 |
|
| UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
| Reply |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why not compulsory water meters?
Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters,
and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? -- Timothy Murphy e-mail (80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Because its more cost effective when the meter is supplying for just one person, but is expensive when their is a family of four and up. Incidently should you get a water meter installed in your house and you come to sell the house prospective buyers will be put off by this as the meter once installed cannot be taken out. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Timothy Murphy" wrote in message ... Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Water meters would focus the mind. In modern well insulated houses (all relevant as the UK is not well insulated to other countries), with two bathrooms etc, many have larger water than energy bills. On the Continent, aerated taps are common, which use far les water than straight through as we tend to have. They also have smaller pipes to ceratin basins, etc, this reduces the waste in a dead-leg hot pipe. In the Benelux countries rain water reclamation is standard in new houses, with large underground water tank in the garden. There many simple measures to reduce water consumption: - Low flush toilets - Aerated taps. - Install "flow regulators" before taps, or in certain pipe lines. Firehose pressures are not required at basins and sinks. - secondary circulation pumps, to ensure hot water is at each pipe with a dead-leg. - timed garden irrigation. - low water usage appliances - no high flow power showers. All simple and can be implemented in most homes. In a new house most of this would add no cost. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ben" wrote in message . uk... Timothy Murphy wrote: Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Because its more cost effective when the meter is supplying for just one person, but is expensive when their is a family of four and up. Incidently should you get a water meter installed in your house and you come to sell the house prospective buyers will be put off by this as the meter once installed cannot be taken out. Put in water waste prevention measures, which doesn't mean you do without in any way, and then it is an attraction. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Timothy Murphy" wrote in message ... Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? How would you meter the amount of leaks in the company pipes, unless you meter the amount leaving the reservoir and deduct that used by the customers.... Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). The problem is not what is used by the domestic consumer, the problem is caused by the non action of 'fat cat' private water companies.... One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. snip As long as the fat cat water company directors and share holders are charged for the water loss cause by leaks - not fixed due to bonus payments and share dividends etc. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). They do not exist, it is a simple fiction designed to limit the use to the high but not infinite level of supply. We have so much water it is unmetered. We have so much water it is acceptable to run garden sprinklers all day long, day after day. And some do. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. Last I heard they also were fitted pre pipework that is the water co's responsibility, so if a leak occurs in that pipe, you pay for it. Unlimitedly. This is why theyre not considered desirable. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. NT |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Timothy Murphy wrote: Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). They do not exist, it is a simple fiction designed to limit the use to the high but not infinite level of supply. We have so much water it is unmetered. We have so much water it is acceptable to run garden sprinklers all day long, day after day. And some do. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. Last I heard they also were fitted pre pipework that is the water co's responsibility, so if a leak occurs in that pipe, you pay for it. Unlimitedly. This is why theyre not considered desirable. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. Water meters should be fitted inside a house, so that any underground leakage is not charged to the customer. The water companies say that from the curtlidge the consumer is responsible for the pipe work. This is garbage. The gas people are responsible for the gas mains up to the maintap, even though it may run 100 metres on your property. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Timothy Murphy
writes Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Well, the water companies would probably find it actually cheaper to fix their leaks (up to 25% IIRC) than fit water meters to every house Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead -- geoff |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Timothy Murphy" wrote in message ... Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? I think they should be. Are water meters inordinately expensive? I don't think so. Ours is very small and neat, it was fitted within twenty minutes from answering the door to leaving. Or do they have some disadvantage? Only the tired old ones people will come out with. Mary -- Timothy Murphy |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Timothy Murphy wrote: Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. I don't know why you say that. We asked for our meter to be fitted. We opted to pay by DD, monthly, on what the company deemed would be our usage for the equipment we had (we pay all our bills like that,through sheer laziness). It was less than we used to pay on the 'normal' system. The first year ended last month, we had a refund of £68 and the monthly payment has been reduced accordingly. Last I heard they also were fitted pre pipework that is the water co's responsibility, No they don't. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. You could say the same thing about electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. Why shouldn't you pay for what you use? Mary |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
