Irish Water

Pete_Cavan · 17-01-2012 11:32pm #1

Most posters here seem to only be interested in roads and rail but there is more to infrastructure than that, but wont be much of that over the short to medium term so we will have to make do to keep this forum ticking over - beggers cant be choosers and all that!

Good to see some movement on Irish Water. It is badly needed;

Consultation on the Establishment of a Public Water Utility and the future funding of water services

Hogan and O’Dowd Announce Public Consultation on the Reform of the Water Sector

I havent had time to have a full read through the documents but from what I have seen and bits picked up here and there but it seems that Irish Water will also be responsible for waste water and waste water treatment and Council staff will be transferred to staff it. The Commission of Energy Regulation will regulate Irish Water. As Irish Water is not up and running yet, the Department of the Environment will start the metering process. I suppose they need to get the ball rolling asap but I dont see the need for the Department to be involved in the transition, they will untangle the mess of the 34 local authorities and create their own mess for Irish Water to untangle before they can start any real work.

Up to 90% of households will be metered by the end of 2014 at a cost of €500. About 300,000 households will be slapped with a fixed-rate water charge;

The PwC report says: "The remaining households on public supplies, which would be either too expensive or technically difficult to meter individually initially (eg houses with shared service connections and houses in multi-occupancy premises such as apartment or flat complexes and gated communities) will have charges levied on a fixed basis."

This is very self-defeating. I dont see why they cant just pass the cost of providing individual meters to units in apartment blocks or gated communities by metering the supply into the block/estate and charging the management company who then spread the cost across all residents. Everyone will claim "I dont use as much water as your wan down the hall so why should I pay the same?" Their options are either do nothing and all pay the same or pay to have individual meters installed and pay less for using less water. And before anyone says why should apartment dwellers have to pay for their own meter, the state would be providing the same service to them as to everywhere else they meter - ie. they install a meter where the water leaves public infrastructure and enters private distribution pipes.

And I dont like the name Irish Water, Uisce is a better name imo.

bk · 18-01-2012 12:43am

I strongly disagree with your point on apartments.

Apartment dwellers typically live in the highest density and most environmentally friendly fashion in Ireland.

Such people should be awarded for taking this choice, not punished.

As it is apartment dwellers already pay ridiculously high maintenance fees, while typically using much less public resources then standalone houses, this should be taken into account.

Carawaystick · 18-01-2012 3:00am

bk wrote: »

I strongly disagree with your point on apartments.

Apartment dwellers typically live in the highest density and most environmentally friendly fashion in Ireland.

Such people should be awarded for taking this choice, not punished.

As it is apartment dwellers already pay ridiculously high maintenance fees, while typically using much less public resources then standalone houses, this should be taken into account.

As this is only to do with fresh water provided and sewage collected, unless you've some evidence Apt dwellers use less or provide less, then they should pay the same

If apartment dwelling was more sustainable etc, then the management fee would be less than the equivalent in a house dweller, as they wouldn't have to pay individual insurance, grass cutters/gardening due to the economies of scale.

As I see it, the fact civil service staff will start to do the work on IW will be the death knell of any performance improvements or pay reforms; sher thats the way it always was will rule.
There should be no defined benefit pension plans, and no continuity of service for people joining the new company.

I also noticed the line about IW being a public utility, rather than a semi state, not the best.

One thing that seemed to be hammered home was the cost of providing the service was totalled with the capital and operating costs combined and then the operating cost of all water provision mentioned, but not of domestic supply. Surely the commercial/non-domestic supply is known and charged for maybe unser uber menschen/ frauen don't want us to know the actual cost of domestic supply so we can't compare easily.

If they are going to meter sewage then I can foresee the increase of a mcSh1t

Jayuu · 18-01-2012 1:26pm

So I, a single person living alone in my apartment should pay the same as a family of four or five living in a similar apartment? What nonsense. Payment should on a usage basis for everybody.
Why should it be so difficult to meter apartments? We can do it for electricity supplies.

unit 1 · 21-01-2012 10:02pm

A point that occured to me is who is going to pay for future investment. Surely the cc's have already collected levies during the building boom to provide adequate services, so if they are not there will the consumer have to pay for them again,

monument · 22-01-2012 6:04pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

As this is only to do with fresh water provided and sewage collected, unless you've some evidence Apt dwellers use less or provide less, then they should pay the same

Apartments owners / renters are hugely less likely to:

Have any kind of leaky outdoor tap or pipes
Be using a hose to water a garden
Be using a hose to wash a car
Be using a hose to wash a dog
Leave a hose or outdoor tap running

Many apartments also don't even have a bath, while the vast majority of houses do.

Carawaystick wrote: »

If apartment dwelling was more sustainable etc, then the management fee would be less than the equivalent in a house dweller, as they wouldn't have to pay individual insurance, grass cutters/gardening due to the economies of scale.

Is this in reply to anything bk said?

Because management fees (apartments and in gated houses) have very little to do with how environmentally sustainable apartments are.

markpb · 22-01-2012 6:35pm

Jayuu wrote: »

So I, a single person living alone in my apartment should pay the same as a family of four or five living in a similar apartment? What nonsense. Payment should on a usage basis for everybody.
Why should it be so difficult to meter apartments? We can do it for electricity supplies.

I presume its because apartments were built with electricity meters in mind but not with water meters. You could probably put meters in each apartment easily enough but not in a location accessible to someone who wanted to read it.

tharlear · 23-01-2012 5:38pm

Don't understand what all the fuss is about.

As I do not live in Ireland my house has a water meter. It's about 100x100x150mm, has an aerial (similar to an FM radio attenna) sticking out of it. 4 time a year the water utility "drive by" and "read" the meter.
Before they installed the present meter that there was a wire going out to dial on the exterior of the house which was read by a person. Took them all on 20 minutes to change out the meter.
As the connection on the new meter were not the same as on the old the had to cut the pipe and solder in new connections. this would be similar to cutting a pipe to install a meter where there was none. As I said don't undersatnd what al the fuss is about.

No entering the building unless there is a fault. I get billed each quarter. If I didn't pay 2 quarter in a row then my water would be shut off. To get reconnect I would have to pay the full bill plus a reconnection fee.

monument · 23-01-2012 5:41pm

For reference, where do you live?

tharlear · 23-01-2012 7:41pm

In one of the countries of the world that uses water meters.

US

By the way I am not commenting as to weather or not water meter should be installed in ireland. Just saying that in my experience its not a big deal to have one installed

dowlingm · 24-01-2012 6:14pm

tharlear's setup sounds very like what we have in Toronto.

Water rates here are 1.90 Euro per cubic metre at current exchange rates if paid by the due date. That works out to about 8.62 Euro for 1,000 gallons assuming I have my sums right (C$[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]0.01131836/gallon)[/FONT].

tharlear · 24-01-2012 9:01pm

Service charges quarterly (for being connected to the system)
meter size based on pipe size
inch__________________mm
3/4 inch meter_$19.20__19.05mm E14.76
1 inch meter___$30.30__25.4mm E23.31
1-1/4_________$40.80__30.8mm E31.38
1-1/2_________$50.40__38.1mm E38.77
2____________ $76.20__50.8mm E58.62
3_____________$123___ 76.2mm E94.62
etc
12___________$927____305mm E713.1

Volume charges are
first 15000 cubic feet $2.12per 100cubic feet (first 425cubic m 0.58 per Cubic m)
next 185000cF $1.80 per 100cf (next 5239cubic m 0.49 per Cubic m)
over 200000cf $$1.50 per 100 cf (over 5663cubic m 0.41 per Cubic m)

So single family home(new construction is normally 1"inch)using 424 cubic m per quater (or 142 per month) pays about E270.00 per quarter

I normally pay about $140 to $180 (in summer) per quarter.

Pete_Cavan · 24-01-2012 9:13pm

bk wrote: »

I strongly disagree with your point on apartments.

Apartment dwellers typically live in the highest density and most environmentally friendly fashion in Ireland.

Its not environmentally friendly if they are wasting lots of water.

Jayuu wrote: »

So I, a single person living alone in my apartment should pay the same as a family of four or five living in a similar apartment? What nonsense. Payment should on a usage basis for everybody.
Why should it be so difficult to meter apartments? We can do it for electricity supplies.

Apt blocks are wired so that the amount of energy consumed by each unit can be measured. I guess if/how water meters work will depend on how they are plumbed; if the water for each unit comes of the general building pipework at one point and is distributed to all taps/showers/washing machine in the unit from there it is easy, if each taps/showers/washing machine in the building comes off different points along the general building distribution pipework individual metering would be too difficult. But like I said, if the entire building is metered, and each resident is charged for the water the entire building uses, there is an incentive for them to reduce waste.

tharlear wrote: »

As I do not live in Ireland my house has a water meter. It's about 100x100x150mm, has an aerial (similar to an FM radio attenna) sticking out of it. 4 time a year the water utility "drive by" and "read" the meter.
Before they installed the present meter that there was a wire going out to dial on the exterior of the house which was read by a person. Took them all on 20 minutes to change out the meter.
As the connection on the new meter were not the same as on the old the had to cut the pipe and solder in new connections. this would be similar to cutting a pipe to install a meter where there was none. As I said don't undersatnd what al the fuss is about.

