registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,214
Likes: 6,021
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 8:52:48 GMT
Post by registerme on Aug 28, 2022 8:52:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2022 9:02:14 GMT
It's a design thing. The UK decided that having one drain and one water reprocessing system for rain water and poo. So, it never rains poo but it rains rain. Hence our ancient sewage system is fine when it is dry, fine in a steady light rain and useless in a storm. Add to that human's need to cover everything in hard surfaces and suddenly the rain that used to soak into soft land now gets funneled into the same sewage system.
Other countries, who came to sewage management later than us, developed two drain systems, one for rain water and one for poo.
Climate change is, of course, making this worse, because when it rains it rains more.
Interestingly Denmark recognised this about 15 years ago and began remaking their main road drains, leaving the poo valleys on the sides of roads, moving the camber(if that is what it is called) towards the centre and fitting a big rain drain there. But then they are just an island..ish thing in the Atlantic..ish so what has that got to do with us when we hate to look outside our sacred island.
Prepare for a lot of road works and a lot of building work, but, of course we will still keep building more houses with more roads and more concreted over land because that is what we like to do and never mind there might be a responsability.
Just on this "design thing", in the Netherlands when there is a car accident, they launch a design review to see if the road layout could have been better to make it safer, amazingly it works. In the UK we sweep up the blood, tow the car away, say sorry to greaving family and let it happen again. The best that happens, after multiple deaths is reduce the numbers on the speed limit signs which, because speed limit signs are not the solution, "but we did something", yep something useless. So many great ideas out there but sitting in fortress Britain our ability to retain ignorance is astounding.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,896
Likes: 2,768
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 12:52:46 GMT
Post by michaelc on Aug 28, 2022 12:52:46 GMT
If there are national infrastructural problems that need solving it needs doing at the national level.
Can a regional water company be expected to think big and plan for all of the UK's needs? Should such a company have a licence to sell water into every home in the region where there is no possibility of competition?
They should be re-nationalised.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,014
Likes: 4,825
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 13:38:21 GMT
Post by adrianc on Aug 28, 2022 13:38:21 GMT
If there are national infrastructural problems that need solving it needs doing at the national level. Can a regional water company be expected to think big and plan for all of the UK's needs? Should such a company have a licence to sell water into every home in the region where there is no possibility of competition? But doesn't that mean that they CAN act regionally and implement such changes...? FWIW, Scottish Water is still nationalised, while Welsh Water is a not-for-profit mutual.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2022 14:05:40 GMT
I'd rather the market pays rather than the tax payer.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,014
Likes: 4,825
|
Post by adrianc on Aug 28, 2022 14:48:41 GMT
I'd rather the market pays rather than the tax payer. Except the problem is that currently the market is being paid, lavishly. Yes, market investors need a return on their investment, else they won't invest. But...
|
|
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 15:48:09 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2022 15:48:09 GMT
I don't think that is the problem, the problem is that the design or specification has not been set correctly. It is a failure of design standards, like many things they are doing what the rules allow them to do, so change the rules or objectives.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,896
Likes: 2,768
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 15:57:00 GMT
Post by michaelc on Aug 28, 2022 15:57:00 GMT
I don't think that is the problem, the problem is that the design or specification has not been set correctly. It is a failure of design standards, like many things they are doing what the rules allow them to do, so change the rules or objectives. Why do they care about it if they are making money? As for "having the market pay", the money from the market ultimately is repaid from money given by customers who are forced to buy their water from that company. In effect that is all taxpayers and more.
|
|
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 16:13:18 GMT
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2022 16:13:18 GMT
If they are not achieving the standard set they will be fined for that failure or may lose their license
Why should I care who pays?
I'm surprised you have not heard of capitalism? Perhaps you should send me all your money? A good company will manage the change of specification well and make good profits, the bad one will not. Letting the tax payer get in the way will be a disaster, we already have set the standard wrong you also want to prove the government cannot manage change well?
Nothing can be done over night, everything will take time, the water company is about to discover that its assets are not worth what it thought they were worth. I'd rather the shareholders and management fought the good fight than they tax payers picked up the bill and make a mess of solving it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2022 16:14:44 GMT
The UK water companies are a pretty much textbook example of a market failure - the 'Natural Monopoly'.
Can I change my water supply to a competitor? No. Can anyone set up a competing water network? No.
This lack of competition renders the idea of 'market forces' utterly laughable. In the absence of competition, these regional monopolies can simply gouge, underinvest and profiteer as they like.
Even Adam Smith himself didn't think that markets were suitable mechanisms in situations such as these.
|
|
mrk
Posts: 807
Likes: 753
|
Post by mrk on Aug 28, 2022 16:14:55 GMT
If they are not achieving the standard set they will be fined for that failure or may lose their license
Why should I care who pays?
I'm surprised you have not heard of capitalism? Perhaps you should send me all your money? A good company will manage the change of specification well and make good profits, the bad one will not. Letting the tax payer get in the way will be a disaster, we already have set the standard wrong you also want to prove the government cannot manage change well?
