Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish Water

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Are IW gonna be splitting storm drains from sewers?
    Or are we going to have no blue flag beaches on less last summer was bone dry?
    If the EPA fines IW for polluting the beaches, will customers just have to pony up?


  • Options
    #33
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,245 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Some councils have been splitting surface water and foul drains for a long time, others I'm not so sure.


  • Options
    #34
    Schadenfreudia
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Schadenfreudia


    According to the SPB today the cost of water from Irish Water will be twice the figure for the UK.

    I'm not sure if that's the cost per unit delivered or just the overhead cost per unit.

    Unbelievable.


  • Options
    #35
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Schadenfreudia wrote: »
    According to the SPB today the cost of water from Irish Water will be twice the figure for the UK.

    I'm not sure if that's the cost per unit delivered or just the overhead cost per unit.

    Unbelievable.

    It appears the cost per unit consumed (as opposed to produced as over half the water produced is classed as "unaccounted for").

    The water system costs about €1.2bn each year, water rates raise approx 200m-250m each (at a rate of about €1.13/1000l).

    I've seen figures that state average personal daily usage is somewhere between 140l-180l, for arguments sake I'll use 175l* as the average (0.175 CuM) as private usage and 200m CuM annually for "rated" usage.

    Population is 4,588,252 at last census.

    Based on these figures, annual average usage is 293,074,597 CuM, add in the estimated 200 CuM of "rated" water, for total use of 493,074,597 CuM.

    €1.2bn/493,074,597 CuM = 2.433, so round up to €2.44/CuM consumed water. If this figure sounds familiar it should, it's the unit rate of fresh water.

    * Okay, it's not for arguments sake, I plugged the 160l/day & 4.6m people into a spreadsheet and noticed they were very close to actual rate so I played with the numbers a bit.


  • Options
    #36
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    antoobrien wrote: »
    It appears the cost per unit consumed (as opposed to produced as over half the water produced is classed as "unaccounted for").

    The water system costs about €1.2bn each year, water rates raise approx 200m-250m each (at a rate of about €1.13/1000l).

    I've seen figures that state average personal daily usage is somewhere between 140l-180l, for arguments sake I'll use 175l* as the average (0.175 CuM) as private usage and 200m CuM annually for "rated" usage.

    Population is 4,588,252 at last census.

    Based on these figures, annual average usage is 293,074,597 CuM, add in the estimated 200 CuM of "rated" water, for total use of 493,074,597 CuM.

    €1.2bn/493,074,597 CuM = 2.433, so round up to €2.44/CuM consumed water. If this figure sounds familiar it should, it's the unit rate of fresh water.

    * Okay, it's not for arguments sake, I plugged the 160l/day & 4.6m people into a spreadsheet and noticed they were very close to actual rate so I played with the numbers a bit.

    All this is ignoring the basic facts.

    1 The average charge for water will be €240 per year according to the Government announcement before the local elections. This will hold for three years (i.e. until after the next general election.

    2. No mention was made for a charge for sewerage or waste water. These charges will be the same for water usage. Those who have a septic tank and no mains waste connection will not have to pay a waste water charge. These come off the average charge. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    3. No standing charge will be made for water, so all charges will be based on meter readings. This will increase the cost per cubic meter.

    4. All domestic users will get a 'free' amount of 300 cu. m. /yr. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    5. Children (those under 18) will get a 'free' usage amount of 21 cu.m. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    Commercial users in Dublin and Fingal pay approx €2 per cu. m. at present.

    With a standing charge of €140, usage charges would be about €1 per cu. m. with no 'free' amount, and no charge for serwerage. This approach would be a reasonable way of minimising the obvious backlash the government parties will feel in the next election. The old cry about 'the emersion - did you leave it on' will become 'you didn't flush the loo' and 'did you make sure the tap was not dripping'.

    Oh dear, I can hear the screams now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    All this is ignoring the basic facts.

    One suggest you go read the CER documentation.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    1 The average charge for water will be €240 per year according to the Government announcement before the local elections. This will hold for three years (i.e. until after the next general election.
    The CER’s proposed allowed revenue of €2,078 results in a gross average household cost of €594. The government funding means that the average annual household cost to customers is reduced to €238. While the average annual cost for all types of households is €238, not all households are the same size or use water in the same way; some will use more, some less. This means that individual customers’ bills will vary depending on the number of people in the house and how much water they actually use. The actual tariffs for water consumption are set out in Irish Water’s Water Charges Plan.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    2. No mention was made for a charge for sewerage or waste water.

