(SAFETY) Thanks to advances in modern technology, it no longer matters
where water comes from. We have the ability to purify any water and make 22% 39% 61%
it healthy to drink.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
19. I am going to read you some statements that have been made by supporters of direct reuse of recycled water in your community. Please
indicate whether it is very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a reason to support direct reuse of recycled water. ^Not Part of
Split Sample
100%
66
Among persuadable voters, the environmental
message is also a standout.
(% Very Convincing)
Message
All
Voters
Swing
Positive
Movers
Environment
50%
58%
65%
Principle
40%
38%
45%
Supply
33%
34%
36%
Adoption
31%
27%
30%
Rates
30%
32%
35%
Natural Process
28%
25%
29%
Drought-proof
27%
24%
26%
Purification
26%
13%
15%
Safety
22%
17%
20%
^
19. I am going to read you some statements that have been made by supporters of direct reuse of recycled water in your community. Please
indicate whether it is very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a reason to support direct reuse of recycled water. ^Not Part of
Split Sample
67
Three in five voters see a variety of additional
information as compelling.
Would you be likely to accept the addition of advanced treated recycled
water to supplement the sources of our drinking water if you learned that:
Yes
California’s drinking water standards are
among the most strict in the nation, and
advanced treated recycled water in the
region would comply with those standards
No
Don't Know/NA
68%
27%
Recycled water could supply as much as
ten percent of our local drinking water
supplies
65%
30%
Recycled water is currently used to
supplement drinking water in other U.S.
communities
63%
30%
0%
Q21.
20%
40%
60%
80%
5%
6%
7%
100%
68
Top messengers are generally those
with scientific expertise.
I am going to read you a list of people and organizations that may provide information about
recycled water. Please tell me if you would generally trust that person’s or organization’s
opinion on this issue, or if you would be suspicious of it.
Total Trust
Total Suspicious
Difference
The Department of Public Health
77%
19%
+58%
Medical researchers
74%
20%
+54%
Medical doctors
72%
22%
+50%
Scientists
71%
23%
+48%
20%
+47%
Nutritionists
67%
The Environmental Protection Agency
71%
Residents of community that already
have potable reuse
80%
Q22. ^Not Part of Split Sample
65%
60%
40%
20%
0%
24%
+47%
22%
+43%
20%
40%
60%
69
Those with a political or economic
perspective are less credible.
Total Trust
Total Suspicious
Difference
+38%
Dentists
62%
Environmental organizations
63%
29%
+34%
Independent lab studies
61%
30%
+31%
A professor at a local university
58%
32%
+26%
Your local water utility
59%
35%
+24%
^
Your local mayor
24%
37%
A taxpayer advocate organization
29%
Local business owners
30%
80%
60%
40%
20%
51%
-14%
53%
-24%
-27%
57%
0%
20%
40%
60%
22. I am going to read you a list of people and organizations that may provide information about recycled water. Please tell me if you would
generally trust that person’s or organization’s opinion on this issue, or if you would be suspicious of it. ^Not Part of Split Sample
70
Trust in various messengers is similar among
persuadable voters.
(Total % Trust)
Messenger
Department of Public Health
Medical Researchers
Medical Doctors
Scientists
EPA
Nutritionists
Residents of community that
already have potable reuse
Environmental Organizations
Dentists
Independent Lab Studies
Your Local Water Utility
^
Professor at Local University
Your Local Mayor
Local Business Owners
Taxpayer Advocate Organization
All
Voters
Swing
Positive
Movers
77%
74%
72%
71%
71%
67%
81%
79%
73%
75%
71%
69%
85%
85%
76%
78%
75%
79%
65%
67%
75%
63%
62%
61%
59%
58%
37%
30%
29%
67%
68%
59%
63%
58%
36%
26%
27%
69%
73%
65%
68%
59%
40%
30%
31%
22. I am going to read you a list of people and organizations that may provide information about recycled water. Please tell me if you would
generally trust that person’s or organization’s opinion on this issue, or if you would be suspicious of it. ^Not Part of Split Sample
71
Information on the news and from community
organizations is most likely to gain attention.
I am going to read you a list of ways someone might try to get in touch with you with more
information about recycled water. Please tell me if you would definitely pay attention,
probably pay attention, or would not pay attention to that method of communicating with you.
Def. Pay Attn.
News reports
Information from community organizations
of which you are a member
^
Inserts in water bills
Prob. Pay Attn.
32%
48%
32%
41%
Newsletters mailed to your home 15%
Information sent home with children from 21%
school
TV ads 13%
Q23.
62%
52%
37%
47%
52%
38%
11%
50%
32%
44%
56%
19%
72%
82%
40%
60%
51%
49%
48%
49%
36%
20%
5%
46%
Twitter 8%
0%
21%
80%
74%
38%
37%
Billboards 7%
Total Pay
Attn.
35%
30%
Your water agency’s website 16%
DK/NA
20%
43%
21%
Radio ads 14%
Facebook
Not Pay Attn.
