On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 16:31:38 +0100, Jeff Layman
wrote:

On 03/08/18 13:11, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 12:29:45 +0100, Jeff Layman
wrote:

On 02/08/18 11:13, Dave Liquorice wrote:

The only thing I can think of is that it reduces the amount of water
in the sewage system. The ban really only affects water use that
wouldn't enter the sewage system under normal conditions.

But, of course, we are paying for it. I am using over 1000l twice a week
to water anything planted less than two years ago, and anything affected
by a couple of 60 ft trees. I don't mind paying for the water I use
(£1.31/ m^3), but I am very annoyed about lining the pockets of the
water company by paying for wastewater treatment (£2.27/m^3) where none
is involved.

What about those times when you add water to the system for them to
have to treat (when it rains) that you didn't buy off them?

That's surface water, which doesn't need treatment.

What, you drink rainwater? ;-)

I though most surface water goes into the same drains as the grey
(particularly in urban areas) and why the *sewage systems* can become
overloaded when there are storms?

But, of course,
anything bottled which is poured down the sink, bog cleaners, etc, does
need treatment and wasn't provided by the water company.

True, and I think can overload their digesters, if in a high enough
concentration.

I have always
assumed that this was taken into account by them when they came up with
the strange figure (IIRC) that 92.5% of water supplied via the mains
finds its way to the sewage works.

Possibly.

Cheers, T i m