"raden" wrote in message ... Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Well, the water companies would probably find it actually cheaper to fix their leaks (up to 25% IIRC) than fit water meters to every house Ours is doing. The loss has been reduced hugely. Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Mary -- geoff |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 12:21:50 GMT, "ben" wrote:
Incidently should you get a water meter installed in your house and you come to sell the house prospective buyers will be put off by this as the meter once installed cannot be taken out. It wasn't a problem when I sold a house with one fitted a few years ago. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Peter Johnson" wrote in message ... On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 12:21:50 GMT, "ben" wrote: Incidently should you get a water meter installed in your house and you come to sell the house prospective buyers will be put off by this as the meter once installed cannot be taken out. It wasn't a problem when I sold a house with one fitted a few years ago. It isn't a problem round here either, judging by the speed the For Sale notices go up and come down. Mary |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter Johnson wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 12:21:50 GMT, "ben" wrote: Incidently should you get a water meter installed in your house and you come to sell the house prospective buyers will be put off by this as the meter once installed cannot be taken out. It wasn't a problem when I sold a house with one fitted a few years ago. Who bought the house, a couple with no children? and did you point out the water meter to the buyers? |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"raden" wrote in message ... In message , Timothy Murphy writes Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Well, the water companies would probably find it actually cheaper to fix their leaks (up to 25% IIRC) than fit water meters to every house Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead Well said Maxie. Well said. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Mary
Fisher writes "raden" wrote in message ... Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Well, the water companies would probably find it actually cheaper to fix their leaks (up to 25% IIRC) than fit water meters to every house Ours is doing. The loss has been reduced hugely. Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run -- geoff |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mary Fisher wrote:
"raden" wrote in message ... Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Well, the water companies would probably find it actually cheaper to fix their leaks (up to 25% IIRC) than fit water meters to every house Ours is doing. The loss has been reduced hugely. Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Sorry Mary but, "No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers" It's a fact of life that the only thing that a (privatised) water company cares for (along with the other utilites) is the high salary levels of their directors and the dividends that they pay to their shareholders - and 'sod the customer' and water leak repairs - just look at their accounts and mains renewal/maintenance costs. Brian G (Yes that is my name) |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mary Fisher wrote:
wrote in message oups.com. Timothy Murphy wrote: Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. I don't know why you say that. Comparing the costs each way of average water consumption maybe? We asked for our meter to be fitted. We opted to pay by DD, monthly, on what the company deemed would be our usage for = the equipment we had (we pay all our bills like that,through sheer laziness).= It was less than we used to pay on the 'normal' system. The first year ended last month, we had a refund of =A368 and the monthly payment has been red= uced accordingly. so what? All it tells us is you use less than average. Thats no surprise. Last I heard they also were fitted pre pipework that is the water co's responsibility, No they don't. ok. The pipework in question is buried in gardens, and the user has no way of knowing its leaking like mad until they get an astronomical bill. With unmetered supplies this real risk doesnt exist. So whereas it is not your problem if youre unmetered, it becomes your problem if on a meter. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. You could say the same thing about electricity, gas, telephone, petrol an= d, well, food. its perfectly obvious one can not say that about any of those. I dont know of any people on unmetered supplies of electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. Maybe you do. Why shouldn't you pay for what you use? I do, we all do. Most of us pay a flat rate based on average use. NT |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Timothy Murphy writes:
Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? They are at the supply end (and at various points in the supply network). A cynic might suggest that water companies would prefer not to have ubiquitous metering at the consumer end because it might draw attention to the amount of water lost through all the leaks that they consider unprofitable to repair. Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. That depends on how much is charged per unit and the threshold beyond which people are prepared to consider changing their usage. If people were charged more for their water in order to regulate their usage, they might expect the money to be spent on the construction of a `national grid' for water rather than diverted into fat cats' pockets, too. [...] Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? I'd quite like a water meter (or, more to the point, for my bill to reflect actual usage), but live in a block of flats with shared riser located inconveniently for meter reading. Can a meter be fitted in such a setup without expensive re-engineering of the supply? The water company web site is unhelpfully vague... -- Mark |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Mary Fisher wrote: wrote in message oups.com. Timothy Murphy wrote: Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. I don't know why you say that. Comparing the costs each way of average water consumption maybe? We asked for our meter to be fitted. We opted to pay by DD, monthly, on what the company deemed would be our usage for the equipment we had (we pay all our bills like that,through sheer laziness). It was less than we used to pay on the 'normal' system. The first year ended last month, we had a refund of £68 and the monthly payment has been reduced accordingly. so what? All it tells us is you use less than average. Thats no surprise. In my experience, of discussing it with other metered users, our experience is far from unique. None of them would go back to the old system. Last I heard they also were fitted pre pipework that is the water co's responsibility, No they don't. ok. The pipework in question is buried in gardens, and the user has no way of knowing its leaking like mad until they get an astronomical bill. With unmetered supplies this real risk doesnt exist. So whereas it is not your problem if youre unmetered, it becomes your problem if on a meter. The meter is fitted in the house. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. You could say the same thing about electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. its perfectly obvious one can not say that about any of those. I dont know of any people on unmetered supplies of electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. Maybe you do. That's exactly what I'm saying. Why shouldn't you pay for what you use? I do, we all do. Most of us pay a flat rate based on average use. But if you were metered perhaps you might be more careful about what you use - as you do (I imagine) with electricity, gas etc. Mary NT |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there Yorkshire water is exemplorary. The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. So what are you doing about it? Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run That says more about your attitude than that of the water companies. They can't turn things round easily - and they can't control users' usage Mary |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Brian G" wrote in message ... No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Sorry Mary but, "No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers" It's a fact of life that the only thing that a (privatised) water company cares for (along with the other utilites) is the high salary levels of their directors and the dividends that they pay to their shareholders - and 'sod the customer' and water leak repairs - just look at their accounts and mains renewal/maintenance costs. Well, in the case of Yorkshire Water at least you're wrong. I do look at the accounts and records. Mary Brian G (Yes that is my name) |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mark Williams wrote:
Timothy Murphy writes: Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? They are at the supply end (and at various points in the supply network). A cynic might suggest that water companies would prefer not to have ubiquitous metering at the consumer end because it might draw attention to the amount of water lost through all the leaks that they consider unprofitable to repair. Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. That depends on how much is charged per unit and the threshold beyond which people are prepared to consider changing their usage. If people were charged more for their water in order to regulate their usage, they might expect the money to be spent on the construction of a `national grid' for water rather than diverted into fat cats' pockets, too. [...] Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? I'd quite like a water meter (or, more to the point, for my bill to reflect actual usage), but live in a block of flats with shared riser located inconveniently for meter reading. Can a meter be fitted in such a setup without expensive re-engineering of the supply? The water company web site is unhelpfully vague... A Water meter can be fitted in any property it sits between the main inlet in your flat and the feed pipe throughtout. Just inform them you wish to have a meter installed and let them do the rest. They will send someone out and install it for free. However if its a council flat then you'd better get in touch with them first, if its private ask your landlord if he/she has any objection. I lived in a House where it was three floors/flats I was paying £179 a year, to a single person thats a lot of money, so I got the meter installed and ended up paying £26 per six months, thats a hell of of a saving. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ben" wrote in message . uk... I'd quite like a water meter (or, more to the point, for my bill to reflect actual usage), but live in a block of flats with shared riser located inconveniently for meter reading. Can a meter be fitted in such a setup without expensive re-engineering of the supply? The water company web site is unhelpfully vague... A Water meter can be fitted in any property it sits between the main inlet in your flat and the feed pipe throughtout. Just inform them you wish to have a meter installed and let them do the rest. They will send someone out and install it for free. However if its a council flat then you'd better get in touch with them first, if its private ask your landlord if he/she has any objection. I lived in a House where it was three floors/flats I was paying £179 a year, to a single person thats a lot of money, so I got the meter installed and ended up paying £26 per six months, thats a hell of of a saving. So I'm not alone on this group as in Real Life. Thanks, Ben, Mary |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mary Fisher wrote:
"ben" wrote in message . uk... I'd quite like a water meter (or, more to the point, for my bill to reflect actual usage), but live in a block of flats with shared riser located inconveniently for meter reading. Can a meter be fitted in such a setup without expensive re-engineering of the supply? The water company web site is unhelpfully vague... A Water meter can be fitted in any property it sits between the main inlet in your flat and the feed pipe throughtout. Just inform them you wish to have a meter installed and let them do the rest. They will send someone out and install it for free. However if its a council flat then you'd better get in touch with them first, if its private ask your landlord if he/she has any objection. I lived in a House where it was three floors/flats I was paying £179 a year, to a single person thats a lot of money, so I got the meter installed and ended up paying £26 per six months, thats a hell of of a saving. So I'm not alone on this group as in Real Life. Thanks, Ben, Mary It wasn't a case of wanting a meter installed in my flat, it was a case having to because it seems I was paying for the whole house regardless of any other occupants being there or not, apparently it goes by the ratable value of the property banding in that particular area, so in other words as far as the waterboard was concerned the full amount was being paid regardless of there being three flats. What made me furious was the same house across the road was occupied by a family of 8 who where paying the same amount and using a lot more water and yet I was in a flat.Where's the justice in that? |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ben" wrote in message . uk... .... What made me furious was the same house across the road was occupied by a family of 8 who where paying the same amount and using a lot more water and yet I was in a flat.Where's the justice in that? There is none. We should pay for what we use, no more, no less. Mary |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Mary
Fisher writes Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there Yorkshire water is exemplorary. The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. So what are you doing about it? Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run That says more about your attitude than that of the water companies. They can't turn things round easily - and they can't control users' usage Meanwhile on Radio 4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/ -- geoff |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"raden" wrote in message ... In message , Mary Fisher writes Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there Yorkshire water is exemplorary. The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. So what are you doing about it? Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run That says more about your attitude than that of the water companies. They can't turn things round easily - and they can't control users' usage Meanwhile on Radio 4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/ They weren't talking about ALL water companies. Mary -- geoff |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
In message , Mary
Fisher writes "raden" wrote in message ... In message , Mary Fisher writes Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there Yorkshire water is exemplorary. The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. So what are you doing about it? Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run That says more about your attitude than that of the water companies. They can't turn things round easily - and they can't control users' usage Meanwhile on Radio 4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/ They weren't talking about ALL water companies. And where did I say they were ? -- geoff |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mary Fisher" wrote in message . net... "raden" wrote in message ... In message , Mary Fisher writes Of course, the easiest option is to do as little as possible and hit the customers instead No it isn't. a good water company cares for its product and its customers. Maybe, but you used the word "good" there Yorkshire water is exemplorary. The amount of water lost in the watercos' pipework is a matter of record and is IMO fairly disgraceful. So what are you doing about it? Privatisation of the watercos was sold on the "fact" that it would allow money to be put into repairing the infrastructure, but, of course, the attitude is one of take the money and run That says more about your attitude than that of the water companies. They can't turn things round easily - and they can't control users' usage Meanwhile on Radio 4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts/ They weren't talking about ALL water companies. Some of them are clear crooks. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mary Fisher wrote:
