MUA water meters

[english zloty]

12 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

Global warming? It's July. Look out of the window.

Those bidets are the problem, that's my opinion.

Average household consumption has dropped from about 250litres a day to around 150 since the Island assumptions (2003 for a TT week population of around 100,000). The capacity issues are entirely due to a lack of historical knowledge of the network combined with significant under investment in turn leading to very significant leakage paths of between a quarter and a third of all water treated. 

As others have postulated, the meter is merely a revenue raising thing

Edited July 6, 2023 by english zloty

[WTF]

14 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Not sure I agree. Yes, in the short term, but in the long term things could be different. One really dry year, we will be fucked. Where will we get our water if it didn't rain from March to October. 

build a desalination plant and use  seawater.

[Major Rushen]

2 hours ago, WTF said:

build a desalination plant and use  seawater.

For our population size water would be very expensive.

[Cambon]

3 hours ago, WTF said:

build a desalination plant and use  seawater.

Actually, all they would need to do is move water from one of our disused reservoirs. Plenty of spare capacity there. 

[WTF]

1 hour ago, Major Rushen said:

For our population size water would be very expensive.

so like now then ??

[Ringy Rose]

23 hours ago, Cambon said:

At the moment we are paying a lot for water (water rate and sewerage tax)

The thing is, we’re not. It might feel a lot when you get an annual bill, but actually it really isn’t.

I lived in outer London and was paying £70 a month *ten years ago*, in a small two-bed flat. It’s £800 a year here for a four-bed semi, and the underlying infrastructure costs are higher here because of the lack of population density.

[Non-Believer]

On 7/6/2023 at 5:08 PM, Cambon said:

Not really. At the moment we are paying a lot for water (water rate and sewerage tax).

Much of the sewerage tax (the "Toilet Tax") goes towards repaying the MUA debt.

[Happier diner]

5 hours ago, Cambon said:

Actually, all they would need to do is move water from one of our disused reservoirs. Plenty of spare capacity there. 

How would you 'move' the water?

[Happier diner]

9 hours ago, WTF said:

build a desalination plant and use  seawater.

Why stop at one. Let's have have a couple? We might get discount if we get a couple of nuclear reactors as well. The world is our oyster. Not like we have a history of cock ups or anything is it?

[finlo]

5 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

How would you 'move' the water?

They must have been on the network previously no?

[Non-Believer]

1 hour ago, finlo said:

They must have been on the network previously no?

Many of the reservoirs are interconnected, the capacity exists to transfer water from one to another and it does already happen  to augment water supplies to the more heavily drawn on reservoirs.

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, finlo said:

They must have been on the network previously no?

Yes, but it doesn't mean they are now or could be added back easily.  If they had their own treatment plant, they would need to have a new one built and new connections made or a completely new link to move water to an existing reservoir.

It's also worth looking what the unused ones are:

Cringle (decommissioned 2008) 125,000 cu m

Ballure (2005) 70,000 cu m

Block Eary (used for hydropower) 50,000 cu m

That's a total of 245,000 cu m and a lot of work needed to get it (they'd also need to be drained and relined).

In contrast the other four working reservoirs have a total capacity of 6,262,000 cu m.  The reason they went out of use is that they're not very big.

[finlo]

8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Yes, but it doesn't mean they are now or could be added back easily.  If they had their own treatment plant, they would need to have a new one built and new connections made or a completely new link to move water to an existing reservoir.

It's also worth looking what the unused ones are:

Cringle (decommissioned 2008) 125,000 cu m

Ballure (2005) 70,000 cu m

Block Eary (used for hydropower) 50,000 cu m

That's a total of 245,000 cu m and a lot of work needed to get it (they'd also need to be drained and relined).

In contrast the other four working reservoirs have a total capacity of 6,262,000 cu m.  The reason they went out of use is that they're not very big.

So we basically built new bigger reservoirs to compensate for our leakage problems?

[Roger Mexico]

32 minutes ago, finlo said:

So we basically built new bigger reservoirs to compensate for our leakage problems?

We built a bigger reservoir (Sulby) in 1982- all the others still in use are well over 100 years old.  And nothing to do with leakage, because of increasing population.

[woolley]

6 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

The thing is, we’re not. It might feel a lot when you get an annual bill, but actually it really isn’t.

It really is compared to what it used to be. Massively ahead of inflation since 2000. I appreciate it isn't as much as in the UK, but why should we be benchmarking our charges against theirs? They have shareholders to pay. Too much of copying practices from over there.