Water leaks question

[gnawsome]

I'm obviously going to be embarrassed but here goes
When the water leaks from water coy pipes - where does it go. I guess it doesn't 'dematerialse'.
I suppose it travels over or thro' the ground to a water course or aquifer and is then available again for extraction and treatment.
Now that can't be quite right or there wouldn't be such a fuss about having double-treated water.
Be kind... I just wanted to tick off one of my gnaws

[daveh]

Some will evaporate, some will water plants in the vicinity of the leak, but it has been cleaned and purified at a cost in energy and time so is being wasted and would be better if the leaks were fixed asap.

[DrFfybes]

Some will evaporate, some will water plants in the vicinity of the leak, but it has been cleaned and purified at a cost in energy and time so is being wasted and would be better if the leaks were fixed asap.

Also it has usually come out of a reservoir up in the hills, that is fed by rainwater falling on the nearby hills, and has no simple way of getting back to the top of the distribution chain, so it mainly lost from it.

Paul

[Mike4]

Some will evaporate, some will water plants in the vicinity of the leak, but it has been cleaned and purified at a cost in energy and time so is being wasted and would be better if the leaks were fixed asap.

Also it has usually come out of a reservoir up in the hills, that is fed by rainwater falling on the nearby hills, and has no simple way of getting back to the top of the distribution chain, so it mainly lost from it.

Paul

Also, not every droplet of water entering the aquifers gets harvested, treated and fed into the clean water supply. In fact probably only one in a million does.

[GoSeigen]

I'm obviously going to be embarrassed but here goes
When the water leaks from water coy pipes - where does it go. I guess it doesn't 'dematerialse'.
I suppose it travels over or thro' the ground to a water course or aquifer and is then available again for extraction and treatment.
Now that can't be quite right or there wouldn't be such a fuss about having double-treated water.
Be kind... I just wanted to tick off one of my gnaws

I haven't noticed any fuss about what you call double-treated water. Could you cite an example please, so I know what the discussion is about>

Thanks.

GS

[bungeejumper]

Now that can't be quite right or there wouldn't be such a fuss about having double-treated water.

I haven't noticed any fuss about what you call double-treated water. Could you cite an example please, so I know what the discussion is about

I don't think there' would be much danger from double-treated water, even if the water that leaked from the pipes were somehow able to get back to the treatment works for a second go round. Certainly, any chlorine in the water will normally dissipate naturally in a day or three, although the minute doses of fluoride (added to keep your teeth healthy) might stick around a bit longer

Around these rural parts, we are still being supplied by large-bore cast-iron pipes that were laid in the Victorian era, and we can't persuade the water company to update them. Every so often, somebody drives a lorry over the pipes and the cast iron main bursts, and then they dig it up and bodge it until the next time. Our end of the village gets extra shots of chlorine and suchlike, because that's all that's keeping the Victorian diseases at bay (er, possibly), but our tap water tastes far too horrible to drink, which is why we have to annoy all you enlightened types by buying bottled water.

They say that 25% of all the water leaving the treatment works is lost through leaks. Which. Is. A. Disgrace. Far worse than cheese, and far less likely to be remedied any time soon.....

BJ

[GoSeigen]

Now that can't be quite right or there wouldn't be such a fuss about having double-treated water.

I haven't noticed any fuss about what you call double-treated water. Could you cite an example please, so I know what the discussion is about

I don't think there' would be much danger from double-treated water, even if the water that leaked from the pipes were somehow able to get back to the treatment works for a second go round. Certainly, any chlorine in the water will normally dissipate naturally in a day or three, although the minute doses of fluoride (added to keep your teeth healthy) might stick around a bit longer

Around these rural parts, we are still being supplied by large-bore cast-iron pipes that were laid in the Victorian era, and we can't persuade the water company to update them. Every so often, somebody drives a lorry over the pipes and the cast iron main bursts, and then they dig it up and bodge it until the next time. Our end of the village gets extra shots of chlorine and suchlike, because that's all that's keeping the Victorian diseases at bay (er, possibly), but our tap water tastes far too horrible to drink, which is why we have to annoy all you enlightened types by buying bottled water.

They say that 25% of all the water leaving the treatment works is lost through leaks. Which. Is. A. Disgrace. Far worse than cheese, and far less likely to be remedied any time soon.....

Thanks BJ, we don't often cross paths here, so while I'm here, will just say how much I enjoy reading posts by someone who writes a lot more lucidly and entertainingly than I...

The double treated water thing is lost on me. If there is a fuss I haven't seen it and google didn't help either. So hoping the OP can explain what it's all about.

Agree unnecessary wastage is undesirable, but there is a cost-benefit trade-off: the fact is water is ubiquitous and plentiful in most parts of this planet so there must be a fairly high bar to cross before leaks become a real economic and/or moral problem... [not talking about desert regions obvs.] There's also something odd about the level of complaining by people living in the 6th largest economy in the world -- "To the privileged....etc", seems to be a national pastime.


GS

[UncleEbenezer]

the fact is water is ubiquitous and plentiful in most parts of this planet
GS

That's precisely what it isn't, in a lot of the places people live. Human populations are far too big for available resources, and that includes water.

Irrigation goes back to ancient times, and started the population excess. In some cases, irrigation itself caused the land to degrade, leading to famine and migration. But for most of our history, that only ever happened locally - though it could be devastating.

In Blighty today, much of the south and east has a serious problem: more population than water. A long dry spell turns the problem acute. Add the heat which raises demand, and who knows how bad it could get. Even some of the less-stressed parts of Blighty - like the southwest - are struggling a bit and have written to us about saving water.