80%
5%
24%
7%
10%
100%
72
Process graphics on IPR and DPR were helpful in
drawing distinctions, but left some wanting more.
WW Treatment
Urban Water Use
Water Treatment
Nature
AWT =
RO + UV
WW Treatment
Urban Water
Use
Water
Treatment
Nature
AWT =
RO +
UV
• Focus group participants
had positive reactions to
the process graphics,
and found them a helpful
way to draw distinctions
between
the
two
processes.
• They liked seeing the
three steps of the
treatment
process
spelled out.
• At the same time, many
indicated
that
they
wanted more information
about
the
treatment
process and how it would
work.
73
Participants very much liked elements of the fact sheets
that described the three-step process.
•
Reading details gave them more confidence in the effectiveness of the
process.
•
Participants liked the idea that there were three stages to the process, so that
a failure at one stage would be backed up by further treatment to follow.
•
Some were relieved to see that no chemicals were involved.
74
Images were also extremely helpful.
• Some participants expressed interest in seeing or touring a treatment
plant.
• Several said that images of the treatment equipment helped ease their
concerns; although they had no idea how any of the machinery work,
its apparent sophistication increased their comfort level.
75
76
Communications Recommendations
• DO leverage public concern about California’s ongoing water
shortages to consolidate support for DPR – without relying on
the current drought.
• DO emphasize the role of water agencies, as opposed to
other levels of government, in overseeing the process.
• In particular, DO emphasize the role of scientists and public
health professionals in designing and monitoring the process.
• DO place a special emphasis on communications with
women, communities of color, non-English speakers, seniors,
and less well-educated and affluent communities.
• DO continue to use “advanced purified water” as a term for
the product of DPR.
• DO NOT simply assert that technology has already made it
possible to make any water safe to drink.
77
Communications Recommendations (Cont.)
• DO emphasize the three stages of the treatment process.
• But DO NOT rely on the words “microfiltration, reverse
osmosis, and ultraviolet light” alone – provide some brief
explanation.
• DO highlight the frequency and sophistication of monitoring
and testing processes.
• DO note that public health and environmental protection
agencies have reviewed and approved the DPR process.
• DO use images to reinforce the effectiveness and complexity
of the treatment process.
• DO highlight the successful implementation of DPR in other
communities.
• DO draw comparisons to the health and safety of bottled
water.
78
Communications Recommendations
(Cont.)
• DO appeal to the broader principles of
environmental protection and recycling as
rationales for expanding the use of recycled
water.
• DO NOT rely on arguments that DPR will end up
reducing rates.
• DO NOT rely on elected officials, taxpayer
advocates or business owners as messengers –
they do not speak to the health issues at the core
of public concerns.
79
Key Messages
• Potable reuse provides a safe, reliable and
sustainable drinking water supply.
• Using advanced purified water is good for the
environment.
• Potable reuse provides a locally controlled,
drought-proof water supply.
Key Messaging Points
• The purification process produces water that is
more pure than most bottled water.
• Purified Water:
– will comply or exceed strict state and federal drinking
water standards.
– will be tested, in real-time, with online sensors and be
strictly monitored by the department of health.
– currently used to supplement drinking water in many
communities in the U.S. and around the world.
• There have been no problems from this use of
purified water.
Suggested Messaging from
WRA Education & Outreach Committee
• Water reuse – including potable reuse – happens
naturally all over the planet.
• Water reuse happens daily on rivers and other
water bodies.
• Planned Potable Reuse is publicly acknowledged
as an intentional project to recycle water for
drinking water.
• The amount of fresh water on the planet does
not change, so through nature all water has been
used and reused since the beginning of time.
Project Advisory Committee
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Albrey Arrington, Loxahatchee River District
Jeff Dennis, Metropolitan Water District
Dave Smith, WateReuse California
Jennifer West, WateReuse California
Marsi Steirer, City of San Diego
Eleanor Torres, Orange County Water District
Ron Wildermuth, West Basin Municipal Water District
Greg Oliver, Australian Water Recycling Centre of
Excellence
Participating Agencies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
City of Lubbock
City of Phoenix
City of Scottsdale
Denver Water
El Paso Water Utilities
Orange County Water District
San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission
• Santa Clara Valley Water District
• Southern Nevada Water Agency
• Tucson Water
• West Basin Municipal Water District
International
• AERSA (Spain)
• PUB (Singapore)
• WSAA (Australia)
2 Communication Plans
• Local Community Level
- Customize to meet your specific needs
- Tailor questions to your demographics
• State Level
- Regulatory environment will be different
- Basic approach valuable: Listen, Learn, Adapt your Messaging
CA DPR Initiative
www.watereuse.org/foundation
Recent Research
13-02-1
Model Communication Plans for Increasing Awareness and Fostering Acceptance of Direct
Potable Reuse
www.watereuse.org/california
Advancing DPR Acceptance:
13-02 Update: Research Findings
Challenge at our Doorstep
February 18, 2015
Mark Millan
Dave Metz
Patsy Tennyson