Drive by meter reading is standard, even here in Ireland.

tharlear · 24-01-2012 9:24pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayuu
So I, a single person living alone in my apartment should pay the same as a family of four or five living in a similar apartment? What nonsense. Payment should on a usage basis for everybody.
Why should it be so difficult to meter apartments? We can do it for electricity supplies.

I presume its because apartments were built with electricity meters in mind but not with water meters. You could probably put meters in each apartment easily enough but not in a location accessible to someone who wanted to read it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tharlear
As I do not live in Ireland my house has a water meter. It's about 100x100x150mm, has an aerial (similar to an FM radio attenna) sticking out of it. 4 time a year the water utility "drive by" and "read" the meter.
Before they installed the present meter that there was a wire going out to dial on the exterior of the house which was read by a person. Took them all on 20 minutes to change out the meter.
As the connection on the new meter were not the same as on the old the had to cut the pipe and solder in new connections. this would be similar to cutting a pipe to install a meter where there was none. As I said don't undersatnd what al the fuss is about.

Pete Cavan
Drive by meter reading is standard, even here in Ireland.

Only addded that info to highlight that access to each apartment would not be required

bk · 25-01-2012 2:50pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Its not environmentally friendly if they are wasting lots of water.

But how would they?

They typically don't have gardens to water, can't wash a car (if they even own one), water features in a garden to run, etc.

I'm pretty certain that apartment dwellers are probably some of the lowest water users in the vast majority of cases.

Jayuu · 27-01-2012 12:43am

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

But like I said, if the entire building is metered, and each resident is charged for the water the entire building uses, there is an incentive for them to reduce waste.

I don't see how this follows. In fact its the very opposite because if you already use a large amount of water (because your a family of four or five compared to a single person) then your usage is being subsidised by the other people in the block.

Also since there's no way of knowing if everybody is trying to be responsible then you'll always get people who won't care and won't reduce their water usage. To be honest, if I know that I'm going to have to pay more than I should based on my actual usage then I'll probably increase my water usage to get a fairer amount for what I'm being charged.

serfboard · 27-02-2013 4:38pm

Lest we forget, here are some reasons why we badly need Irish Water.

Galway City Tribune wrote:

One city household would face a bill of almost €47,000 for the year when domestic water charges are introduced, an extensive leak detection survey by Galway City Council has revealed.

[...]

A property at St Claire’s on Taylor’s Hill is currently consuming a staggering 13,473 gallons of water per day – more than 120 times the average – the Leak Detection Unit found. That would equate to a water charges bill of €46,941.

The survey identified more than 100 ‘Private Side Leakages’ (on private property), and after being contacted, around half of these were repaired by the owners.

The Council then fitted meters at the boundaries of 18 properties, and found they would clock up water usage of more than €260,000 for the year – almost 27.5 million gallons.

The average ‘normal’ daily consumption is 110 gallons – a house at Ros Aitinn on the Clybaun Road was found to be using 11,000 per day (which would cost almost €38,500), while another property at St Brendan’s Terrace in Woodquay is using 7,871 gallons per day (€27,422).

Pete_Cavan · 03-08-2014 11:58am

Irish Water are having a public consultation and offering the public the chance to make submissions on its Water Services Strategic Plan;

http://www.water.ie/about-us/project-and-plans/future-plans/

Closing date for submissions Monday September 1st 2014.

Sam Russell · 03-08-2014 5:01pm

Water meters were fitted in our street about 7 years ago. They also set up a remote reader on the local lampost to send the data back - no drive-by reader. They fitted a new water main and fitted water meters at that time. They reduced water leaks to zero. They stopped monitoring the meters about 4 years ago.

According to DCC, our household consumption was below average at a bit less than 100 cu m per year. Using that figure, our bill will be 100 - 30 (free allowance) =70 by €4.88 = 341.60, well above the €270 it will be for non-metered consumption, (two adults, no kids) and well above the 'average' of €240. I think that 150 cu m would be closer average for a two adult household.

They have come up with the craziest cost scheme imaginable. Given they said the average charge per household would be €240 each house (fixed by Government): then with a consumption of 100 cu m/an gives the figures below:

If they had a standard charge of say €140, and would then get €1 per cu m.
If they had a standard charge of say €40, and would then get €2 per cu m.
If they had a standard charge of say €0, (free usage of 30 cu. m) and would then get €3.40 per cu m.
If they had a standard charge of say €0, free usage (30 cu m) and 1 child (20 cu m)would then get €4.80 per cu m.
(I think I see where the €4.88 per cu m came from - but not based on reality).

The free usage and no standing charge pushes up the cost per cu m if the average is fixed. This has the opposite effect the politicos wanted. If there is a standing charge that is high, the cost per cu m comes down. But with no standing charge and a generous free allowance, this causes people to see the actual cost of water (per cu m.) to be huge, and a lot of people will try to reduce consumption by not flushing the loo. If you are above the free allowance, then every cu m. cost you €4.88 and so every flush (9l) costs 4.4c. Not flushing the loo is not just unhygenic but it also affects the sewage system by reducing the volume/flow of water and increasing the percentage of the lumpy stuff - not good.

The commercial charges by DCC are €2 per cu m. The free allowances should be scrapped and a standing charge of €40 should apply. The government parties will pay a huge price for this come the next election.

Free allowances for children should go too and if politically required should be on the social welfare children's allowance, not Irish Water. The value of the free allowance per child (using published charges) is €102.48/year compared with the social welfare benefit of €130 per month or €1,560 per year for the child allowance payable to all children up to 16 or up to 18 if in full time education.

It is just daft to expect a semi-state operation to be chasing such nonsense as children's PPS numbers and checking their ages. (Will there be a rent a kid scam).

How about a free electricity allowance for babies to warm their bottle?

BonkeyDonker · 03-08-2014 8:02pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Not flushing the loo is not just unhygenic but it also affects the sewage system by reducing the volume/flow of water and increasing the percentage of the lumpy stuff - not good.

Maybe it doesnt say alot good for me, but that made me chuckle.

As for no standing charges - I agree, not having them is stupid as it drives up the variable rate(the price per litre). It will ultimately end up costing people more, as their "free" allowance is accounted for in the cost of their remaining water usage. But it made for good PR at the time for a few politico types.

At least Irish water have said that not having one will drive up the price, as they need to allow for the "free" allowance somehow.

Sam Russell · 03-08-2014 10:25pm

BonkeyDonker wrote: »

Maybe it doesnt say alot good for me, but that made me chuckle.

As for no standing charges - I agree, not having them is stupid as it drives up the variable rate(the price per litre). It will ultimately end up costing people more, as their "free" allowance is accounted for in the cost of their remaining water usage. But it made for good PR at the time for a few politico types.

At least Irish water have said that not having one will drive up the price, as they need to allow for the "free" allowance somehow.

This is the very point. It is like buying a mobile phone that gives you an iPhone for 'free' on a 24 month contract at €60 per month. That is a €1440 contract for a €500 free gift.

Every litre used once you are above the 'free' allowance will cost .44c whatever your usage. Thus flushing the loo costs 3.06c if you have a modern 9l flush but upto double that if you have an old one. To have a shower might cost 20c. It brings back that old Irish saying "did you switch off the immersion?"

Heaven help us from such terror as leaving on the immersion or let a tap drip.

Schadenfreudia · 05-08-2014 11:56pm

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?

Five Lamps · 06-08-2014 12:12am

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?

Doesn't really matter how wet the country is. It's the infrastructure to contain and supply drinking water that matters. Also it has 10 times the population so you'll have economies of scale that you don't have here.

Schadenfreudia · 06-08-2014 12:26am

Five Lamps wrote: »

Doesn't really matter how wet the country is. It's the infrastructure to contain and supply drinking water that matters. Also it has 10 times the population so you'll have economies of scale that you don't have here.

OK.

Let me rephrase!

Is it true that water in Spain is one fifth the cost of what is proposed in Ireland?

(And I'd suggest rainfall matters very much indeed, and population density , is rather more relevant that total population).

Sam Russell · 06-08-2014 7:52am

I am not familliar with water costs in Spain, but I would not be surprised if that were true.

It is certainly true that the Government have chosen a very stupid charging scheme. Commercial units pay approx. €2 per cu metre for water (where metered) in DCC and Fingal CC. Domestic users will be charged more than double this amount.

The TDs were caught up in the overwhelming demand that no standing charge be levied and users should have a 'free' allowance. They obviously did not understand that if the average charge was fixed (at €240/yr) then the cost per litre would be very high. The more 'free' allowance (like extra 'free' water for children) pushes up the per cu. m. cost. It also increases the cross subsidy from one group towards the other.

They should have settled on a standing charge of €140 per yr and we would then have a charge of €1 per cu. m.

Remember, (nearly) all users will exceed the 'free allowance' and so pay the €4.88 per cu. m. for their water. I]Why are TDs so stupid?[/I

Sam Russell · 06-08-2014 9:11am

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

OK.

Let me rephrase!

Is it true that water in Spain is one fifth the cost of what is proposed in Ireland?

(And I'd suggest rainfall matters very much indeed, and population density , is rather more relevant that total population).

You might check this out.

http://www.publicpolicy.ie/domestic-water-charges-in-europe/

Table 1: Water prices across selected cities (per 1000 litres)

So while Madrid is shown at €.99 /cu.m, Milan is only €0.40 /cu.m.

So, no, Spain is not the cheapest but is one of the cheapest. And Dublin is not the dearest but is one of the dearest.

serfboard · 06-08-2014 12:33pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I]Why are TDs so stupid?[/I

They're not stupid - it's just that the only thing they know anything about is how to get planning permissions and medical cards, and that seems to be enough for us to keep re-electing them.

Sam Russell wrote: »

So, no, Spain is not the cheapest but is one of the cheapest.

Spain is cheap for a lot of things so there's no surprise there.

Idbatterim · 06-08-2014 5:58pm

some of the leakage on private property is insane, at least these should be quick and cheap fixes in most cases, that will save insane amounts...

Five Lamps · 07-08-2014 9:04pm

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

OK.

Let me rephrase!

Is it true that water in Spain is one fifth the cost of what is proposed in Ireland?

(And I'd suggest rainfall matters very much indeed, and population density , is rather more relevant that total population).

I don't agree. The cost is capturing, storing and distributing water. Spain may get less rainfall than Ireland but they may well have enough average rainful for the purpose.

Also population density is not the key issue - it's more about concentrations or urbanisation. SPain has a low population density but also has concentrations of populations on coastlines and large urban centres. If you can set up system correctly then you can get the required economies of scale and lower costs per litre.

Sam Russell · 08-08-2014 9:44am

The charges in Ireland, at this stage, are irrelevant to actual costs.

Currently, it is a tax gathering exercise as 50% of water is lost through leaks. There is no time to address this prior to bills going out. The proposal is for usage to be charged for, rather than infrastructure. Having wasted €180m setting up the company, and then taking on all the local authority employees, and so saddling themselves with too many employees, I think usage is the least cost.

Victor · 08-08-2014 11:56am

Sam Russell wrote: »

The charges in Ireland, at this stage, are irrelevant to actual costs.

Currently, it is a tax gathering exercise as 50% of water is lost through leaks. There is no time to address this prior to bills going out. The proposal is for usage to be charged for, rather than infrastructure. Having wasted €180m setting up the company, and then taking on all the local authority employees, and so saddling themselves with too many employees, I think usage is the least cost.

Let's stick to Infrastructure-relevant discussion.

Moderator

Carawaystick · 09-08-2014 8:25pm

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?

Victor · 10-08-2014 3:58pm

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

Schadenfreudia · 10-08-2014 5:53pm

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.

antoobrien · 11-08-2014 12:35pm

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.

Sam Russell · 11-08-2014 1:48pm

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.

antoobrien · 11-08-2014 3:53pm

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.

Idbatterim · 11-08-2014 4:04pm

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

antoobrien · 11-08-2014 4:14pm

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.

Sam Russell · 11-08-2014 7:48pm

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.

Victor · 11-08-2014 7:58pm

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.

a65b2cd · 11-08-2014 9:55pm

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?

Victor · 12-08-2014 2:50am

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.

antoobrien · 12-08-2014 10:38am

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.

Sam Russell · 12-08-2014 12:04pm

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.

antoobrien · 12-08-2014 12:30pm

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.

Sam Russell · 12-08-2014 1:55pm

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.

antoobrien · 12-08-2014 4:40pm

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.

tayto lover · 12-08-2014 4:43pm

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.

Schadenfreudia · 13-08-2014 8:14pm

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?

Sam Russell · 13-08-2014 9:57pm

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.

Irish Water

Comments