Drought....Hosepipe Ban.... next they'll be calling for Water meters

my3cents

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

If water charges had gone ahead we would still have these issues. A few dry weeks and the wettest country in the world is having issues with water that tells you how incompetent our government is.

Incompetent and corrupt - which is why meters were put in before leaks were fixed. The charge was set up to extract money from people and filter it to all the boys in the golden circle, like Hubert Kearns who bankrupted Sligo, got a 6 figure golden handshake, and a big fat pension, and then ON TOP of that, was given a seat on the board of Irish Water. When that man was in charge of Sligo there were stories in the paper saying the streetlights might have to be turned off as the council couldn't pay the ESB.

If you think the hosepipe ban is because people didn't pay water charges, you are a reactionary moron.

People were fed up giving money to incompetent and corrupt organizations and getting nothing for it or having it be wasted. They were done with being robbed and we already pay for water. obviously, it was not free, ever. you don't get anything free in this country, but people think water has been free all these years?

if the water charge would have gone ahead, this drought would still have happened and the ban would still be in place.

and guess what else? they would use it as an excuse to raise the charge for next year. guaranteed. just like they want to use it as an excuse to bring it back in but are too afraid to.

once the bin charges came in they rose drastically every year, greenstar even raised twice a year, and irish water would be an even bigger monopoly. you should be thanking those of us that prevented you getting fleeced, not blaming us for a drought that Irish Water wouldn't have been equipped to handle even if the charge had been collected anyway.

While I am in full agreement with you the argument for charges in these dry times is that if you have to pay for what you use then you will make better use of it and not waste it.

In the UK the cost is so high in some areas that people think twice before using water.

GreeBo

gandalf wrote: »

Yep I do believe water charges will come in at some stage. The two mistakes made was not to address the biggest leaks first and to try to introduce the charges at the height of the recession.

When you say "first" do you mean before water charges come in or are you just talking about priority of repairs?

Part of the reason for meters was to determine where the biggest leaks are.

We need billions to fix the leaks, we need meters and charges to get the loans for the billions, so no matter how you look at it, we need people paying for water by consumption and metres before we can do very much to improve things.

GreeBo

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Thanks McGaggs.

Averaged over how long? Where are you getting those numbers from?

I couldn't find any up to date figures - anything I could find only went as far as May. Not missing much - except the 1 bone dry month dry month so obviously that could skew the picture considerably!

For what it's worth, this is total rainfall @ Dublin airport for the months Jan to May for the past 5 years.

2018 - 294.1mm
2017 - 183.9mm (inc. june 270.3mm)
2016 - 349.4mm (inc. june 408mm)
2015 - 273.9mm (inc. june 288mm)
2014 - 368.5mm (inc. june 404.7mm)

There was no crisis in 2017 or 2015 that I can recall and even with no rain whatsoever in June we are ahead of those years. (Obviously you'd have to consider the whole country not just Dublin airport, but that was just the example you gave)

The average doesnt for the yeah wont help since we had very wet weather at the start of the year. You cant bank all that water for the dry times as any excess will bypass storage/treatment and go back into the ground/sea.

You need monthly or weekly comparisons against the norm to determine where we are now.

_Dara_

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

If water charges had gone ahead we would still have these issues. A few dry weeks and the wettest country in the world is having issues with water that tells you how incompetent our government is.

Incompetent and corrupt - which is why meters were put in before leaks were fixed. The charge was set up to extract money from people and filter it to all the boys in the golden circle, like Hubert Kearns who bankrupted Sligo, got a 6 figure golden handshake, and a big fat pension, and then ON TOP of that, was given a seat on the board of Irish Water. When that man was in charge of Sligo there were stories in the paper saying the streetlights might have to be turned off as the council couldn't pay the ESB.

If you think the hosepipe ban is because people didn't pay water charges, you are a reactionary moron.

People were fed up giving money to incompetent and corrupt organizations and getting nothing for it or having it be wasted. They were done with being robbed and we already pay for water. obviously, it was not free, ever. you don't get anything free in this country, but people think water has been free all these years?

if the water charge would have gone ahead, this drought would still have happened and the ban would still be in place.

and guess what else? they would use it as an excuse to raise the charge for next year. guaranteed. just like they want to use it as an excuse to bring it back in but are too afraid to.

once the bin charges came in they rose drastically every year, greenstar even raised twice a year, and irish water would be an even bigger monopoly. you should be thanking those of us that prevented you getting fleeced, not blaming us for a drought that Irish Water wouldn't have been equipped to handle even if the charge had been collected anyway.

Ireland is nowhere close to being the wettest country in the world. It’s not even the wettest country in Europe.

monkeybutter

GreeBo wrote: »

The average doesnt for the yeah wont help since we had very wet weather at the start of the year. You cant bank all that water for the dry times as any excess will bypass storage/treatment and go back into the ground/sea.

You need monthly or weekly comparisons against the norm to determine where we are now.

But thats exactly what happens, how much water is left in reserve in Dublin.

A woman was on the news from irish water, and this happens most years, saying they had 150 days of water left and really wanted 200

Now I can't find those figures anywhere, but it ties in with other years

So theres plenty of water in the resvevoirs

The problem is leakage, Dublin is at near capacity in usage because of it, giving no room for maneuver when usage goes up

This is the same reason a few days of snow also results in restrictions.

I reckon it will rain in the next 150 days somehow.

James Brown

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have you any figures to back up your claim the “general public” called enough???

I didn't count the tens of thousands out marching and protesting, but I personally knew a lot of people who took part and to suggest any of them, or the lions share of protesters were PBP/Paul Murphy supporters just isn't accurate. The polls would testify to that. It makes great spin for a FG/Lab government at odds with the public mind. In fact I personally know a number of Fine Gael supporters who protested.

James Brown

my3cents wrote: »

Three days of decent rain and we'll all be moaning for the good old days of the drought again.

Floods more like.

GreeBo

monkeybutter wrote: »

But thats exactly what happens, how much water is left in reserve in Dublin.

A woman was on the news from irish water, and this happens most years, saying they had 150 days of water left and really wanted 200

Now I can't find those figures anywhere, but it ties in with other years

So theres plenty of water in the resvevoirs

The problem is leakage, Dublin is at near capacity in usage because of it, giving no room for maneuver when usage goes up

This is the same reason a few days of snow also results in restrictions.

I reckon it will rain in the next 150 days somehow.

Thats not how it happens.
If you have a 1ML reservoir and expect 1ML to normally fall every month then you cant expect it to all magically work if you get no rain for 2 Months and then 300ML in the third month!

If the problem was leakage then the weather would be irrelevant!

IW are worried about the upcoming, typically driest months (August & September) rather than right now.
There is loads of water for right now, but typically we rely on "right now" to be adding capacity, not removing it.

Snow leads to restrictions because you cant drink snow.
Melted snow (i.e. water) can be treated, so freezing temperatures and snow dont increase supplies, they decrease them.

Water table is ~900MM lower than expected at this time of year, I dont fancy 900MM over 3 days, but maybe you know more about this than the rest of us....

sbsquarepants

GreeBo wrote: »

The average doesnt for the yeah wont help since we had very wet weather at the start of the year. You cant bank all that water for the dry times as any excess will bypass storage/treatment and go back into the ground/sea.

You need monthly or weekly comparisons against the norm to determine where we are now.

Do you have these comparisons?

Anecdotally I drove past blessington lakes the other day - they looked much like they do any other day. The liffey runs behind my house, it hasn't slowed to a trickle or anything!

There's plenty of water in the system - there's a shortage of capacity in the treatment of it, because for every litre we clean and process we effectively spill 500ml down the drain.

That is the problem - not the weather, the weather is a god damn blessing.

This is not Ethiopia, the rain will be back soon enough. For the time being, good riddance to it!

monkeybutter

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats not how it happens.
If you have a 1ML reservoir and expect 1ML to normally fall every month then you cant expect it to all magically work if you get no rain for 2 Months and then 300ML in the third month!

If the problem was leakage then the weather would be irrelevant!

IW are worried about the upcoming, typically driest months (August & September) rather than right now.
There is loads of water for right now, but typically we rely on "right now" to be adding capacity, not removing it.

Snow leads to restrictions because you cant drink snow.
Melted snow (i.e. water) can be treated, so freezing temperatures and snow dont increase supplies, they decrease them.

Water table is ~900MM lower than expected at this time of year, I dont fancy 900MM over 3 days, but maybe you know more about this than the rest of us....

that is how it works

the problem is leakage, not supply of water

look at what Irish water say, They produce an amount and the usage is above it

not they have no water

its the same with snow, you think they empty the reservoirs in 5 days of snow, after a winter of rain

Usage has gone up, this is down to the weather.

They don't plan for water to run out in 1 week

They are running the supply of clean water to close to its usage, with 50% or so of it leaking out, that's the problem

I was out walking round some of our fields a few days ago. The ground is like a rock.

When it does rain again, Id say the countryside will absorb a serious amount of water before it really starts to flow into the rivers and lakes in volume.

my3cents

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

I was out walking round some of our fields a few days ago. The ground is like a rock.

When it does rain again, Id say the countryside will absorb a serious amount of water before it really starts to flow into the rivers and lakes in volume.

I'd be worried that if we didn't get a few days of "soft" weather before we get a deluge then there will be a lot of soil washed away.

Roger Hassenforder

my3cents wrote: »

I'd be worried that if we didn't get a few days of "soft" weather before we get a deluge then there will be a lot of soil washed away.

Might be getting both this weekend

ht9zni1gs28crp

Ive just come to an end of 7500litres of Rainwater in my harvesting tank. Thats used only for flushing toilets. Nothing else. I reckon ive 200litres left if that....any moment now it will switch over to mains supply.

Thats two adults and one child household.

If you could only see the sheer amount used it would give you a better longsighted vision as to the amounts of water ONE household waste, and subsequently the value of water.

If only the system or a system could be clarified correctly then Im sure most wouldnt hesitate to monitor their water usage/water wasting. IW has politically run itself into the ground. In principle it should work, but actual delivery in this country is a joke.

What Im trying to say I suppose, if people could actually see the reality of the amount of water one household uses then conservation would play a bigger part at the end of the process where it matters.

Fingers crossed for a day of rain at least, if not im onto the 'if its yellow let it mellow' mantra for that bit longer....

ifElseThen

Toyota Long Mile washing their pristine cars on the lot yest with a powerhose. Irish Water say that's ok as it's critical to their livelihood.

monkeybutter

Judah Stocky Fibula wrote: »

Ive just come to an end of 7500litres of Rainwater in my harvesting tank. Thats used only for flushing toilets. Nothing else. I reckon ive 200litres left if that....any moment now it will switch over to mains supply.

Thats two adults and one child household.

If you could only see the sheer amount used it would give you a better longsighted vision as to the amounts of water ONE household waste, and subsequently the value of water.

If only the system or a system could be clarified correctly then Im sure most wouldnt hesitate to monitor their water usage/water wasting. IW has politically run itself into the ground. In principle it should work, but actual delivery in this country is a joke.

What Im trying to say I suppose, if people could actually see the reality of the amount of water one household uses then conservation would play a bigger part at the end of the process where it matters.

Fingers crossed for a day of rain at least, if not im onto the 'if its yellow let it mellow' mantra for that bit longer....

It's not wasted though, its all part of a cycle, it falls as rain, there's no real shortage of that, you have invested money in holding onto it, probably in a big auld plastic tank which will end up as landfill some day

Collectively we have done the same

Why conserve when over half the water is pissing away into the ground, and that's a fairly conservative half, probably way higher

sbsquarepants

Judah Stocky Fibula wrote: »

Ive just come to an end of 7500litres of Rainwater in my harvesting tank. Thats used only for flushing toilets. Nothing else. I reckon ive 200litres left if that....any moment now it will switch over to mains supply.



Fingers crossed for a day of rain at least, if not im onto the 'if its yellow let it mellow' mantra for that bit longer....

Your intentions are no doubt noble, but the difference they've made is less than negligible.

In the time it took you to type that post, maybe 4 or 5 of those tanks have just emptied into the ground.

Until that problem is addressed everything else, EVERYTHING ELSE, is absolute wankology.

sbsquarepants

ifElseThen wrote: »

Toyota Long Mile washing their pristine cars on the lot yest with a powerhose. Irish Water say that's ok as it's critical to their livelihood.

I drive in past naas golf course every morning, sprinklers on watering the greens.....nothing to see here folks!

The J Stands for Jay

Judah Stocky Fibula wrote: »

Ive just come to an end of 7500litres of Rainwater in my harvesting tank. Thats used only for flushing toilets. Nothing else. I reckon ive 200litres left if that....any moment now it will switch over to mains supply.

Thats two adults and one child household.

If you could only see the sheer amount used it would give you a better longsighted vision as to the amounts of water ONE household waste, and subsequently the value of water.

If only the system or a system could be clarified correctly then Im sure most wouldnt hesitate to monitor their water usage/water wasting. IW has politically run itself into the ground. In principle it should work, but actual delivery in this country is a joke.

What Im trying to say I suppose, if people could actually see the reality of the amount of water one household uses then conservation would play a bigger part at the end of the process where it matters.

Fingers crossed for a day of rain at least, if not im onto the 'if its yellow let it mellow' mantra for that bit longer....

Fair play to you for doing that. I'd be interested in getting my house set up to use rainwater to flush the toilets, but I think it would be a massive undertaking in a semi-detached for little financial benefit.

ht9zni1gs28crp

monkeybutter wrote: »

It's not wasted though, its all part of a cycle, it falls as rain, there's no real shortage of that, you have invested money in holding onto it, probably in a big auld plastic tank which will end up as landfill some day
Collectively we have done the same
Why conserve when over half the water is pissing away into the ground, and that's a fairly conservative half, probably way higher

That’s some attitude to have! Its wasted water if you’re using TREATED Potable water to flush waste. It’s very short sighted and uninformed of you to see all water usage as rainfall cycle and what comes out of your tap.
‘Probably’ is an assumption and in the context of your response post is based on begrudgery , not that I have to prove to you but it’s a purpose made concrete tank and system for rainwater harvesting.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Your intentions are no doubt noble, but the difference they've made is less than negligible.
In the time it took you to type that post, maybe 4 or 5 of those tanks have just emptied into the ground.
Until that problem is addressed everything else, EVERYTHING ELSE, is absolute wankology.

Same attitude as monkeybutter above, ah shure let someone else sort it all out. Now that’s ‘wankology’ as you eloquently put it. If today’s pressure of water demand was halved then leaks and upgrading an ageing system wouldn’t play as hard in everyones minds given the likely disruption and costs of infrastructure.

McGaggs wrote: »

Fair play to you for doing that. I'd be interested in getting my house set up to use rainwater to flush the toilets, but I think it would be a massive undertaking in a semi-detached for little financial benefit.

True for a retrofit I guess, although not as massive as you might think. I had mine installed at time of building, so works and costs were absorbed and not noticed really.

sbsquarepants

Judah Stocky Fibula wrote: »

Same attitude as monkeybutter above, ah shure let someone else sort it all out. Now that’s ‘wankology’ as you eloquently put it. If today’s pressure of water demand was halved then leaks and upgrading an ageing system wouldn’t play as hard in everyones minds given the likely disruption and costs of infrastructure.

.

Yea that makes perfect sense - if everyone could just stop using the water then we wouldn't have to bother fixing the leaks!

We leak in the region of 250m litres of treated water into the ground every day. 2,900L per second. If you are amazed at how quickly the 7,500 litres disappears, I assume it didn't disappear in 2 and a half seconds - now that would be amazing.

So yea, by all means congratulations for saving that tank of water, it's just a pity that Irish Water didn't return the favour. Instead by the time that 1 tank was used up Irish Water pissed 1.1 million of them away down the drain. It may well have made the owner feel good, but that is all it done, any positives that may have come from the endeavour was just negated by 2 and half seconds worth of leaks. That's perspective.

Any plan to fix this problem which doesn't FIRST address the enormous holes in the pipes is a very stupid plan indeed.

seagull

It's not the fault of Irish water that the leaks are so bad. It's due to serial underinvestment in the water supply infrastructure over decades. It's one thing to go digging up and fixing the pipes in a rural area. Can you imagine the uproar if they were to dig up the whole of Dublin to replace the old leaky pipes. They have a limited budget, so they can only repair so much.

And before the inevitable assumptions and accusations - No, I have absolutely no association with Irish water.

my3cents

seagull wrote: »

It's not the fault of Irish water that the leaks are so bad. It's due to serial underinvestment in the water supply infrastructure over decades. It's one thing to go digging up and fixing the pipes in a rural area. Can you imagine the uproar if they were to dig up the whole of Dublin to replace the old leaky pipes. They have a limited budget, so they can only repair so much.

And before the inevitable assumptions and accusations - No, I have absolutely no association with Irish water.

But they could afford to pay contractors something like €400 for each meter install they did.

Grayson

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

I was out walking round some of our fields a few days ago. The ground is like a rock.

When it does rain again, Id say the countryside will absorb a serious amount of water before it really starts to flow into the rivers and lakes in volume.

It's the otherway around. The soil can only soak up water so quickly. And if it's really try it actually soaks it up slower. So when rain comes we'll get a feck load of run off and very little absorbed.


On the subject of the OP. I was both for and against water charges. Yeah, I know sitting on the fence but hear me out.
They were brought in during a time of high unemployment when so many were strapped of cash. I always felt that it should be like tax credits. You get X amount for free and get charged for the rest. That way it penalizes those who use it excessively and makes it more affordable for everyone else.
The way it was brought in by capping the max amount was better for a middle class family that might use a lot, but was harsher on a working class family. And since there was a max charge it didn't incentivize anyone to reduce usage.

GreeBo

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Do you have these comparisons?

Anecdotally I drove past blessington lakes the other day - they looked much like they do any other day. The liffey runs behind my house, it hasn't slowed to a trickle or anything!

There's plenty of water in the system - there's a shortage of capacity in the treatment of it, because for every litre we clean and process we effectively spill 500ml down the drain.

That is the problem - not the weather, the weather is a god damn blessing.

This is not Ethiopia, the rain will be back soon enough. For the time being, good riddance to it!

So you don't believe that losses through evaporation are much higher for the last 6 weeks than average?

And you don't think the fact that no rain has fallen has any impact on supply?

Sure why do we need rain at all then, if no rain has no impact on our water supply?

In February of this year IW said
" 40 per cent of the River Liffey’s water is being extracted to supply water to Dublin and that the utility would be in “serious trouble” if there was a drought or prolonged dry period in the capital."

Do you think you understand our water system better than they do?

ectoraige

the_pen_turner wrote: »

completely separate things.
I use the roads directly and indirectly. I am getting what I am paying for.

I don't use the public water . I have no way to. So I pay and receive nothing.

Has nobody ever taken you out to dinner?

the_pen_turner

ectoraige wrote: »

Has nobody ever taken you out to dinner?

resturants are comercial so are paying for water.


a better comparison is have i eaten at someones house who is on the mains

Jennehy

Europe better give us bags of cash now.

sbsquarepants

GreeBo wrote: »

So you don't believe that losses through evaporation are much higher for the last 6 weeks than average??

Of course they have been

GreeBo wrote: »

And you don't think the fact that no rain has fallen has any impact on supply?

Of course it has

GreeBo wrote: »

Sure why do we need rain at all then, if no rain has no impact on our water supply??

Don't be silly now!

GreeBo wrote: »

In February of this year IW said
" 40 per cent of the River Liffey’s water is being extracted to supply water to Dublin and that the utility would be in “serious trouble” if there was a drought or prolonged dry period in the capital

Another way of saying this would be, IW said "currently we take 20% of the River Liffeys water and spill it down a drain"

My point - that you seem to be ignoring, in a fit of righteous pique, is that any positive effect from any and every step taken to conserve water is absolutely destroyed but this scandalous amount of leakage.

You or me or anyone else, even everyone else - saving a litre here or a litre there is meaningless in the face of 3000L per second being pissed away. It's like trying to put out a bonfire by squirting it with a water pistol!

"Every little helps" Just stop and think about it for a second. Do you really think the water pistol is making a blind bit of difference?

GreeBo wrote: »

Do you think you understand our water system better than they do?

I think I understand it better than you do.

Which do you think is the bigger issue - the enormous holes in the pipes letting 50% of the water escape every day, or the once in 50 year weather event?

monkeybutter

GreeBo wrote: »

So you don't believe that losses through evaporation are much higher for the last 6 weeks than average?

And you don't think the fact that no rain has fallen has any impact on supply?

Sure why do we need rain at all then, if no rain has no impact on our water supply?

In February of this year IW said
" 40 per cent of the River Liffey’s water is being extracted to supply water to Dublin and that the utility would be in “serious trouble” if there was a drought or prolonged dry period in the capital."

Do you think you understand our water system better than they do?

What does 40 of the River Liffeys water is being extracted to supply dublins water leads you to your conclusion

Thats stored in the Reservoir

For this very reason

Schemes that don't have a reservoir and feed directly off rivers are up **** creek

Hard to get an exact answer but there could be 100 billion liters of water in the reservoir, that's more than a years worth of water, plus vartry

its 20square kms

GreeBo

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Another way of saying this would be, IW said "currently we take 20% of the River Liffeys water and spill it down a drain"

My point - that you seem to be ignoring, in a fit of righteous pique, is that any positive effect from any and every step taken to conserve water is absolutely destroyed but this scandalous amount of leakage.

I think I understand it better than you do.

Which do you think is the bigger issue - the enormous holes in the pipes letting 50% of the water escape every day, or the once in 50 year weather event?

I'm not at all disagreeing that we should ignore the water that is lost...but we have been losing that water for years, its not whats causing the shortage, its the weather.
You seem to be ignoring the weather (sure its just a bit of Sun) when that's the factor that has changed and caused the issue.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You or me or anyone else, even everyone else - saving a litre here or a litre there is meaningless in the face of 3000L per second being pissed away. It's like trying to put out a bonfire by squirting it with a water pistol!

"Every little helps" Just stop and think about it for a second. Do you really think the water pistol is making a blind bit of difference?

So 2 million+ people saving hundreds of litres per day has no impact?

259,000,000 L/day through leaks
225,000,000 L/day by adults saving half of their usage (3.5M adults & 47,000L yearly allowance based on IW figures)

We can save 259,000,000L/day by spending Billions, or we can save 225,000,000L/day by people using less water for personal use.

But hey, you keep shouting about the leaks!;)

GreeBo

monkeybutter wrote: »

What does 40 of the River Liffeys water is being extracted to supply dublins water leads you to your conclusion

Thats stored in the Reservoir

For this very reason

Schemes that don't have a reservoir and feed directly off rivers are up **** creek

Hard to get an exact answer but there could be 100 billion liters of water in the reservoir, that's more than a years worth of water, plus vartry

its 20square kms

Quick go tell Irish Water, they clearly don't know as much as you do about this whole water thing.

Seriously, why do you think they were worried about a drought back in February if we have enough water sitting around?

SuperS54

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not at all disagreeing that we should ignore the water that is lost...but we have been losing that water for years, its not whats causing the shortage, its the weather.
You seem to be ignoring the weather (sure its just a bit of Sun) when that's the factor that has changed and caused the issue.



So 2 million+ people saving hundreds of litres per day has no impact?

259,000,000 L/day through leaks
225,000,000 L/day by adults saving half of their usage (3.5M adults & 47,000L yearly allowance based on IW figures)

We can save 259,000,000L/day by spending Billions, or we can save 225,000,000L/day by people using less water for personal use.

