In view of this would it not be a cheaper option to run a pipeline from areas that have an excess of water ie. The Lake District or Scotland to the resovoirs in areas that suffer water shortage during times of drought.
2006-11-19 07:18:42 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
It is not about what is cheaper or more efficient, it is about how to maximise the profits of the private water companies.
2006-11-19 23:43:34 · answer #1 · answered by SteveNaive 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Water meters are fairer because then people are charged for the amount of water they use. They also save water because people are more carefull not to waste water if they are being charged per unit.
Without a meter you are charged water rates which are based on the old rateable value of your house. So people pay different amounts of water rates depending on where they live, regardless of how many people live in their house and how much water they use.
Water could be moved around. It is already - water from the lake district goes to Manchester and water from Bolton goes to Liverpool etc. We could have more pipes to move more water around, but people still have to accept that they should also be careful with water. Water meters will help them to do this as well as being a fairer system of charging everyone for water.
2006-11-19 21:56:03 · answer #2 · answered by ribble_girl 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
meters are being introduced so the water can be accountable. piping is not an option as they are resevoirs for homes and people in that area incase there is a problem in their system. what you are saying is like what my town council did. i live near a seaside town but am rural and they cut off our water to supply the huge demands in the town during the summer which is outrageous. they have recently stopped and have had more resevoirs to fill during the winter for the summer months. also droughts occur from the over use of water. in england you can't drink out of taps so the water is being wasted in bathes showers and sinks. in ireland we drink our tap water as it is safe to do so and we never end up with droughts. it is up to your government to increase the number of water treatment plants to meet demands.
2006-11-20 06:59:28 · answer #3 · answered by Sarah C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good point, why can't the Powers that be, realise this!!!
I had a water meter at my last address and what I was paying per month - normally, was covering me for about 4 months.
I want one fitted at this address, I live on my own and there's no way I use £223.84 worth a year.
I have to get a fitment for under my sink before they will do it. Can't afford the plumber, to do the job!
Most laws are usually not beneficial to us, the public but this one certainly will be. Bring it on.
.
2006-11-19 07:32:14 · answer #4 · answered by ? 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The plans are that long term every house will have a meter, but at present there is no law that says you have to have one, but you can request one from your local water board if you want one (yeah right!!). All new houses have them as standard though...;
2006-11-19 08:10:09 · answer #5 · answered by huggz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I had a water meter fitted last year and my water bill dropped by about 60%
2006-11-19 07:31:42 · answer #6 · answered by barn owl 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They have looked into running pipes & they say it would be too
expensive.Thames Valley water board announced they are building a resaviour
2006-11-23 00:55:59 · answer #7 · answered by Ollie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What, and take away a nice little earner for themselves, that is too simple, obvious, and not in the water companies interests.
2006-11-19 11:09:32 · answer #8 · answered by Spanner 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
omg i hope i dont get one,i use water wisely as it is.if people used water wisely in droughts this wouldnt be happening,water is being wasted way to much these days.
2006-11-19 09:15:17 · answer #9 · answered by shaz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
but think of the damage to the countryside...it would cost millions to fix it...cheaper to fit the meters
2006-11-20 08:55:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