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

Any plans for new reservoirs?

2»

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/06/hacking-water-meters-is-easier-than-it-should-be/
    If people want to reduce their water bills, they could hack the sensors. They could also increase the bill paid by a neighbor they don’t like, or evade restrictions on the amount of water used. And since the usage of water indicates the presence or absence of the homeowner, the hacked water meters can be used for surveillance purposes.

    Slides
    http://www.slideshare.net/the_netlocksmith/defcon-2011-vulnerabilities-in-wireless-water-meters#btnNext

    Full talk
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xy9If6WTcA


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    So they are spending less than 4m in a normal year ?

    Nope. I said between 4 & 5. Here are the exact figures for fresh water taken from the 2013 city council budget:
    Water Plants & Networks - €4,813,069
    Service Support Costs - €1,124,160

    The plant in Terryland is operated by the city but supplies water the the county, so I don't know if that is the total cost (and I don't have the co co budget too hand_)
    27857 Households in Galway
    .....
    At a cost of €500 per meter that's going to cost nearly €14 million not counting interest payments.

    You're forgetting businesses - who currently pay the €11m total cost of water provision and waste water treatment in Galway city.
    If that saves 10% water and that somehow magically translates into a 10% cost reduction on maintenance (lots of fixed costs, esp. wages) then it would take 35 years to pay for the meters out of the savings. :mad:

    Not really no, because IW will take over all the costs of water provision. So it will take over the 5.9m total cost from Galway. What's not clear to me is if it is also supposed to be taking over the waste water treatment (4.7m).

    The private houses are paying for 2-3 years total provision of water to the city, or just less than 1.5 years - where they have not paid water rates before.
    Oh BTW the property tax is already raising over three million a year in Galway City

    Good that reduces the €41m difference in income and expenditure that rates have to cover (rates which are never collected in full).
    On the grand scale of things the Bord Na Mona reservoir which will supply one third of the population will cost ~ €470m

    That joke? When the water was most needed there were water restrictions in the areas served by the areas that they wish to "drain" to flood the bog to make the resevoir. Oops, looks like the eco nuts didn't do their sums again.

    Dublin's problem isn't storage it's production. During the hot spell water usage went up 30m litres per day in Dublin, where they produce 500ml. That would be easily covered by the 10% usage reduction you speak of from metering.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell



    Wireless meters have security vulnerabilities and don't work as reliablly as they would like, so it's not going to save all the labour on reading as they will still have to inspect many of the meters rather than a drive by


    My house has a meter installed. [It was obviously a test area when they replaced the water pipes.]

    There is a white box (two actually) that monitor the meters all the time. These, as far as I know, relay real-time information back to base. This allows monitoring use and can detect leaks. If a meter is tampered with, this will be known straight away. No drive by readings, we live in an age of constant monitoring and instant communication.


  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭petronius


    I believe it has been negligent of the Water Authorities not investing in metrics on the water system to identify where leaks occur
    If they identify where leakages/water loss occurs they could reduce the amount of treated water they have to produce.
    Meaning that it would be cheaper and we wouldnt need the shannon- dublin scheme

    I recall listening to a speech where a conservationist said Ireland has the highest quality of water used to flush toilets - i dont know how feasiable it is to have a dual system of treated and non-treated water(collected rainwater) but that sounds more expensive than many other measures
    but again maybe households which invest in water collection systems for use for lavatory water should get subsidies from government since it would require less water to be treated and delivered


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    petronius wrote: »
    I believe it has been negligent of the Water Authorities not investing in metrics on the water system to identify where leaks occur
    If they identify where leakages/water loss occurs they could reduce the amount of treated water they have to produce.
    Meaning that it would be cheaper and we wouldnt need the shannon- dublin scheme

    I recall listening to a speech where a conservationist said Ireland has the highest quality of water used to flush toilets - i dont know how feasiable it is to have a dual system of treated and non-treated water(collected rainwater) but that sounds more expensive than many other measures
    but again maybe households which invest in water collection systems for use for lavatory water should get subsidies from government since it would require less water to be treated and delivered

    I would think a greater problem is not segregating sewage waste from storm water run off. If the sewage system was made secure so that floods/storms did not cause mixing of the two, then floods would be far less damaging. It is the lumpy water that causes the damage as infections and smells are next to impossible to clean up.

    It is the leaks that waste water, not flushing toilets. What percentage of water is flushed down the loo? (Compared to the 50% leaked).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭petronius


    I agree sewage should be better sealed off from run off where it is possible.