    Not even slightly true as there was a lot of uninformed "debate" regarding the amount that would be charged to those who did not use the public sewers.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    These charges will be the same for water usage. Those who have a septic tank and no mains waste connection will not have to pay a waste water charge. These come off the average charge. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    Taking sewage out of it has no effect on the cost per CuM.
    Water & Wastewater Services – Irish Water will provide water and wastewater services to customers where domestic tariffs are calculated on a national basis, with separate tariffs for water and waste water calculated on a 50/50 cost basis, with no standing charge. Unmetered customers will be charged on the basis of adult occupancy
    Metered Charges – The CER is consulting on Irish Water’s proposal that a volumetric unit rate of €2.44 per 1,000 litres for each service. This results in a combined charge of €4.88 per 1,000 litres for water and wastewater services.
    Unmetered Charges – The CER is consulting on Irish Water’s proposal that unmetered charges will be assessed on the basis of the number of adult occupants where the government allowance means that there is no charge for children. Based on CER calculations, a household with a single adult occupant will have an annual charge of €176 for both services, with an additional €102 for every extra adult in the household.

    Sam Russell wrote: »
    3. No standing charge will be made for water, so all charges will be based on meter readings. This will increase the cost per cubic meter.

    The lack of standing charge reducing the price is a fallacy, as the price is being dictated by expected consumption, rather than production.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    4. All domestic users will get a 'free' amount of 300 cu. m. /yr. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    5. Children (those under 18) will get a 'free' usage amount of 21 cu.m. This will increase the cost per cu.m.

    I'd love to know where the fallacy that allowances are pushing up the cost is coming from, because the raw numbers show that it will not.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Commercial users in Dublin and Fingal pay approx €2 per cu. m. at present.

    Fingal charge €1.02 for water (€1.19 for waste), DCC €1.16 (+0.83), SDCC 1.93 combined (no split, so realistically they are paying 1.93/CuM water), DLR €1.04 (+1.24)
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    With a standing charge of €140, usage charges would be about €1 per cu. m. with no 'free' amount, and no charge for serwerage.

    This is false, the proposed standing charge would generate €231m p/a.

    The free allowances are 30CuM per household (for both services) costs giving €120m each - meaning that the service charge wouldn't actually cover the cost of both allowances - before we get to allowances for children.


  • Options
    #38
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    if this charge based on current average usage or forecast average usage?


  • Options
    #39
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    if this charge based on current average usage or forecast average usage?

    It seems (to me) to be (clearly) based on the current estimated average usage per person.


  • Options
    #40
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    antoobrien wrote: »
    The lack of standing charge reducing the price is a fallacy, as the price is being dictated by expected consumption, rather than production.
    If the average is decided, then if there is a usage of 100 cu m. of water, it will cost [standing charge + 100 times cost/cu.m.].
    Standing charge =€0 then cost/cu m. =€2.40 / cu.m.
    Standing charge =€40 then cost/cu m. =€2 / cu.m.
    Standing charge =€140 then cost/cu m. =€1 / cu.m.
    I'd love to know where the fallacy that allowances are pushing up the cost is coming from, because the raw numbers show that it will not.
    See above. Once the average is decided, then the cost per unit dependes on the fixed charge. The higher the fixed charge, the lower the unit cost.

    Simples.
    Fingal charge €1.02 for water (€1.19 for waste), DCC €1.16 (+0.83), SDCC 1.93 combined (no split, so realistically they are paying 1.93/CuM water), DLR €1.04 (+1.24)
    All close enough to €2 per unit, the figure I gave.
    This is false, the proposed standing charge would generate €231m p/a.

    The free allowances are 30CuM per household (for both services) costs giving €120m each - meaning that the service charge wouldn't actually cover the cost of both allowances - before we get to allowances for children.

    You missed the point I made. Once the average is decided, then the unit costs follows. If you give kids a free allowance, this pushes up the cost to those that do not get it. If you charge for sewerage, then, since not everyone pays that, those that do pay more. The costs of production are not relevant, as the average charge is decided politically.

    Now lets get down to facts.

    I live in a 2 adult familly, and my metered consumption is, according to DCC is below average at less than 100 cu m./yr. I will be paying (for say 100 cu.m.) will be (100-30)*€4.88=€344.60 well above the quoted average, and well above the non-metered charge for my circumstances of €270. Remember, my usage is below average according to DCC.

    My house has been metered for the last seven years, and these figures come from the meter and from DCC. I was expecting a unit cost between €1 and €2 and was shocked at the quoted €4.88. It is outrageous that domestic users will be paying one of the highest usage charges in Europe, Milan pays €0.5, and Madrid pays €1. Not only that, but more than twice the charge as commercial users pay - for the same water.


  • Options
    #41
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,245 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    People are comparing the costs of water in foreign cities. In Ireland, it will be the same price whether urban or rural.

    In cities, there might be an average 2 metres of pipe per person to maintain on public roads. In rural areas, it might be hundreds of metres per person. If prices were based on cost of delivery, there might be very different prices.

