EDITOR – The fact that the municipality has embarked on an unannounced program of installing restrictors on domestic water systems calls for comment.
Firstly there is evidence that in some cases this step, due to the reduced pressure and throughput, has caused some washing machines and some high pressure geysers to fail.
Secondly as, to my knowledge, no machines work on time factors, all fill to a certain volumetric point, it suggests the step will not reduce consumption but merely slow it down so the procedures will only take longer and will not result in the use of less water. Due to the lack of municipal advice as to just how I am expected to save 15 per cent of my normal water consumption, I have over recent days carried out a detailed study to determine where my domestic consumption comes from.
The conclusions, from measurements, not conjecture, show that roughly 40 per cent each month is due to washing clothes and dishes. 40 per cent is due to toilet flushing and the remainder due to showers and general usage in the house and the garden. Thus none of these are going to be affected by installing a restrictor.
The average toilet tank holds about 15 litres of water, whilst a brick has a volume of about 1.5 litres, so putting a brick in the cistern tank will save less than 2 per cent of the total domestic water usage – still a long way below the target figure of 15 per cent.
One solution which would save the target amount would be for the toilet users to resort to the policy adopted in the drought and water restriction period in the early 1980s namely to consider avoiding flushing on every toilet usage for liquids – as opposed to the removal of solids. If one only flushed the toilet when it had been used previously for collecting urine the water usage would reduce 50 per cent and a saving on the household bill would be close to 20 per cent. In other words, a saving above the municipal target.
A recent report in the newspapers suggests, once again, the claim that the high general water usage is in a very large part due to inadequate or maintenance. I would therefore suggest that instead of producing pointless schemes such as the fitting of restrictors, an action which tends to focus attention away from the municipality arena, they publish details at regular and frequent intervals showing the extent of wastage due to pipeline faults and the progress they are making resolving their part in the drought alleviation situation.
It would also be most useful to know how much of the water available is being used by (A) rate payers, (B) industrial concerns, (C) free allocations to the population and (D) loss via wastage due to reckless usage or failed and not repaired reticulation.
The municipality needs to get out of its dominating ivory tower and join the general population in attending to and solving this difficult situation.
A concerned customer
Gillitts
