"What happens when we have extreme heat, even now in the early spring, is that the snow melts faster," said Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at ASU. "A lot of that snowmelt evaporates into the air instead of basically making its way kind of percolating through the ground to the river."

“People are pretty united about the state’s position, and I think it’s because the state’s position is we’re not going to take a deal that leaves us worse off than no deal,” said Sarah Porter, director for Arizona State University’s Kyl Center for Water Policy. “… I don’t expect to have perfect unanimity in terms of ‘what do we do next.’”

In 1991, Arizona officials, already well aware that the surface water supplies on which their thriving cities depended were being depleted, designated several aquifers as “transportation basins,” from which water could be pumped into the Central Arizona Project should the need arise. 

These basins “were specifically set aside as casualties,” explained Kathryn Sorensen, director of research for the Kyl Center for Water Policy. “It is allowable under state law to essentially drain them and then import the water into the Valley of the Sun and other areas.”

Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University, said companies’ investments in water conservation are not yet making a big difference, but can be valuable because of the message they send.

“The main reason I am always happy to see corporate engagement in this way is that it shows everybody that this is something worth investing in and that they really care about it,” she said. “When we see companies step up and announce goals, and then they, you know, put real money down to get to those goals, that paves the way for other corporations and other institutions to follow.”

Since the states have been unable to come to a new agreement, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation will dictate the terms of a new policy going forward. And it will likely be less water for everyone.

“You will be reading scare headlines all around,” said Sarah Porter, the director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy. “Maybe you saw a really scary ad during the Olympics.”

“Five or 10 years ago, the assumption was California is not going to help Arizona with its water problem,” said Sarah Porter, the director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy. “But in the last few years, that view has softened, and we’re seeing more interest by different entities in California in at least having a conversation.”

“The thing I keep trying to tell people is, in the Colorado River Basin, we are not running out of water,” Rhett Larson, a professor of water law at Arizona State University, said. “We are running out of cheap water.”

One federal option, which could realistically go into effect, would cut water to the Central Arizona Project by nearly 60%, according to Rhett Larson, an ASU water law professor and chief legal counsel for the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association.

“People’s response to the threat was, we’re going to retrench and fight,” Larson said.

Kathryn Sorensen, director of research with the Kyl Center for Water Policy, said three key factors are driving the increases: inflation, aging infrastructure, and the dwindling supply from the Colorado River.

On inflation, Sorensen pointed to the rising cost of equipment and labor. On infrastructure, she said the systems that deliver safe drinking water are overdue for replacement.