Like some sun-baked third-world country hampered by international debt and home-grown corruption England limps into another water-shortage with the first phases of water restrictions - the traditional hosepipe ban - being widely discussed.
South East Water is the third company already to actually enforce a hose-pipe ban and will probably not be the last. Thames Water may be banning sprinklers.
From The Telegraph:
Despite the mixed weather of the past few weeks, there has been a hidden drought since November. Rainfall has been below average for eight months, making it the fourth driest period since records began in 1892.
The problem is worst in the densely populated South and East, where rivers are at half their normal height for the time of year.
Thames Valley, which supplies eight million people, said a ban by early August was “a distinct possibility”.
Well, now. Is it the ‘hidden drought’ or the increased numbers of people living in England’s south-east and south-west regions?
The 2001 census suggests this may be a contributing factor. Regarding population change the census reveals:
Compared to 1981, the biggest increases were found, not surprisingly, in South East England (+10.4%) and South-West England (12.5%) and East England (+11.0%), whilst the North East (-4.6%) and the North-West (-3.0%) have seen a decline in population.
A spokesman for WaterVoice, the consumer watchdog, hinted at the problems of population growth in these areas:
“But if this sort of thing [hosepipe and sprinkler] is happening now, what will happen when we have 1.1 million more households in the South East? It is an alarm bell for the water industry and regulator, who need to look at the long-term position.”
Hmm. Or government could realise that population needs a certain amount of managing and act to spread ours out a bit. It can be done: relocate some government departments, offer tax benefits to companies setting up in areas of lower population density and so on.
One theory as to why the government doesn’t tackle this issue is as follows: most of England’s Conservative Party voters are in the south-east. Better that the area soak up as many such voters as possible in as small an area as possible and leave the rest of the country open for Labour to win. Spreading some of the excess Conservative votes across England might tip the balance in a few key marginals. And Blair wouldn’t want that…
Gary
Comments re water shortages and droughts always catch my eye. I saw this in Jeff Howell’s column (On the Level - a builder gives it to you straight) in the Sunday Telegraph, 17th July (I’d have given you a link but it’s not on their web page yet so I’ve scanned and copied it):
“With the sunny weather finally arriving, the water industry has been quick to send out press releases claiming that the country is gripped by drought. Such claims are usually a preamble to breaking the bad news that the water company in question wants us to stop watering our gardens, cleaning our teeth, or - more likely - that it wants to build a new reservoir. As I pointed out last week, reservoir-building is popular with the privatised water companies because it counts as “capital investment”, which the water regulator Ofwat allows them to pass on to their customers in the form of higher water bills unlike fixing leaks, which comes under routine maintenance, the costs of which have to be borne by the companies themselves.
As my colleague Philip Eden pointed out in his “Weather Week” column last week, however, rainfall statistics are often selectively quoted and geographically misrepresented by the water industry. For example, Folkestone and Dover Water is claiming that, in the South of England, the period from November 2004 to June 2005 was the driest spell since 1975-76, and the company is trying to use this to compel all of its customers to be fitted with water meters. But Philip Eden reports that, averaged over the whole of England and Wales, the period October 2004 to June 2005 was actually only 11 per cent dryer than the long-term average, and thus far from being unusually dry.
Government, too - at both national and local level - seems to be easily fooled by the statistics, while ignoring the realities of water use and wastage. For example, the Environment Agency is encouraging us to buy “water-efficient” washing machines and dishwashers, and the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, is suggesting that we flush the loo less often. Yet at the same time, traditional siphonflushed WC cisterns are being rapidly replaced with cisterns operated by American-style flush valves, which are notorious for wasting water.
Siphon-operated flushing mechanisms have been in use in Britain since about the 1860s. Before that, WC cisterns were operated by flush valves, which have remained in use in most other countries, notably the USA. Flush valves use a simple, stopper or flap that closes the entrance to the flush pipe in the bottom of the cistern. When this is lifted, water flows down the flush pipe, and when the cistern is empty, it falls back into place. For watertightness, the system relies on the stopper or flap being a perfect fit in its seat, but experience shows that this is not always the case. In the 19th century, flush valves were so notorious for leaking that they were replaced with siphons, which were marketed at the time as “water waste preventers”. There were several designs and patents, including that of the legendary Thomas Crapper of Chelsea, but all siphon mechanisms shared one characteristic - they never leaked.
This was the situation that prevailed up until 1999, when the UK water regulations were changed to allow flush valves to be reintroduced. In the USA, however, flush valves are estimated to leak 15 to 30 litres per person per day, and American DIY books commonly contain sections on how to fix or replace what they call a “run-on” toilet.
Many flush valves also contain an integral overflow, so that in the event of a leaky ball-float valve (the “ballcock” that allows the cistern to fill), the excess water will flow into the flush pipe and down into the WC pan. Again, this is a break from British plumbing tradition, which always used to require overflows to emerge through an outside wall. Overflow pipes are correctly called, in fact, “warning pipes”, with the express purpose that when water is seen or heard splashing onto the ground outside, it is hard to ignore. With integral overflows, however, a ball-float valve might leak for years without anybody noticing or fixing it.
The odd thing is, at a time when we are all being urged to save water, the Government has not only changed the rules to allow these notoriously leaky devices to be used, but it is even offering an “enhanced capital allowance” scheme which allows the (mostly American) manufacturers to write-off 100 per cent of their first year’s investment against tax. Is this just summer madness, or is something more sinister going on?”
Comment by Paul — July 19, 2005 @ 10:33 am
Very interesting… Just as water starts to run short the government does just what’s needed to ensure is runs even shorter.
This must be that legendary ‘joined up’ government that we keep hearing about…
GM
Comment by Administrator — July 20, 2005 @ 6:42 am
Does anyone know precisely what regulations are used to impose a hosepipe ban,and exactly what you can and can’t do?
Comment by Jim Stockwell — August 10, 2005 @ 10:19 pm