How much rain will cure hosepipe issues/canal depth/reservoir levels?

[ghostlymoron]

Ofwat are the ones with the supposed power. Every five years they negotiate with the water companies to decide priorities and fix charges. Water companies present them with a plan of how much they want to spend on capital projects and say how much it is going to cost and what the water charges to customers would have to be to cover it. Ofwat say 'no, you can't raise charges by that much' and knock out some of the capital spend. Companies respond by saying 'if we don't spend that money, we can't meet our statutory requirements'. Eventually a compromise is reached between spend and charges. You can't force companies to spend money they don't have! Water companies make reasonable profits but not excessive (I know, I'm a shareholder in some of 'em). Everyone agrees that a (relatively) leak free distribution system would solve the problem of water shortages but no one will bite the bullet.
Metering and increased charges would encourage users to use more carefully and consider rainwater harvesting but would create outrage against Ofwat and their masters HMG so it isn't going to happen.

 

[WilliamUK]

Ofwat are the ones with the supposed power. Every five years they negotiate with the water companies to decide priorities and fix charges. Water companies present them with a plan of how much they want to spend on capital projects and say how much it is going to cost and what the water charges to customers would have to be to cover it. Ofwat say 'no, you can't raise charges by that much' and knock out some of the capital spend. Companies respond by saying 'if we don't spend that money, we can't meet our statutory requirements'. Eventually a compromise is reached between spend and charges. You can't force companies to spend money they don't have! Water companies make reasonable profits but not excessive (I know, I'm a shareholder in some of 'em). Everyone agrees that a (relatively) leak free distribution system would solve the problem of water shortages but no one will bite the bullet.
Metering and increased charges would encourage users to use more carefully and consider rainwater harvesting but would create outrage against Ofwat and their masters HMG so it isn't going to happen.

Strange that HMG are more than happy to take a firm, unmoving stance in the face of union action, but they are not so firm with requiring water companies to meet their statutory requirements... or with perhaps INCREASING the statutory requirements.

Then there's the little thing called "cross party support".

I'd type more on that point but I find the entire political system to be awfully depressing (being a libertarian I generally want them to bugger off and leave me alone - hopefully leaving the free market alone in the process) and I'm teetering on the edge of going from "in a pretty chirpy mood" to p*****g and moaning about politicians.

 

[Greenheart]

Everyone agrees that a (relatively) leak free distribution system would solve the problem of water shortages but no one will bite the bullet.

Metering and increased charges would encourage users to use more carefully and consider rainwater harvesting but would create outrage against Ofwat and their masters HMG so it isn't going to happen.

That must be one of the saddest occasions in the history of Democracy - everyone knows exactly what must be done, but no-one is obliged or inclined to be first.

If it was simple as deciding to dam the Arun don't you think we would have done it by now?

Rainwater harvesting and grey water recycling are both good solutions to reducing domestic demand but the current cost of water doesn't justify the capital required in most cases.

So, in spite of oblivious, unstinting use of water as the sources dry up, water's cost isn't permitted to reflect the situation.

However unwelcome (and loony and totally spontaneous) my Arun-damming idea was, surely its percieved unreasonableness stems from our near-total lack of concern on this topic, relative to worries about nature conservancy, land values, etc.

As elsewhere, I suspect we'll stay calm and insist on low prices, right up till the day the taps don't give us what we've paid for.

I don't think I ever had less respect for HMG, regardless of right/left sides, than right now. They've not enough nerve to tell us frankly what we eventually must accept, and they haven't enough subtlety to ease us into an accepting mood.

 

[WilliamUK]

So, in spite of oblivious, unstinting use of water as the sources dry up, water's cost isn't permitted to reflect the situation.

Price should always reflect cost of production, scarcity and demand.
When someone or something prevents price reflecting demand and scarcity, as happens when water prices are held low, it prevents market forces from resolving the situation.

Let's assume the water companies actually want to solve their part of the problem and that they weren't prevented from setting water prices to reflect the cost of the needed work.

Repair work begins and prices increase.
People are outraged at price rises.
Those who feel hard done by can begin metering to keep costs lower. Costs for non-metered users will rise to compensate.
All users will see price rises over time.
Usage restrictions will continue to be implemented as needed.
If ever all the major works are completed the price will continue to rise based on demand and scarcity as stocks dwindle in areas of insufficient rainfall to support the demand of the population of an area.
All users will either put up and shut up, move to a cheaper area or begin domestic collection and efficent use.

