Hose pipe ban how does it harm you?

pegare said:
no hose pipe ban in Devon yet, but i think we may get one soon. funny though, 2 weeks ago my sister had a hosepipe ban, and now they have floods, but still with a hosepipe ban :D
Click to expand...

Hosepipe ban won't effect me, the torrential rain we've had in the last week washed the hosepipe away :(
 
pegare said:
no hose pipe ban in Devon yet, but i think we may get one soon. funny though, 2 weeks ago my sister had a hosepipe ban, and now they have floods, but still with a hosepipe ban :D
Click to expand...

Short duration wet weather isn't what we need, south of England is in a prolonged dry spell for the last few years. Groundwater is severely depleted and will require a prolonged couple of wet winter when there is less evaporation to recharge unfortunately.
 
Pudney said:
Perhaps they're right. Perhaps, just perhaps, there's a scientific reason why snow cannot actually help water levels if conditions aren't right. It may seem silly to you, but I would imagine you're not an expert on snow (apologies if you are).
Click to expand...

It's not even that. A lot of the south had only a few inches of snow in a month or two. That's equivilent to a few mm/cm of rain over one or two of the wettest months, massively below average rainfall. That is why the last two winters were so dry, just because there is snow on the ground for several weeks doesn't mean there is lots of water!:p
 
alx said:
Agreed, the pipes could be in a much worse condition! It's a general problem with the UK though, as one of the first industrial nations our infrastructure tends to be fairly old and so a lot of it needs replacing at significant cost and disruption. Guess that's the problem with doing it first!

As you say, the private sector doesn't want to invest and the public sector was incompetent and wasted money like it was going out of fashion.

Problem with the water network is that it's such an expensive, difficult, disruptive and time consuming process of relaying pipes, often with only minimal improvement. I bet more people would complain about the roadworks and disruptions that would occur if the pipes were to be relaid than the current house pipe ban.

I'd bet it would be much more cost effective to invest in new reservoirs and/or a (semi) national water network than it would be to try and replace every leaking pipe.
Click to expand...

A big point you missed is that most of the pipes and rail was laid down by private, for profit companies in the first place. You have to wonder, if current companies aren't investing, why the aren't. For example the railways have been around for a couple of hundred years. They have only been public for around 40 of those years...
 
Amp34 said:
A big point you missed is that most of the pipes and rail was laid down by private, for profit companies in the first place. You have to wonder, if current companies aren't investing, why the aren't. For example the railways have been around for a couple of hundred years. They have only been public for around 40 of those years...
Click to expand...

you're joking aint you? Public railway has been around for 100 years+.

I think it stinks to be honest. 23% shortage is quite a lot. the goverment should be taking measures so companys renew their lines more often.

239 million regardless of their turnover is quite sufficiant enough to invest more time into fixing leaks. why are people jumping on the water companys bandwagons? they are clearly being greedy, and thats just one company.

It wouldnt suprise me if they're imposing this to profit gain because they saved so much last year.

Why is it the customers fault? £1000 for using a hosepipe wasting what? a few gallons of water apposed to the water company wasting billions on leaks.
Goverment shouldnt allow water companys to impose this but rather deal with the bigger picture.

surely they cannot just shut off your water supply and erect standpipes on every street corner? it would be far cheaper alternative to create a seawater desalination plant?
I watched a documentary on what australia have done to conquer their water problems, but as usual the goverment are happy to **** off their tax payers.
 
Amp34 said:
More to do with the SE being semi arid climate wise but yeah, something like that. :p

For example, how mental our weather is... London gets less rain than Rome whereas large parts of the west of the country get more rain than a number of rain forests. All you westerners stealing the easterners water!:mad:
Click to expand...

Everything looking nice and dandy up here in yorkshire :o
 
bledd. said:
I just use the pressure washer instead :o
Click to expand...

That little loophole has been closed for Anglian Water customers :(

I now use a watering can to wash the cars but because it does a rubbish job on a properly dirty car I end up washing them twice as often probably using more water in the process :o
 
Jonnybmac said:
you're joking aint you? Public railway has been around for 100 years+.

I think it stinks to be honest. 23% shortage is quite a lot. the goverment should be taking measures so companys renew their lines more often.

239 million regardless of their turnover is quite sufficiant enough to invest more time into fixing leaks. why are people jumping on the water companys bandwagons? they are clearly being greedy, and thats just one company.

It wouldnt suprise me if they're imposing this to profit gain because they saved so much last year.

Why is it the customers fault? £1000 for using a hosepipe wasting what? a few gallons of water apposed to the water company wasting billions on leaks.
Goverment shouldnt allow water companys to impose this but rather deal with the bigger picture.

surely they cannot just shut off your water supply and erect standpipes on every street corner? it would be far cheaper alternative to create a seawater desalination plant?
I watched a documentary on what australia have done to conquer their water problems, but as usual the goverment are happy to **** off their tax payers.
Click to expand...

Desalination is the most expensive way to produce drinking water, bar none and Australia have not "conquered" their water problems. Whilst they do have low leakage levels they have water source problems and a lot of their water sources are over capacity and capped to stop future developments.

England actually compares pretty well with studies on individual levels of leakage and several companies are actually driving leakage below the Economic Level of Leakage at which point it costs more to fix the leak than lose the water.
 
My grandparents like big butts, and the water bill can not lie
you other gardeners can't deny,
that when the rainfall fails and the hose pipe's banned,
And the lawn all brown and dry,
you get stung!

Water bills way up high,
Unless your butt is stuffed,
... Ok, that's already 6 lines more than I had any plan for, but you get the idea.

I don't know why everyone down South doesn't just keep big butts if they need it for gardening - My family would probably keep a butt up North just to save on water bills/environment if we didn't happen to have a stream running through the back garden.



I think a fairer system though would just be to decide how water much a resonably frugal household of a certain size would use, and let them have that on normal rates, but then have a massive price spike above that (only when water shortages abound though). It just seems a bit silly to me that you could have the kitchen tap running however long you like and get away with wasting loads of water, but even a little hosepipe use would incur a fine. A bit like phone providers placing restrictions on how you use the data allowance you have paid for seems very unfair to me.

Edit: So meters would need to be installed everywhere, and probably read more often.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom