Shannon Water not Neded if Dublin Leaks Fixed

Boggles

This "pipeline" seems to be more of a concept than an actual plan.

When the guy from Irish Water in the video was asked about cost, he squirmed and gave the red flag answer "he wouldn't be drawn on it".

Yip this is going straight to the PAC if it gets the go ahead.

flazio

There's already two water lines running from the Shannon to Dublin. The Royal Canal and the Grand Canal.

Wanderer78

Logistical nightmare to try fix all leaks in Dublin, but for pure conservation reasons, makes absolute sense. Not a hope it ll be done though, on a large scale, so the Shannon it is

PhilOssophy

So at what stage do we fess up to the logistical nightmare that it is, when the pipe is nearly gone?

Wanderer78

PhilOssophy wrote:

So at what stage do we fess up to the logistical nightmare that it is, when the pipe is nearly gone?

Who knows, but maybe, we don't tend to do the right thing, when it comes to environmental matters, but the relatively easiest and quickest, we re pretty damn good at this can kicking approach

PhilOssophy

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Who knows, but maybe, we don't tend to do the right thing, when it comes to environmental matters, but the relatively easiest and quickest, we re pretty damn good at this can kicking approach

No votes to be had in fixing pipes I suppose.

careless sherpa

J Mysterio wrote: »

Is that right? I thought it was blocked.
I'm completely 100% against fracking, terrible, awful practice.

So the UK want to frack in NI, and dump nuclear waste there... Brilliant, thanks lads.

Yes they are beginning exploratory drilling again in Belcoo. Will be a phased approach to avoid the bulk of the resistance that stopped them the first time. Or so they hope. They are also recommencing near Blackpool after the earth tremors the last time

Wanderer78

PhilOssophy wrote:

No votes to be had in fixing pipes I suppose.

Yea it gets complicated when the political process is involved, but I'd imagine chasing leaks in the Dublin region would be complex, time consuming, highly disruptive, and damn expensive, taking all of the above into account, it's understandable why the Shannon approach is favoured by some, but it makes little or no sense environmentally

Seth Brundle

flazio wrote: »

There's already two water lines running from the Shannon to Dublin. The Royal Canal and the Grand Canal.

The pressure along the canals may be a little lower than required.
Also I assume that they have NHA and/or SPA status.

PhilOssophy

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Yea it gets complicated when the political process is involved, but I'd imagine chasing leaks in the Dublin region would be complex, time consuming, highly disruptive, and damn expensive, taking all of the above into account, it's understandable why the Shannon approach is favoured by some, but it makes little or no sense environmentally

If the govt did right they'd ring fence a tonne of money for pipe repair and get it done in the next downturn. At the moment, any contractor worth their salt is flat out. It'd provide employment during a downturn as well.

Wanderer78

PhilOssophy wrote:

If the govt did right they'd ring fence a tonne of money for pipe repair and get it done in the next downturn. At the moment, any contractor worth their salt is flat out. It'd provide employment during a downturn as well.

Unfortunately, we live in the age of 'financial fiscal contraction', particularly during downturns, so you may forget about this logical approach, austerity is good, apparently!

BarryD2

PhilOssophy wrote: »

If the govt did right they'd ring fence a tonne of money for pipe repair and get it done in the next downturn. At the moment, any contractor worth their salt is flat out. It'd provide employment during a downturn as well.

If the govt did right they'd introduce a basic metered system for water use like they do practically everywhere else in the western world.

I heard IW's rather pathetic appeal this morning for people to only use what they need.

The ONLY way to approach modest use and conservation is for metering of water and a charge by use. It'll probably take the partial collapse of the greater Dublin water supply though to knock that into peoples heads. No pain no gain I guess.

Wanderer78

BarryD2 wrote:

If the govt did right they'd introduce a basic metered system for water use like they do practically everywhere else in the western world.

I do think metering is critical, but best of luck with this, particularly politically, we ve made an absolute mess of this one

Guy:Incognito

odyssey06 wrote: »

We don't need water charges to do that. Cap the broadband plan budget at €1 billion and take the €2 billion the government were going to waste on it and use it for essential stuff, like the water system.

A once off payment. That'll fix everything. Cool.


Then we can switch off the water so the pipe dont degrade and never need any ongoing maintenance.

odyssey06

BarryD2 wrote: »

If the govt did right they'd introduce a basic metered system for water use like they do practically everywhere else in the western world.
I heard IW's rather pathetic appeal this morning for people to only use what they need.
The ONLY way to approach modest use and conservation is for metering of water and a charge by use. It'll probably take the partial collapse of the greater Dublin water supply though to knock that into peoples heads. No pain no gain I guess.

There's metering for commercial water usage.
Yet car washes continued to operate during last year's drought.

Metered use for domestic users in the UK led to a reduction in use of approx 7-8%. It's not a game changer re: usage.

odyssey06

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

A once off payment. That'll fix everything. Cool. Then we can switch off the water so the pipe dont degrade and never need any ongoing maintenance.