    People are also forgetting (a) the standing charges people are paying and (b) the level of subsidy involved.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    a65b2cd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 148 ✭✭a65b2cd


    Victor wrote: »
    Some councils have been splitting surface water and foul drains for a long time.

    Is that possible for existing drains or only for new ones?


  • Options
    #43
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,245 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    a65b2cd wrote: »
    Is that possible for existing drains or only for new ones?

    With new development, the council insists on a separate system, i.e. separate foul and surface drainage.

    With older developments, new surface water drains are fitted gradually, with the existing foul drainage kept (or vice versa). In theory, this means that that foul water would never end up in the surface water system, although inevitably some will. However, as drains will often run alongside each other and sometimes drains are life-expired, both may need to be replaced.

    The objective is that rainwater, groundwater and some river water than ends up in the drainage system can simply be connected to attenuation ponds, either at a neighbourhood level or just before the final outfall and receive a minimum amount of treatment - essentially moving anything that either floats (vegetation, oils, plastics) or settles (pebbles, grit).

    Here is an example of a petrol interceptor. http://www.alltanksltd.co.uk/interceptorworks The attenuation ponds wo0rk on the same principle, but on a grander scale.


  • Options
    #44
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    If the average is decided, then if there is a usage of 100 cu m. of water, it will cost [standing charge + 100 times cost/cu.m.].
    Standing charge =€0 then cost/cu m. =€2.40 / cu.m.
    Standing charge =€40 then cost/cu m. =€2 / cu.m.
    Standing charge =€140 then cost/cu m. =€1 / cu.m.

    Show the sums, you're find you're wrong.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    See above. Once the average is decided, then the cost per unit dependes on the fixed charge. The higher the fixed charge, the lower the unit cost.

    Now I see what's wrong, you're looking at the bills not the cost of production.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    All close enough to €2 per unit, the figure I gave.

    I was kinda assuming, given your previous objection to the payment for sewage, tha you were taling about fresh water only.

    Sam Russell wrote: »
    You missed the point I made. Once the average is decided, then the unit costs follows. ....

    Now lets get down to facts.

    Yes lets get to facts, the averages have sweet fanny adams to do with it, that's the governments problem not IW. IW are calculating the price on the production cost, you'll see that if you open your eyes and run the figures.


  • Options
    #45
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Show the sums, you're find you're wrong.



    Now I see what's wrong, you're looking at the bills not the cost of production.



    I was kinda assuming, given your previous objection to the payment for sewage, tha you were taling about fresh water only.




    Yes lets get to facts, the averages have sweet fanny adams to do with it, that's the governments problem not IW. IW are calculating the price on the production cost, you'll see that if you open your eyes and run the figures.

    I think we are at total cross purposes.

    Yes I am talking about bills, and only about bills and not the cost of production.

    Consider the following equations:

    [Total Cost of production] minus [total of all bills] = [Total of government subsidy].

    [Av cost per house] times [no of houses] = [total of all bills].

    Each bill is calculated as [fixed charge] plus [cu.m. used] times [cost per unit]. Free allowances are negative fixed charges.

    Fixed numbers in this set of equations are all those in the second equation, and all those in the first equation. All that is left is to determine the way the actual cost per household is calculated.


  • Options
    #46
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    I think we are at total cross purposes.

    Yes I am talking about bills, and only about bills and not the cost of production.

    Exactly, which was the point of the original post I made.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Consider the following equations:

    [Total Cost of production] minus [total of all bills] = [Total of government subsidy].

    [Av cost per house] times [no of houses] = [total of all bills].

    Each bill is calculated as [fixed charge] plus [cu.m. used] times [cost per unit]. Free allowances are negative fixed charges.

    None of that will change the cost structure.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Fixed numbers in this set of equations are all those in the second equation, and all those in the first equation. All that is left is to determine the way the actual cost per household is calculated.

    Seriously, go read the CER documentation, that has already been outlined.


  • Options
    #47
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The total to be raised by Irish Water has been determined by the regulator and appears to be high.

    DCC has told me my water usage is 'below average' at below 100 cu. m. /yr. Yet my water bill will be significantly above my assessed bill if I had no meter. Clearly the regulater's sums are wrong.


  • Options
    #48
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    The total to be raised by Irish Water has been determined by the regulator and appears to be high.

    Just because the regulator isn't using figures to your liking doesn't make them wrong. Indeed the figures they are using appears to be in a range that is the stated average from multiple local authorities.
    Sam Russell wrote: »
    DCC has told me my waer usage is 'below average' at below 100 cu. m. /yr. Yet my water bill will be significantly above my assessed bill if I had no meter. Clearly the regulater's sums are wrong.

    The CER has made provision for rebates where the assessed charge is higher than the proven metered charge.