But hey, you keep shouting about the leaks!;)

Yeah! If everyone stopped using water completely we could save 450,000,000L/day! Think about it! Stop using water and even if the leaks double or triple or quadruple we'll all be grand!!

What a nonsensical concept. The fact that leaks account for more than half of an adults daily usage is completely insane.

whisky_galore

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I drive in past naas golf course every morning, sprinklers on watering the greens.....nothing to see here folks!

A business. They pay for it and have paid for it for years.

No green grass, no business. No one wants to play on dust.

Billgirlylegs

_Dara_ wrote: »

Ireland is nowhere close to being the wettest country in the world. It’s not even the wettest country in Europe.

I think you missed his point

my3cents

SuperS54 wrote: »

Yeah! If everyone stopped using water completely we could save 450,000,000L/day! Think about it! Stop using water and even if the leaks double or triple or quadruple we'll all be grand!!

What a nonsensical concept. The fact that leaks account for more than half of an adults daily usage is completely insane.

Or if we all stopped using water we'd still be using close to 259,000,000L/day :mad:

_Dara_

Billgirlylegs wrote: »

I think you missed his point

Nope, I got it. Standard boilerplate ranting. And saying Ireland is the wettest country in the world was an early signifier that a rant was imminent.

Billgirlylegs

GreeBo wrote: »

When you say "first" do you mean before water charges come in or are you just talking about priority of repairs?

Part of the reason for meters was to determine where the biggest leaks are.

We need billions to fix the leaks, we need meters and charges to get the loans for the billions, so no matter how you look at it, we need people paying for water by consumption and metres before we can do very much to improve things.

How does putting a meter outside someone’s door indicate where there is major leak? Is it a big meter at major junctions in pipework that gives a reading on flow through district pipes.

These meters seem to be flicking magic cos they seem to be able to identify where there are leaks further back in the pipe.
Hos about the IW people go look for damp patches on roads and pavements in this “drought” and root around to see what,s causing it?
I can give them a pointer, there’s one on Donnycarney Road, and anther on Oscar Traynor ( opposite the junction for Aldi). They are both North East Dublin City.

Elmer Blooker

Am I getting this right? There's no money available to fix leaking pipes but €540m was made available to install water meters?

we need people paying for water by consumption.

Large families? I don't know how children are going to pay?

partyguinness

Living in England now and pay for water with a meter.. About £360.00 per year for a family of 4.


I have no problem with it and it certainly focuses the mind when it comes to wastage.

Jennehy

I refuse to use a toilet that contains unflushed faeces. We are not living in a third world country.

NinetyTwoTeam

my3cents wrote: »

While I am in full agreement with you the argument for charges in these dry times is that if you have to pay for what you use then you will make better use of it and not waste it.

In the UK the cost is so high in some areas that people think twice before using water.

the leaks are where the water is being wasted, most people are just using water (which has never been free) for their normal day to day needs like washing/drinking.

the cost is so high in the UK because it's being used as a cash cow for private companies. all they will do is rob you and raise the price at every turn just like the ESB and the bin companies. why the hell would you want that here? let me guess, you're a middle class taxpayer and think there's too many scroungers getting stuff for free off your back?

Daisy78

theyoungchap wrote: »

Because people aren't drinking water from lakes or rivers. There is a vital process in the middle called "treatment" which makes it drinkable. That is where the capacity is being exceeded, hence the hose pipe ban.

Nobody is saying that The Shannon or some lake in Clare is running out of water.

I cannot for the life of me understand why people don't get this. If I hear the "but it rains all year round in this country what do we need a hosepipe ban for" il tear my hair out. There is a whole infrastructural system, which is currently at breaking point, needed to store, treat and distribute the water between the point of abstraction to your tap. But by all means take your drinking water directly from the lake if that's what you want.

GreeBo

SuperS54 wrote: »

Yeah! If everyone stopped using water completely we could save 450,000,000L/day! Think about it! Stop using water and even if the leaks double or triple or quadruple we'll all be grand!!