No we use the broadband pipes to run the water, obviously!
This bears as much relation to what I wrote as the strawman you are presenting.

BarryD2

odyssey06 wrote: »

There's metering for commercial water usage.
Yet car washes continued to operate during last year's drought.

Metered use for domestic users in the UK led to a reduction in use of approx 7-8%. It's not a game changer re: usage.

Any reduction in use is better than expansion. It was well reported here a few years ago when metering was first on the agenda, that water usage dropped. The message was getting through to the public that they would need to look at ways of tightening up.

Boggles

Wanderer78 wrote: »

but I'd imagine chasing leaks in the Dublin region would be complex, time consuming, highly disruptive, and damn expensive,

Lolz.

I watched one evening as a company contracted by Irish Water dug out my perfectly working relative new water meter and replaced it with on of theirs, and fúcked my one on the back of a truck with the rubble. That action cost between 900-1000 euro.

I quietly said to myself "this is Ireland".

Wanderer78 wrote: »

taking all of the above into account, it's understandable why the Shannon approach is favoured by some, but it makes little or no sense environmentally

I don't understand it, I can guess why it's favored though.

But forget it is water. Pretend it is crude oil.

'Irish Petroleum' want to build a 170km pipe line for "insert billions here" to pump crude oil to a refinery in Dublin. Cost of running it and maintaining, again anyones guess.

Once there, they make lovely petrol at a fairly substantial cost, then it pumps that petrol around Dublin losing 50% of it on the way forever.

Now imagine the management team went to the CEO with that plan.

Not only would he have them fired, he would have had them sanctioned.

It's fúcking loony tunes time again.

Victor

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Fix the leaks, then fix the consumption (charge for excessive use), then look at where you are at re Shannon, not the opposite order.

1. You can do more than one thing at a time. 2. You need to plan for the future.

flazio wrote: »

There's already two water lines running from the Shannon to Dublin. The Royal Canal and the Grand Canal.

You realise that birds, animals and boat users pee and poo in this water, that is largely stagnant? And that you would have to pump up from the Shannon anyway?

odyssey06 wrote: »

There's metering for commercial water usage.

They even charge them for it!

Yet car washes continued to operate during last year's drought.

Car washes recycle their water.

Boggles

Victor wrote: »

Car washes recycle their water.

Not the 2 I go to, it goes down the drain.

Migaloo

Why don't they pipe water from the Boyne? Only 50KM from the city...all downhill as well!

PhilOssophy

Victor wrote: »

1. You can do more than one thing at a time. 2. You need to plan for the future.

You can, but 1. This is a useless utility who would probably dig up the road to replace the pipes the week after a new surface has been laid and 2. Future planning is always trumped by vote winners.

mikhail

Boggles wrote: »

Once there, they make lovely petrol at a fairly substantial cost, then it pumps that petrol around Dublin losing 50% of it on the way forever.

Oh no! What will happen to the soil with all that petroleum leaking into it? It'll be an environmental catastrophe. And what waste! Do they think crude oil falls from the sky?

Podge_irl

Boggles wrote: »

Lolz.

I watched one evening as a company contracted by Irish Water dug out my perfectly working relative new water meter and replaced it with on of theirs, and fúcked my one on the back of a truck with the rubble. That action cost between 900-1000 euro.

I quietly said to myself "this is Ireland".




I don't understand it, I can guess why it's favored though.

But forget it is water. Pretend it is crude oil.

'Irish Petroleum' want to build a 170km pipe line for "insert billions here" to pump crude oil to a refinery in Dublin. Cost of running it and maintaining, again anyones guess.

Once there, they make lovely petrol at a fairly substantial cost, then it pumps that petrol around Dublin losing 50% of it on the way forever.

Now imagine the management team went to the CEO with that plan.

Not only would he have them fired, he would have had them sanctioned.

It's fúcking loony tunes time again.

Unless the 170km pipeline was quicker and cheaper than fixing the existing, sprawling infrastructure. In which case this is exactly what they would do. And if it was a CEO who was looking to hike up share prices he would care a lot more about the short term then the long term impact of the decision also.

It is not a remotely implausible scenario for a private company to get into.

PhilOssophy

Podge_irl wrote: »

Unless the 170km pipeline was quicker and cheaper than fixing the existing, sprawling infrastructure. In which case this is exactly what they would do. And if it was a CEO who was looking to hike up share prices he would care a lot more about the short term then the long term impact of the decision also.

It is not a remotely implausible scenario for a private company to get into.

The pipes won't get any better though and eventually somebody will have to face up to it.

martingriff

Boggles wrote: »

Not the 2 I go to, it goes down the drain.

And what is under that drain. Could it possible be connected to a tank to recycle the water

Boggles

martingriff wrote: »

And what is under that drain. Could it possible be connected to a tank to recycle the water

No.