  • Options
    #49
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,488 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Just read that Water Charges could be as high as 1,200 euro per year for a family of four.
    That is just too expensive and will put families in hock.
    I can see huge demonstrations and refusal to pay when this becomes apparent.


  • Options
    #50
    Schadenfreudia
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Schadenfreudia


    Victor wrote: »
    People are comparing the costs of water in foreign cities. In Ireland, it will be the same price whether urban or rural.

    Sounds like a very good reason why Dubs shouldn't be forced to subsidize the "one-off" housing plague across the land.

    They built it, let they pay for their own water supply?


  • Options
    #51
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Just because the regulator isn't using figures to your liking doesn't make them wrong. Indeed the figures they are using appears to be in a range that is the stated average from multiple local authorities.



    The CER has made provision for rebates where the assessed charge is higher than the proven metered charge.

    The regulator has the wrong figures for average consumption. He must be unaware of the work done by Dublin City Council.

    The rebates do not apply where the below average consumption is higher than the non-metered charge.

    I will be paying more for water than electricity, based on usage charges for both. Standing charges make the electricity more than the water, but that is ridiculous.

    There will be riots in the streets when the bills drop on the mats. The unit charge is too high.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    The regulator has the wrong figures for average consumption. He must be unaware of the work done by Dublin City Council.

    The work by DCC that puts the average consumption per household at 600L/day?

    Population 4.6m
    Households 1.6m
    Average per household = 2.875
    Average usage (including children) =209.7L/day.


  • Options
    #53
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    I can see the amount of water people use if they have a meter plummeting! no taps on when brushing teeth, way less baths (shower off when lathering up) water butts for garden, install newer dual flush loos or displacement devices.

    This is the Irish and tax we are talking about, if there is a way to get around it or lower it as much as possible, it will be done!


  • Options
    #54
    crossmolinalad
    Registered Users Posts: 837 ✭✭✭crossmolinalad


    Schadenfreudia wrote: »
    I read today a claim that

    "the cost of water in Ireland (Europe's wettest regions) will be 500% higher than the cost of water in Southern Spain (Europe's driest regions)"

    Anyone know if this is true?

    ohhh i believe that directly
    we live rural and one of the roads where the mains lies between two small towns has last year only 52 water leaks over 12 km
    This year they are already at the amount of 12 leaks in the same pipe
    Pipe is just 7 years old


  • Options
    #55
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    ohhh i believe that directly
    we live rural and one of the roads where the mains lies between two small towns has last year only 52 water leaks over 12 km
    This year they are already at the amount of 12 leaks in the same pipe
    Pipe is just 7 years old

    how is that possible if it is buried to the correct depth and the mains are plastic I am assuming?


  • Options
    #56
    NUTLEY BOY
    Registered Users Posts: 2,344 ✭✭✭NUTLEY BOY


    Wll there be VAT charged on domestic water bills ?

    If so, what rate will apply ?


  • Options
    #57
    rameire
    Registered Users Posts: 4,115 ✭✭✭rameire


    NUTLEY BOY wrote: »
    Wll there be VAT charged on domestic water bills ?

    If so, what rate will apply ?

    no vat

    🌞 3.8kwp, 🌞 Split 2.28S, 1.52E. 🌞 Clonee, Dub.🌞



  • Options
    #58
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Meters just installed on our street. HAve to say that the contractors were very efficient and did a very tidy job in the time they said they'd do it.

    That said - not looking forward to the bill. Just wondering, when the first bill comes in do they charge all usage from zero or from the reading taken at a particular date?


  • Options
    #59
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    First reading will be 1st October by a drive-by van and second reading on 1st Jan. [Exact dates may vary - t&c apply:)]. They should read the meters at least once per month, but we shall see.

    The old DCC system was read over the air and was continuous - like every 15 mins (as far as I know) and as a result had problems with battery life. Also the transmission was a bit iffy in the summer due to tree in folliage. It was very successful but abandoned after a year or two. I do not think IW has used the results. Our meter was replaced a few weeks ago in a few minutes.


  • Options
    #60
    NUTLEY BOY
    Registered Users Posts: 2,344 ✭✭✭NUTLEY BOY


    Our new water meter was installed recently. The old stop-cock was taken away and is replaced by a blue handle which is an integral part of the meter assembly.

    I needed to change a tap washer. I turned the blue stop-cock handle. The water flow reduced to a trickle but would not shut off completely. With the old stop-cock (turned on/off with a water key) I could switch off the water supply completely.

    Is this how the new stop-cock is supposed to work or is it a fault ? It does not seem right or satisfactory that you cannot now isolate the water supply at the stop-cock. My neighbour checked his new stop-cock with identical results.

    Any thoughts please ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Alun
    Registered Users Posts: 21,421 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    Don't you also have a separate stop cock in the house itself?


Advertisement