Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 8. Diversity of the Level 1 and Level 2 study site locations <br />• <br />BRITISH <br />COLUMBIA ALBERTA SASKATCHEWAN <br />L <br />MONTANA <br />OREGON IDAHO <br />WYOMING <br />NEVADA <br />UTAH COLORADO 41 <br />KANSAS MISSOURI VIRGINIA <br />KENTUCKY VIRGINIA <br />CALIFORNIA • • <br />TENNESSEE NO <br />OKLAHOMA ARKANSAS CARO A <br />• ARIZONA NEW MEXICO <br />SOUTH <br />• CAROLINA <br />TEXAS MISSISSIPPI ALABAMA GEORGIA <br />• <br />LEVEL 1 STUDY SITES: Clayton County, GA • Denver, CO • Fort Collins, CO • Peel, Ontario • San Antonio, TX <br />Scottsdale, AZ • Tacoma, WA • Toho, FL • Waterloo, Ontario <br />LEVEL 2 STUDY SITES: Aurora, CO • Austin, TX • Cary NC • Chicago, IL • Edmonton, Alberta <br />Henderson, NV • Miami, FL • Mt. View, CA • New Haven, CT • Otay, CA • Philadelphia, PA • Portland, OR <br />Santa Barbara, CA • Santa Fe, NM <br />Flow Trace Monitoring <br />Meter -Master flow recorder installed on a <br />magnetic drive water meter. <br />(Photo courtesy of the F. S. Brainard Company) <br />After the surveys were tabulated, 900 homes (100 from each of <br />the nine Level 1 utilities) agreed to participate in detailed flow <br />trace monitoring, which involved recording flow through each <br />customer's water meter every 10 seconds for a period of about <br />two weeks. The flow trace monitoring portion of the study took <br />more than a year to complete, as the research team installed the <br />equipment, collected the data, and moved the equipment from <br />city to city. High-level flow data were successfully obtained <br />from 762 homes. <br />RESIDENTIAL END USESOF WATER, VERSION 2: EXECUTIVE REPORT 1 13 <br />