Hose pipe ban how does it harm you?

[Freefaller]

Never going to happen, the cost of implementing and running such a system would be prohibitively expensive and if it did go ahead expect your water bills to rise massively. The system would have to be pressurised and pumped for huge distances meaning even the running costs alone would be massive.

It might be possible on a local/country level and most water utilities already have systems in place to move supplies onto new reservoirs/treatment works if required in emergencies.

Well HS2 is over £30bn... for what, getting people to b'ham 15 minutes quicker? Doesn't seem cost effective to me, however there has been major water bans for year after year - surely working towards redistributing water would be better?

however, I think better education and water usage is key, as well as fixing the pipes. However, what's new? We're good at patching things up but not fixing the root cause...

 

[LordSplodge]

have the water companies solved all the losses due to leakage yet ? if not they really shouldn't be telling others how to behave

No. I saw a woman from the Environment Agency bleating on about managing the water shortages. She neglected to mention the profiteering water companies failing to fix all their leaks.

 

[Danthus]

Snip.......

ELL is a joke.

United Utilities met their ELL target for 2010/2011

They only leaked 464 Mega litres per day.

 

[Windle]

ELL is a joke.

United Utilities met their ELL target for 2010/2011

They only leaked 464 Mega litres per day.

464 megalitres per day equates to 154.6 litres per household per day based on the rough figure of 3million households served which is below what the typical ELL would be (Approx 174l per household per day).

To put that in context, UU deliver 2,000,000,000 litres of water per day to their customers and lost 464,000,000 litres per day to leakage. Less than 25%

 

[Danthus]

464 megalitres per day equates to 154.6 litres per household per day based on the rough figure of 3million households served which is below what the typical ELL would be (Approx 174l per household per day).

To put that in context, UU deliver 2,000,000,000 litres of water per day to their customers and lost 464,000,000 litres per day to leakage. Less than 25%

Bases on your numbers that is 23% leaked. How is that acceptable?

 

[Richie]

the UK isn't exactly short of water and it's not like you're neighbours are goin to care and

we live in England, we get enough rain...

Quite obviously not considering there is a water shortage in areas of England....

Instead of spending all that money on the HS2 project, they could invest in setting up water pipes from all around the uk to redistribute water.

Funnily enough, the Scottish Government has suggested installing a commercial sized pipe system at the same time as the HS2 is built. Unfortunately, the HS2 stops at Birmingham so unless they extend it to Scotland then it won't work. Quite obviously an attempt by the Scottish Government to get HS2 up here

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-17314545


Personally I don't agree with shipping the water down there in any form as this could result in shortages in Scotland and lets face it, if England pay more for water than Scotland, who are the companies more likely to "sell" it to?





According to stats I heard on the news, some English reservoirs are at 60-65% of capacity just now whereas all Scottish reservoirs are between 95 and 99% capacity...

Hey, if you want to have the good weather then there are downsides


Think I will go turn a tap on for a couple of hours (no metered water up here for domestic premises either )




Edit: in answer to the OP's question - it will not affect me one jot

 

[Windle]

Bases on your numbers that is 23% leaked. How is that acceptable?

Because as I've said above zero leakage is not attainable and don't forget leakage figures include customer side leakage which aren't the water utilities responsibility which unless the customer has a meter they have zero incentive to report/repair unless it's impacting them in any way.

UU have 42,000 km of water mains and 3 million properties supplied. Removing every single bit of leakage is physically impossible as leakage is detected in a number of ways:

1) By increases in the average night line reported at the inlet meter for District Metered Areas (DMA). A spike in overnight consumption figures for an area can tell you that there's a leak in a general area.
2) Visible water rising leakage spotted and reported, ie there's water coming up through the ground
3) Leakage teams sweeping an area using electrical noise/leak correlators and listening sticks to listen for leaks in the pipes

All the water utilities have large expensive leakage programs with companies constantly going around looking for leaks but there are limitations on how many they can find such as the fact you don't get a good leak noise off Asbestos Concrete pipes. These are the inherent difficulties in working with large, complex underground pipe networks, suppose they could just put all the pipes above ground with masses of cladding so that all the leaks are easy to find

 

[bakes0310]

I dont wanna sound like im over reacting but ill shoot the pigs if they touch my hose.