In this free-market situation nobody can vote in or out a government based upon price rises as it's got nothing to do with the government and everything to do with the natural change in prices to reflect cost of production, scarcity and demand.

It's only when government gets involved and tries to prevent things taking their natural course that stuff gets messy.

That this is even a topic of conversation shows exactly how much of a choke-hold the government holds us in. That even something as simple as supply and demand doesn't happen on something as basic, obvious and straightforward as this.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Hence: "start".
Then go on with the process by requiring it for certain classes of extension, renovation and conversion.

Proper insulation in loft conversions is expensive stuff, but it doesn't stop that being required in all work done to regs. That was all about energy conservation, I see no huge difference with water conservation.

Either way though, there's absolutely no excuse for building new housing based upon the prevailing model where 90% of drinking water is wasted and enough water to supply between 50% and 100% of a house's non-potable use is dumped off the roof into the sewers... no matter how few are built.

Conversion to parallel systems at grid or at domestic level is probably inevitable... or we can destroy habitat as a stop-gap... or just pretend it's not happening.

Just to put the record straight, water saving features are required on new builds right now. I have just bought a brand new house, and our water usage is much less than it was. Simple things like toilets with efficient flushes, showers with low water usage and so on (as well as reasonably efficient water using appliances) mean that we use a LOT less water than the water company's initial estimate. I have a 220 litre water-butt in the garden, so hopefully I will last through most periods of low rainfall.

And it is worth noting that part of the unseen engineering of the development includes a major system to remove surface water. I live in the driest part of the UK (we get less rain in East Anglia than some parts of the Sahara!), but as usual, the UK has weather, not climate, so that sort of system is essential. The outflow from that goes straight into a field drain, where it is then available for use by farmers.

 

[Greenheart]

...that this is even a topic of conversation shows exactly how much of a choke-hold the government holds us in. That even something as simple as supply and demand doesn't happen on something as basic, obvious and straightforward as this.

Don't stop, William: I'm in agreement, but in my naivity, I don't know what needs doing or saying, to induce free-market recovery of the water system.

 

[jordanbasset]

The trouble is there is no free market of water supply because they are local monopolies. We cannot go elsewhere to get our water (except bottled drinking water) so there have to be controls over the water companies. Understandably water companies have a duty to their share holders to provide a profit, there appears to be no equivalent duty for them to supply an uninterrupted supply of water (including hosepipes) to their customers.
The regulator needs to be tougher, it is beyond the pale that companies are failing to achieve even the modest reduction in leaks that are set for them whilst rewarding themselves big bonus'.

 

[DJE]

I have a 220 litre water-butt in the garden, so hopefully I will last through most periods of low rainfall.

Don't bet on it! I have a total of 800 litres of water butts and SWMBO can easily empty them in one week of summer watering.

 

[WilliamUK]

Don't stop, William: I'm in agreement, but in my naivity, I don't know what needs doing or saying, to induce free-market recovery of the water system.

I'm not sure I see any real prospect of that in the UK outside a revolution.
The three main parties are too similar, too statist and too entrenched. Even the big-bad-tories make me feel ill they are so big-government.
If I ever get to see something vaguely approaching a libertarian-leaning state in this country, I expect I'll be very, very old.

Just to put the record straight, water saving features are required on new builds right now. I have just bought a brand new house, and our water usage is much less than it was. Simple things like toilets with efficient flushes, showers with low water usage and so on (as well as reasonably efficient water using appliances) mean that we use a LOT less water than the water company's initial estimate. I have a 220 litre water-butt in the garden, so hopefully I will last through most periods of low rainfall.

And it is worth noting that part of the unseen engineering of the development includes a major system to remove surface water. I live in the driest part of the UK (we get less rain in East Anglia than some parts of the Sahara!), but as usual, the UK has weather, not climate, so that sort of system is essential. The outflow from that goes straight into a field drain, where it is then available for use by farmers.

Water saving is a great start. The trouble is it's still using drinking water for things that don't need it. Even if you knocked the earlier mentioned 150 litres per person per day down to 100 litres, that's still about 90% of potable water that didn't need to be potable. A very big improvement on 93% to 94%, but still a long way from ideal.


I think the dry-area volume of rainfall on a roof I figured out earlier in the thread was based on East Anglia. Very, very dry. So much so I feel odd when I'm down there in the winter or spring and see no rain for weeks. Once I was down there (well, not East Anglia, actually West Sussex and Kent) for a couple of months and saw it rain properly (in northerner terms) about 4 or 5 times. This was in Feb, March and April IIRC.

I got back up north to about a week solid of the stuff. I actually felt happier to see it raining than I was to see so much sun down there at that time of year. Shockingly dry!