[Nocton]

Actually there is plenty of water in the UK and there is no reason at all for water shortages and hosepipe bans. It just needs more forward planning and investment. Until privatisation the UK was woefully under-invested in water supply, due, as with most nationalised industries, to politicians putting current concerns - taxes, votes, will I be re-elected? - before long-term investment. Since privatisation there has been massive investment, but there would have been more if OfWater (or whatever it is called) hadn't limited investment returns to keep water bills down.

We live in the driest region, supplied by Anglian water. Our annual rainfall is about 600mm. Nevertheless, according to today's Times Anglian Water is supplying 105 million L per day to areas in the south. Not surprisingly, Anglian Water has installed lots of meters, has one of the largest reservoirs in the country, has the lowest leakage rate by far and is currently building a massive pipeline to take water from the north of its region to the south. And there have not been any hosepipe bans nor any in prospect.

[mutantpoodle]

the media doesnt show much detail when it comes to water useage by hosepipes

in fact (apparently) hosepipe useage accounts for 1%...yes,,,ONE percent of water use i UK

so headlines shouting hosepipe bans are only for 'headline' and are not really relevant for water conservation

[pje16]

ent.
Now that can't be quite right or there wouldn't be such a fuss about having double-treated water.

Not sure what the figure is today
but some years ago I heard that the water that come through your tap has been recycled at least 7 times
I do try to not think about that too much

just googled it... it is SEVEN
https://www.groundwatergovernance.org/i ... -recycled/
perhaps other parts of the country are different

[servodude]

the media doesnt show much detail when it comes to water useage by hosepipes

in fact (apparently) hosepipe useage accounts for 1%...yes,,,ONE percent of water use i UK

so headlines shouting hosepipe bans are only for 'headline' and are not really relevant for water conservation

Yeah and no.

Don't doubt the 1% figure by any means; it's probably at the resolution of measurement over a billing period.

The issue is that hot dry weather encourages and concentrates the acute usage of water through hosepipes at precisely the time when the storage facilities are at their most depleted. When you're running low on potable water you've got better things to do with it than put it on your lawn.

[Stompa]

the media doesnt show much detail when it comes to water useage by hosepipes

in fact (apparently) hosepipe useage accounts for 1%...yes,,,ONE percent of water use i UK

so headlines shouting hosepipe bans are only for 'headline' and are not really relevant for water conservation

Well I guess it depends whose numbers you believe. The ones here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44697603

are a little higher.

[doolally]

the media doesnt show much detail when it comes to water useage by hosepipes

in fact (apparently) hosepipe useage accounts for 1%...yes,,,ONE percent of water use i UK

so headlines shouting hosepipe bans are only for 'headline' and are not really relevant for water conservation

Maybe a hosepipe ban does not directly have a big effect, but it helps to get the message across so may have an indirect effect on other water usage
doolally

[bungeejumper]

Maybe a hosepipe ban does not directly have a big effect, but it helps to get the message across so may have an indirect effect on other water usage

Ed Zackerly. A large part of the point of a hosepipe ban is just to make the public more aware of the wider issue, and to make people ask themselves privately whether this particular dose of water on the lawn is an exception to the rule that can be honestly justified. (Usually not. ) The fines are just the dramatic part that help to sell the story. I just hope that we don't see garden-hose snooper helicopters chopping around the suburbs, like we did in 1976?

If you were running a bowling green or a cricket pitch, you'd have a different answer to the average householder, and likewise if you were a professional window cleaner or car washer. (Both of whom usually have exemptions.) For the rest of us, though, the question makes sense.

Slightly off-topic, but some 25 years ago, a colleague who was an out-and-out eco campaigner confessed to me that the case for recycling glass bottles was weak at best. The energy required to melt and remould a glass bottle wasn't very much less than what would be required to start again from scratch with a heap of fresh sand - and heck, you could always find uses for crushed bottles, such as in specialist road surfaces. But, as an exercise in persuasion, recycling bottles was a good story to sell to the well-meaning public.

Things have changed a bit on the glass recycling front, because the right kind of sand is apparently in short supply these days! And those mounting piles of dead bottles would have become a separate problem by now. But, back on the waterfront, there's always beneficial mileage in encouraging less wastage. To me, it speaks volumes that this cold, wet, flood-prone group of north European islands is feeling the same sorts of pressures as Spain or Italy - even if not to the same extent.

BJ

[Laughton]

but our tap water tastes far too horrible to drink, which is why we have to annoy all you enlightened types by buying bottled water

Try fitting a water filter to the cold water tap supply in your kitchen (or wherever you would get glasses of water to drink). We too have horrible tasting water but I've found that they really do work. Very simple job to do (I've done it in our last three houses so it must be easy).

Change the filter every six months or so - it's a lot cheaper than bottled water and saves storage space in your fridge.

This is the one I've used in case it's of any interest - www.screwfix.com/p/bwt-high-capacity-wa ... -kit/16747 (other makes and models are available).

[richlist]

I've been using a hosepipe almost every day since the hot weather started.......it started raining today so I have now stopped. Most plant pots get watered every other day and the area of grass immediately in front of my front door get the sprinkler treatment every other day. That's because when I open my front door I don't want to see a dead, yellow arid landscape more akin to a desert.

I don't feel embarrassed about using a hosepipe. We are in an area of the south east that appears to have plenty of water and the supply company have said they've no plans to issue a hosepipe ban.

[Nocton]

I've been using a hosepipe almost every day since the hot weather started.......it started raining today so I have now stopped. Most plant pots get watered every other day and the area of grass immediately in front of my front door get the sprinkler treatment every other day. That's because when I open my front door I don't want to see a dead, yellow arid landscape more akin to a desert.

I don't feel embarrassed about using a hosepipe. We are in an area of the south east that appears to have plenty of water and the supply company have said they've no plans to issue a hosepipe ban.

That's perfectly OK with me as long as you have a water meter.