 

[Danthus]

Because as I've said above zero leakage is not attainable and don't forget leakage figures include customer side leakage which aren't the water utilities responsibility which unless the customer has a meter they have zero incentive to report/repair unless it's impacting them in any way.

UU have 42,000 km of water mains and 3 million properties supplied. Removing every single bit of leakage is physically impossible as leakage is detected in a number of ways:

1) By increases in the average night line reported at the inlet meter for District Metered Areas (DMA). A spike in overnight consumption figures for an area can tell you that there's a leak in a general area.
2) Visible water rising leakage spotted and reported, ie there's water coming up through the ground
3) Leakage teams sweeping an area using electrical noise/leak correlators and listening sticks to listen for leaks in the pipes

All the water utilities have large expensive leakage programs with companies constantly going around looking for leaks but there are limitations on how many they can find such as the fact you don't get a good leak noise off Asbestos Concrete pipes. These are the inherent difficulties in working with large, complex underground pipe networks, suppose they could just put all the pipes above ground with masses of cladding so that all the leaks are easy to find

Where have I suggested 0% leakage should be the target, pipes break, leaks occur. However, I think most people would agree 23% is far too high.

 

[haaammit]

A hosepipe ban won't affect me - I have my own 100+ foot borehole so Anglian Water can get bent

 

[Ahleckz]

Instead of spending all that money on the HS2 project, they could invest in setting up water pipes from all around the uk to redistribute water.

You ain't having our water!

 

[Gregster]

You ain't having our water!

Share or I am telling your Mum.

 

[Trifid]

snip

Bloody residents! I like our local reservoir, it has fish so those who like doing nothing in a boat can sit with their rod and the road around it is arrow straight and wide and never used so you can drive really fast at NSL.

 

[LordSplodge]

464 megalitres per day equates to 154.6 litres per household per day based on the rough figure of 3million households served which is below what the typical ELL would be (Approx 174l per household per day).

To put that in context, UU deliver 2,000,000,000 litres of water per day to their customers and lost 464,000,000 litres per day to leakage. Less than 25%

Not acceptable, especially with the amount of profit being made. Whilst nobody expects a zero percent leak figure those figure you quoted are far too high.

Between 5-10% maybe. However even that makes banning hosepipes look silly. Oh well it's always easier to target customers than fix the actual problems, amirite?

 

[Danthus]

Not acceptable, especially with the amount of profit being made. Whilst nobody expects a zero percent leak figure those figure you quoted are far too high.

Between 5-10% maybe. However even that makes banning hosepipes look silly. Oh well it's always easier to target customers than fix the actual problems, amirite?

United Utilities made £239 million profit after tax for the year 2010/2011

 

[Gangster]

Doesn't. Just fill up bucket after bucket with a tap instead. Just do it loads of times so you can equate to what you would use if you were to use a hosepipe.

 

[Semple]

Should get one of these badboys. That'll do anyone's garden some justice.

 

[LordSplodge]

United Utilities made £239 million profit after tax for the year 2010/2011

Exactly. They should fix the leaks first.

Should get one of these badboys. That'll do anyone's garden some justice.

I think it may work out cheaper to risk the fine from the water police!

 

[aproctor]

So no, you most certainly will not use what you want.

Water doesn't go anywhere though, the reason for the shortage is the lack of investment.

The North has been setup for heavy industry which no longer exists and a smaller population.

Personally i'll keep using the hose.

 

[OpenToSuggestions]

I doubt there will be police walking around looking for people using hoses.

This tbh.
No pensioners take any notice of the ban anyway. They use their hoses to wash their cars and water their plants, plus they are probably on a fixed rate water bill rather than a meter.