    And 50% loss in a system is scandalous - I mean there has to be a percentage which evaporates and gets lost by leaks but 50% how can an organisation justify that.

    Of course there should be cross planning between utilities, Gas, Electric, Telecoms, Board of Works, Road dev. etc. so as there is less disruption to roads from water and utility works and also where there is common openings -
    Like whats the point in one month the ESB digging up a road, and then resurfacing it only for the water guys to dig it up the following month

    Some european cities only allow city road works occur at Night! I think this is something which should be looked at. Some european cities work on roads with tram lines occur when the trams are scheduled to finish - no stopping the tram service for a day for road works etc.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The neighbours had the gas co dig a big hole in front of my house and exposed my water main which needed to be replaced. I called the water people and they said that they could not touch it while the road was open otherwise they would have to pay 50% of the cost of opening and closing the hole, which was a lot for all they would have done.

    Later the gas company dug up the whole road and renewed the gas main. The following year the water crowd dug up the whole road and replaced the water main. The electricity needs doing now.

    Great system.


  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭petronius


    This is one of the great frustrations with utilities
    The Board of Works or City council should broker the utility companies who are working on the roads etc. and coordinate developments and road closures

    Agreed - The idea of charging 1/2 the price for to one company who just want to do a minor measure when the surface is open is pathetic. They will only have to come back and open up the small portion they need to access..

    As a cyclist I have been on cycle lane which have been butchered by multiple roadworks, with token resurfacing. And during roadworks the cycle lane is the first thing to be sacrificed as if it doesnt matter.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,811 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    petronius wrote: »
    I believe it has been negligent of the Water Authorities not investing in metrics on the water system to identify where leaks occur
    If they identify where leakages/water loss occurs they could reduce the amount of treated water they have to produce.

    They need meters to find where the water is leaking. At the moment they know how much they are treating but have no way of knowing where it's being used the most. They don't need meters on every house but we do need to pay for water so they are solving 2 issues with the one meter
    petronius wrote: »
    Meaning that it would be cheaper and we wouldnt need the shannon- dublin scheme

    IIRC the Dublin water shortage has nothing to do with leaking pipes it's a lack of suitable sources, especially on the North side
    petronius wrote: »
    I recall listening to a speech where a conservationist said Ireland has the highest quality of water used to flush toilets - i dont know how feasiable it is to have a dual system of treated and non-treated water(collected rainwater) but that sounds more expensive than many other measures
    but again maybe households which invest in water collection systems for use for lavatory water should get subsidies from government since it would require less water to be treated and delivered

    They will be getting a subside as they won't have to pay as much as their neighbour, who doesn't have a rainwater capture system, for water. Retrofitting white and gray water systems to current homes isn't really doable, but they could change the building regs to make all new builds dual water.


  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭petronius


    If you are losing 50% of what you produce then surely it is a factor in shortage.

    Metrics on the water system (and it should have been done and should be done irrespective of if we introduce domestic water charges) would surely help identify where loss occurs

    Dual water systems well public, educational and community buildings should in future be obliged to have dual systems, and retrofitting where buildings are being upgraded

    Apartment blocks would also a good example where dual systems could be implemented - single water collection system on the roof (topped up from water network in times of drought) - and would give those annual charges residents are laden with could be justified for the mgmt company looking after it


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    petronius wrote: »
    Apartment blocks would also a good example where dual systems could be implemented - single water collection system on the roof (topped up from water network in times of drought) - and would give those annual charges residents are laden with could be justified for the mgmt company looking after it
    Multi-storey buildings do less well from rainwater collection as there is less roof per dwelling / resident.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Victor wrote: »
    Multi-storey buildings do less well from rainwater collection as there is less roof per dwelling / resident.

    But more residents/dwellings to pay for the infrastructure.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,811 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    But more residents/dwellings to pay for the infrastructure.

    There's no point in altering a building if it doesn't improve the situation, that's wasting resources that could be better used elsewhere.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Del2005 wrote: »
    There's no point in altering a building if it doesn't improve the situation, that's wasting resources that could be better used elsewhere.

    Yes, but adding a water butt at the end of a down pipe is not altering the building.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,811 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Yes, but adding a water butt at the end of a down pipe is not altering the building.

    How does the water get from the butt into the units in the building and then into the 1 or more bathrooms they each have?

    I think someone already posted in this thread that the average house doesn't have a big enough roof area to catch enough rainwater to be used in a gray water system, so how will a building with several homes be able to catch enough?

    We can't change what's built, but any new builds or major alterations should be forced by planning or building regs to have dual water systems installed.


Advertisement