What a nonsensical concept. The fact that leaks account for more than half of an adults daily usage is completely insane.

Again, for the billionth time, no one is arguing that we need to fix the leaks, but there is the slight problem of tens of BILLIONS of Euro required to do that. There is also the fact should we find this money tomorrow, the leaks are not going to be fixed over night or even in a year.

You can keep jumping up and down and shouting, but nothing, NOTHING will change the fact that the cheapest and fastest way out of this crisis is if people simply use less water. If you use 1L less it saves 2L due to the leaks, so you wouldnt even need to half your consumption, 25% will do.

Billgirlylegs wrote: »

How does putting a meter outside someone’s door indicate where there is major leak? Is it a big meter at major junctions in pipework that gives a reading on flow through district pipes.

These meters seem to be flicking magic cos they seem to be able to identify where there are leaks further back in the pipe.
Hos about the IW people go look for damp patches on roads and pavements in this “drought” and root around to see what,s causing it?
I can give them a pointer, there’s one on Donnycarney Road, and anther on Oscar Traynor ( opposite the junction for Aldi). They are both North East Dublin City.

You need metres along the major arteries AND at the endpoints, otherwise you dont know where the leak is. Sure you can narrow it down, but then what? Dig up all the pipework downstream of the last IW meter?

Meters at the point of consumption and meters along the IW network are what is required. They already have the meters on their side, they need them at the consumption end to determine exactly where the leak is.

I assume you have reported this leak?
https://www.water.ie/support/report-a-leak/

Jennehy

Can they not put radweld into the treatment plant to fix the leaks.

RandomName2

GreeBo wrote: »

Again, for the billionth time, no one is arguing that we need to fix the leaks, but there is the slight problem of tens of BILLIONS of Euro required to do that.

That seems a slightly excessive number.

GreeBo wrote: »

You can keep jumping up and down and shouting, but nothing, NOTHING will change the fact that the cheapest and fastest way out of this crisis is if people simply use less water. If you use 1L less it saves 2L due to the leaks, so you wouldnt even need to half your consumption, 25% will do.

How would most people save 25% of their water usage? Shower less? Drink less?

GreeBo

RandomName2 wrote: »

That seems a slightly excessive number.

https://www.water.ie/docs/Irish-Water-Business-Plan.pdf
Page 5
Investing €5.5bn to bring our water infrastructure and services to an acceptable level

I've rarely seen a project of that magnitude, with so many unknowns come in on budget. But even if it did, I think ignoring the 5.5 Billion price tag kinda makes any argument pointless.

RandomName2 wrote: »

How would most people save 25% of their water usage? Shower less? Drink less?

Well the IW consumption estimation for the purposes of free allowance is 130L per person per day.
Do you really need 130L of water every day of the year?

An average power shower uses 20l/min so if you knock 5 mins off your shower you will save 100L.
I'm pretty sure people drinking water are not the problem, unless you happen to be an elephant or of the bovine persuasion?

dense

We already have a very low household consumption rate compared to countries which do use domestic meters.


But the hosepipe ban and night restrictions should really have been discussed and brought in much earlier to demonstrate the apparent serious situation.



Its seems very last minute.


Why not build more reservoirs if fixing leaks cant be done?

RandomName2

GreeBo wrote: »

https://www.water.ie/docs/Irish-Water-Business-Plan.pdf
Page 5
Investing €5.5bn to bring our water infrastructure and services to an acceptable level

I've rarely seen a project of that magnitude, with so many unknowns come in on budget. But even if it did, I think ignoring the 5.5 Billion price tag kinda makes any argument pointless.

Okay, fair enough, but of that €5.5 billion, immediately 0.5 billion is simply on installing meters [p.23]. Actual infrastructural investment is projected by the company to be a mere €1.3 billion [p.25]. That's still a large enough sum, about the same amount as the government sends abroad in terms of foreign aid over a two year period.

Seeing that we spend about a billion a year on defense (mainly military), I'd say we could find means to fork out this sum. This isn't an annual expense! How long do pipes last? 100 years, if done right.

weemcd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpBFOJ3R0M4