wrote in message oups.com. Timothy Murphy wrote: Are water meters inordinately expensive? Or do they have some disadvantage? Theyre a way of getting a big hike in prices in through the back door. I don't know why you say that. Comparing the costs each way of average water consumption maybe? snip so what? All it tells us is you use less than average. Thats no surprise. In my experience, of discussing it with other metered users, our experience is far from unique. None of them would go back to the old system. 50% of users use less than average. Its normally the ones that use less than average that consider going over to meters. Water metering is inevitable at some time, all new houses get them now. But if youre on unmeterd, unless youre planning to stay single for life, stay unmetered. You could say the same thing about electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. its perfectly obvious one can not say that about any of those. I dont know of any people on unmetered supplies of electricity, gas, telephone, petrol and, well, food. Maybe you do. That's exactly what I'm saying. Im lost for words. Why shouldn't you pay for what you use? I do, we all do. Most of us pay a flat rate based on average use. But if you were metered perhaps you might be more careful about what you use - as you do (I imagine) with electricity, gas etc. No, Im careful already. NT |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Probably OT, but my attention was drawn by a posting on water meters, and it made me wonder again why water meters are not a standard part of the water supply? It seems to be a policy in these parts (not sure if it is enforced by the council or more likely Anglian Water), that every time a new account is opened (i.e. a house changes hands) they insist on fitting a meter. Every year one reads of water shortages in parts of the UK (not so much in Ireland, but it is not unknown here). One would have thought a charge by water usage would be an obvious response. Depends on the cost / benefit analysis. Fitting meters is not free. There are also a large number of properties (especialy in the south east) with only one or two occupants. These will typically use less than "average" and hence be paying more for their water than they would based solely on usage. From the water co's point of view this is a "good thing"! From a leak control POV, many companies seem to find dropping the pressure is a more cost effective stopgap measure. I was staying in a relative's house in Brussels, and they had an enormous meter in the basement, which I assume is standard there. Are water meters inordinately expensive? Probably not, unless you count the revenue lost from low users... Or do they have some disadvantage? Some seem to give a slight reduction in flow rate. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There many simple measures to reduce water consumption: - Low flush toilets These can be a mixed blessing IME. Some you need several flushes get the job(ie) finished! -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:29:04 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote: In my experience, of discussing it with other metered users, our experience is far from unique. None of them would go back to the old system. I had a meter at my last house. My current house has no meter. I would prefer to remain unmetered! sponix |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John Rumm" wrote in message ... Doctor Drivel wrote: There many simple measures to reduce water consumption: - Low flush toilets These can be a mixed blessing IME. Some you need several flushes get the job(ie) finished! They can also leave solid waste in sections of drainage pipes, causing problems. The real point is, this country is not short of water, it does have a grossly inefficient distribution system were water can't easily be moved around the country and were distribution pipes sometimes resemble colanders... |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
:::Jerry:::: wrote:
"John Rumm" wrote in message ... Doctor Drivel wrote: There many simple measures to reduce water consumption: - Low flush toilets These can be a mixed blessing IME. Some you need several flushes get the job(ie) finished! They can also leave solid waste in sections of drainage pipes, causing problems. The real point is, this country is not short of water, it does have a grossly inefficient distribution system were water can't easily be moved around the country and were distribution pipes sometimes resemble colanders... Not to mention the old Victorian sewers that are still in use and need widening/replacing as they are incapable of dispersing rainwater in heavy floods. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John Rumm" wrote in message ... Doctor Drivel wrote: There many simple measures to reduce water consumption: - Low flush toilets These can be a mixed blessing IME. Some you need several flushes get the job(ie) finished! If the whole unit is designed to be low flush then no problems. Some people only change the cistern part and then have problems. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Heat banks (again!) | UK diy | |||
| Hot water recirculation | Home Repair | |||
| need hot water FAST | Home Repair | |||
| NO MORE hot water problems | Home Repair | |||
| Why do gas water heaters fail? | Home Repair | |||
Linear Mode