Nothing can be done over night, everything will take time, the water company is about to discover that its assets are not worth what it thought they were worth. I'd rather the shareholders and management fought the good fight than they tax payers picked up the bill and make a mess of solving it.
In economist-speak, water supply is actually a typical example of a natural monopoly, one of those cases where a pure free market system doesn't work very well (aka "market failures"). Edit: @eurasian69 beat me to it.
|
|
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 17:16:23 GMT
Post by bernythedolt on Aug 28, 2022 17:16:23 GMT
Just on this "design thing", in the Netherlands when there is a car accident, they launch a design review to see if the road layout could have been better to make it safer, amazingly it works. In the UK we sweep up the blood, tow the car away, say sorry to greaving family and let it happen again. The best that happens, after multiple deaths is reduce the numbers on the speed limit signs which, because speed limit signs are not the solution, "but we did something", yep something useless. So many great ideas out there but sitting in fortress Britain our ability to retain ignorance is astounding.
Sorry, not convinced by that. Design reviews or not, the UK must be doing something right, because our road death rate is one of the lowest in Europe, including lower than NL (and Germany, France, Italy,...). Whether you measure by deaths per 100k population, deaths per 100k vehicles or deaths per billion vehicle-Km, the NL death rate is higher than ours on all measures. In fact, by any of those measures, the UK is one of the safest places in the world as road deaths go. Of all the countries in Europe, only Norway, Sweden and Switzerland have an identifiably better safety record than the UK, and some of our European neighbours are dreadful by comparison. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,627
Likes: 4,196
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 19:50:39 GMT
Post by agent69 on Aug 28, 2022 19:50:39 GMT
Just on this "design thing", in the Netherlands when there is a car accident, they launch a design review to see if the road layout could have been better to make it safer, amazingly it works. In the UK we sweep up the blood, tow the car away, say sorry to greaving family and let it happen again. The best that happens, after multiple deaths is reduce the numbers on the speed limit signs which, because speed limit signs are not the solution, "but we did something", yep something useless. So many great ideas out there but sitting in fortress Britain our ability to retain ignorance is astounding.
Sorry, not convinced by that.Design reviews or not, the UK must be doing something right, because our road death rate is one of the lowest in Europe, including lower than NL (and Germany, France, Italy,...). Whether you measure by deaths per 100k population, deaths per 100k vehicles or deaths per billion vehicle-Km, the NL death rate is higher than ours on all measures. In fact, by any of those measures, the UK is one of the safest places in the world as road deaths go. Of all the countries in Europe, only Norway, Sweden and Switzerland have an identifiably better safety record than the UK, and some of our European neighbours are dreadful by comparison. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rateIn the UK we call them road safety audits:
- Stage 2 audit is carried out on the completed design before construction starts
- Stage 3 audit is carried out when the new roadworks are substantially complete, prior to opening to traffic
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,627
Likes: 4,196
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 20:06:26 GMT
Post by agent69 on Aug 28, 2022 20:06:26 GMT
It's a design thing. The UK decided that having one drain and one water reprocessing system for rain water and poo. So, it never rains poo but it rains rain. Hence our ancient sewage system is fine when it is dry, fine in a steady light rain and useless in a storm. Add to that human's need to cover everything in hard surfaces and suddenly the rain that used to soak into soft land now gets funneled into the same sewage system.
I blame it on Joseph bazalgette.
The system will sort itself out (in a hundred years or so) as old developments are bulldozed and the old combined sewers are replaced with segregated systems. In the meantime the options appear to be:
- leave things as they are
- provide additional storm storage capacity up stream of the treatment works
- dig up every high street and replace the combined sewers with a segregated system.
For me it's a bit like the moaning about hosepipe bans and 20% of water being lost through leaks. The amount of time, money and disruption needed to significantly improve things can't be justified. The last hosepipe ban in Devon was 26 years ago, and I can live with that.
|
|
|
Water
Aug 28, 2022 20:31:45 GMT
Post by bernythedolt on Aug 28, 2022 20:31:45 GMT
Sorry, not convinced by that.Design reviews or not, the UK must be doing something right, because our road death rate is one of the lowest in Europe, including lower than NL (and Germany, France, Italy,...). Whether you measure by deaths per 100k population, deaths per 100k vehicles or deaths per billion vehicle-Km, the NL death rate is higher than ours on all measures. In fact, by any of those measures, the UK is one of the safest places in the world as road deaths go. Of all the countries in Europe, only Norway, Sweden and Switzerland have an identifiably better safety record than the UK, and some of our European neighbours are dreadful by comparison. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate In the UK we call them road safety audits:
- Stage 2 audit is carried out on the completed design before construction starts
- Stage 3 audit is carried out when the new roadworks are substantially complete, prior to opening to traffic
Sorry, my meaning wasn't clear and I should have expressed it better. I didn't mean that design reviews don't work, I meant I wasn't convinced that NL has a better system than the UK, which was the point the poster was making.
|
|