L.A.'s wastewater makeover

Because Los Angeles is doing a before-and-after makeover on our water PR -- not to mention the H2O itself.

The ugly "before" water image goes back to the 1990s and the "reclaimed water" that Jay Leno loved to mock. Purified sewage water sent back through the taps? Gross! Ick! We hated it!

But check out that "after" water now! It's getting styled and primped and dressed for success. Are you ready to see the new, improved "reclaimed water"?

Dude, it's the same water. In any makeover, the difference is window dressing, confidence and attitude. In L.A., it's still the same wastewater recycled for reuse. What will make the difference this time is how it's packaged and pitched.

Unless you want your water delivered by eyedropper in the future, reclaimed water is the way it's going to be. We waste multiple millions of gallons every year -- water that can be cleaned and purified and reused. And you wasted four or five gallons of it this morning, letting the tap run while you brushed your teeth. First, don't keep the tap running while you brush, and as for the water you did use, let's scrub it pure and use it again.

That last part's the reclaimed water principle, whether it's wastewater from your sink or -- here's where the gag reflex sets in -- the toilet.

In the early 1990s, L.A. spent $55 million on a reclaimed water plant. And in a spectacular case of lousy timing, the reclaimed water project was ready to start up just before the 2001 mayoral election. In the absence of a boffo DWP sales pitch for reclaimed water, politicians inflamed and then caved in to voters' fears arising from the irresistibly damning phrase "toilet to tap" water. The bewildered DWP engineers had to shut down their new project after a few days. In those few days, the DWP calculated, the little reclaimed water that did come out of that $55-million plant cost $2.75 a gallon, instead of the third of a cent a gallon we pay for the rest of our water. Now that's ugly.

Cue the sparkly magic music for 2008's makeover transformation. What's different now?

The drought is much worse. The science of treating water is much better. And for once, the DWP may be smarter about its PR. It would have to build a new facility with all the new water treatment whiz-bangs, and the city wouldn't see reclaimed water for another 10 years. But David Nahai, the head of the DWP, has at least decided to get well ahead of the PR curve: "Folks on the street who'll hear about wastewater treatment [may] have some reticence about it. ... The more this languishes, the more the fires of suspicion are going to get fanned. We need to go out quicker."