 

[Greenheart]

Pouring with rain here too, today. No hosepipes this season, then...

The regulator needs to be tougher, it is beyond the pale that companies are failing to achieve even the modest reduction in leaks that are set for them whilst rewarding themselves big bonus'.

And so...(I'm still looking for the villain of the piece, or at least, a productive target to aim unarguable abuse at)...

...it is presumably OFWAT which needs to be more hard-nosed here, and needs to be given the right (by HMG) to insist on the popularly-approved, longterm-beneficial use of funds, however unpopular the actual near-term cost with consumers?

Umm...how do I (dare I say we?) get heard, on this topic?

 

[WilliamUK]

The trouble is there is no free market of water supply because they are local monopolies. We cannot go elsewhere to get our water (except bottled drinking water) so there have to be controls over the water companies. Understandably water companies have a duty to their share holders to provide a profit, there appears to be no equivalent duty for them to supply an uninterrupted supply of water (including hosepipes) to their customers.
The regulator needs to be tougher, it is beyond the pale that companies are failing to achieve even the modest reduction in leaks that are set for them whilst rewarding themselves big bonus'.

Good post. The lack of free market should is why there should be an obligation for the water companies to get things straight and the regulator shouldn't hold prices artificially low to match. Perhaps they could limit the profit margins, but they shouldn't be standing in the way of necessary price rises that actually reflect cost of production, scarcity and demand.

That's as close as we could get to a free market solution in the current monopoly system.

 

[WilliamUK]

Umm...how do I (dare I say we?) get heard, on this topic?

Organising a long-term, relentless letter writing campaign... and not holding your breath or you'll expire.

MPs, OFWAT, papers, TV and so on.

Take the campaign against hunting foxes with hounds as a model and run with it... obviously the saboteur element of that model wouldn't apply all that well unless you want to start fixing leaks guerilla style.
What's the opposite of sabotage?

 

[Greenheart]

What's the opposite of sabotage?

Nice idea...cue music...

...if you can find 'em...if you can afford 'em...maybe your region can have its leaks fixed by......The W-Team...

Presumably a letter/email writing campaign won't last long, because how long will it be before shortages bring the issue to PMQ?

Is any party or MP currently making the case we've more-or-less pinned down, here?

 

[jordanbasset]

Good post. The lack of free market should is why there should be an obligation for the water companies to get things straight and the regulator shouldn't hold prices artificially low to match. Perhaps they could limit the profit margins, but they shouldn't be standing in the way of necessary price rises that actually reflect cost of production, scarcity and demand.

That's as close as we could get to a free market solution in the current monopoly system.

Yes, agree. Think the profit margin should be low as there is no risk, they have a captive audience and a product people are always going to want with no other competitors. Returns should be on a par with Government bonds. Also few if any bonus', as we are not talking about entrepreneurs here. In return a price should be allowed to be charged for the water which will enable investment in replacing pipes and other long term infrastructure improvements.

 

[pappaecho]

Take heart from 1976.
Following the drought orders in 1976, they appointed a Minister of Rain.

It then rained for the next 8 years

 

[ghostlymoron]

Organising a long-term, relentless letter writing campaign... and not holding your breath or you'll expire.

MPs, OFWAT, papers, TV and so on.

Take the campaign against hunting foxes with hounds as a model and run with it... obviously the saboteur element of that model wouldn't apply all that well unless you want to start fixing leaks guerilla style.
What's the opposite of sabotage?

As I said earlier, most leaks aren't visible from the surface so you wouldn't know where to look and fix.

 

[mickywillis]

What p*ss*es me off is the fact that many water treatment facilities and reservoirs have been sold off to make way for new housing developments. This is a double edged sword as less reservoirs and more people living in these new homes equals less storage facilities and even greater demand. There are at least 3 facilities near me which have been turned into housing developments. Water Co's really haven't learnt anything about water storage/treatment even after the droughts in 1976!!

 

[gull1066]

Light rain for 3 months solid, apparently.

 

[Norman_E]

Light rain for 3 months solid, apparently.

Rain like we have had today for about the next three days then!

 

[Greenheart]

Insane weather, lately! And insane water-infrastructure. It now looks like we can expect easily enough rain and floodwater to ruin our summer, but not nearly enough to benefit the drought situation.

Rainwater was flooding 4" deep down the gutters of our steep road last night, for several hours. Presumably storm-water is too much and arrives too suddenly to be usefully captured and stored? Just allowed to channel into the nearest river and out to sea...