LONDON (Reuters) - Britain needs to use more recycled effluent as drinking water if it is to deal with a long-term shortage crisis, a report said on Tuesday. The Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) said using treated sewage was one radical suggestion that needed to be pursued if the country was deal with the growing problem. It also called for a rise in spending on infrastructure along with price rises of up to 20 percent to fund the replacement of old, leaky pipes, particularly in London. Many UK water companies were forced to impose tough restrictions on water usage this summer, banning the use of hose-pipes and sprinklers, because of low reservoir levels. The Environment Agency said south-east England had endured its worst drought for a century. "Parts of the UK are experiencing long term water shortages, so we need a range of solutions to keep the water running," said John Lawson, the ICE's Water Board chairman. "Effluent water reuse is still a relatively untapped way of providing drinking water to meet growing long term needs. Sewage can be turned into drinking water by processes which sieve and then chemically clean the water so it can be put back into rivers to be re-treated for human consumption. In its annual State of the Nation report, ICE also suggested compulsory water metering to encourage users to save water in areas where it was scarce, together with the building of new reservoirs and desalination plants. "Water consumer prices will have to rise to pay for new infrastructure -- an uncomfortable fact customers, the government and regulators must recognise," Lawson said. "We currently pay less for our water than many of our European neighbours -- something that will have to change to keep our taps from running dry. However Water UK, a body which represents water companies, said the ICE report gave a "false analysis" of future resources and accused it of "sensationalism". "While the industry, its regulators and the government keep all potential supply measures under review to ensure security of supply, there is no intention or need to change the current policy on effluent reuse," Water UK said in a statement. http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=adimarticle&f=uk_-_olgbtopnews&t=4023&id=3954502&d=20061017&do=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&ml=ma&lc=en&ae=windows-1252
I thought we did already, surely the water treatment plants you can see everywhere do this, or am I being naeive again ? When presented like that though it does sound more like early groundwork for price rises.
Yes and no. There's a common myth of plants that takes sewage in at one end and pump drinking water out at the other, but this has never been the case. The large plants you see dotted around the UK are either sewage treatment works, which treat sewage and discharge cleaned effluent to rivers, or water treatment works, which take water from rivers/storage reservoirs and treat it for supply. Occasionally the two may be adjacent on the same site, which can lead to confusion. On the other hand, some sewage works do discharge to rivers upstream of abstraction intakes, so the water is indirectly being reused. This can be significant, for instance there is a STW which discharges into the river Lea in Hertfordshire which sometimes makes up 75% of the river flow. Downstream of this is a major WTW which supplies most of North East London. The effluent we discharge is usually cleaner than the river water anyway, but directly re-using it is a little bit, shall we say "unpalatable" to public opinion. That's why they come up with clever schemes like the London desalination plant that that twit Ken Livingstone blocked. It was going to be taking water from the Thames right next to a major effluent discharge - very little salt in it at all. We pay too little for our water to make a sustainable investment in future infrastructure. Unfortunately, privatisation has made price rises a political hot potato.
I suppose that the south west has the best infrastructure around then as the price down here is double the national average. Thanks for your information again sir.
Admittedly, I had London in mind with that last comment. We have the oldest network, desperately in need of renewal, but the combined water & sewerage bills have long been the cheapest in the country. As to why yours is so expensive, it's probably because you're unfortunate enough to live in a sparsely populated region where there aren't economies of scale.
It's only water, touch anything in nature with your bare hands and your touching some animals waste products. How often do we wash our hands.
