Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Is metering the only answer?

Saturday 26 August 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

SHOULD the nation switch over to water meters? The Government backs them, on the grounds that they are fair and provide an incentive to saving water. Trials carried out in the past five years in 50,000 houses on the Isle of Wight and elsewhere show reductions in water use of 10- 20 per cent after meters are installed, though much of this was from reduced leaks. People switch off hosepipes, and install low-flush toilet valves and shower-heads.

The water regulators, Ofwat and the National Rivers Authority, now require evidence that companies are plugging leaks and introducing meters before giving permission for new water-supply schemes, such as dams. But Frank Dobson, the opposition environment spokesman, says compulsory meters are unfair to people who need a lot of water, such as young families, and would cost pounds 4-5bn to install.

Though more than 2 million homes now have meters, water companies are getting cold feet because many customers do not like them. But they have other worries. Most of their costs in supplying water are tied up in laying water pipes and building treatment works, says Colin Green, environmental economist at Middlesex University. If everybody in a town installs meters and cuts their water use by 20 per cent, the cost of supplying that water goes down by only 2 per cent. So companies will raise charges to compensate. Add in the cost of the meter itself and, says Mr Green, "the consumer reduces consumption, but ends up with a higher bill".

One idea Colin Green backs is to insist on meters for people who have a licence to use hosepipes, suggesting that gardeners would be prepared to pay a very high price for a guaranteed supply.

But a more effective place for meters might be along the companies' water mains, where they would also detect leaks. If meters can persuade customers to use less water, the same should work for the private companies. And a few hundreds of millions of pounds spent on monitoring the water distribution system might yield savings greater than those promised from spending billions on digging up pavements to install domestic meters.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in