Rivers of s**t

[Weston Super Saint]

2 minutes ago, Warriorsaint said:

Whatabout, whatabout, whatabout 

Still got me on ignore then  

[Warriorsaint]

Brexit 

In response to the publication this week by the Environment Agency of a time-limited Regulatory Position Statement about water and sewerage company effluent discharges, and the current shortage of specialist HGV drivers, a spokesperson for Water UK, said

“We are currently experiencing some disruption to the supply in England of ferric sulphate, a chemical used at some drinking and wastewater treatment sites.

“This will not affect the supply of drinking water. As a precaution, however, we are monitoring the situation due to the use of ferric sulphate in some waste treatment works. We are working closely with government and our chemical suppliers to ensure disruption is minimised.

“This issue has arisen due to a shortage of HGV drivers in the UK. There is no shortage of ferric sulphate in factories; the issue is solely one of distribution.”

 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

48 minutes ago, Warriorsaint said:

Brexit 

In response to the publication this week by the Environment Agency of a time-limited Regulatory Position Statement about water and sewerage company effluent discharges, and the current shortage of specialist HGV drivers, a spokesperson for Water UK, said

“We are currently experiencing some disruption to the supply in England of ferric sulphate, a chemical used at some drinking and wastewater treatment sites.

“This will not affect the supply of drinking water. As a precaution, however, we are monitoring the situation due to the use of ferric sulphate in some waste treatment works. We are working closely with government and our chemical suppliers to ensure disruption is minimised.

“This issue has arisen due to a shortage of HGV drivers in the UK. There is no shortage of ferric sulphate in factories; the issue is solely one of distribution.”

 

 

Ah yes, a statement about the shortage of lorry drivers.

Still not found anything that says the shortage of lorry drivers is due to Brexit then - but presumably they didn't bother going back to the EU given the shortage of lorry drivers over there 

[ecuk268]

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Yes and like I said on the face of it that seems like something they should have done. Given that they haven't as yet done that and the infrastructure is what it is, what has the Lords amendment got to do with it? 

The Lords amendment was to legally compel them to improve their sewage systems and to demonstrate progressive reductions. So it follows that it would have required them to make improvements in infrastructure rather than just let them carry on as they are.

[hypochondriac]

13 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

The Lords amendment was to legally compel them to improve their sewage systems and to demonstrate progressive reductions. So it follows that it would have required them to make improvements in infrastructure rather than just let them carry on as they are.

It was the rate at which they were required to do so that was the contentious bit. It sounds like infrastructure improvements are something that is needed so hopefully that will happen. Given the lack of current alternative, the least worst option right now is to continue putting some into rivers unless people want it running through the streets. 

[Fan The Flames]

The big lie years ago, was that the water board had to be privatised to facilitate the badly needed investment. Well that's been shown to be wrong.

The system before was underfunded because things like water were low down the government's priority list, the same thing happened to the trains. The simple solution, was not privatisation but to ring fence their income. All that lovely money spunked on dividends could have been spent on infrastructure.

[Weston Super Saint]

Pretty sure that the major investments in the water network are all government funded anyway - the AMP framework - whereas business as usual repairs and maintenance are funded by the water companies from household bill payments...

So, if the infrastructure isn't fit for purpose that goes back to the funding from central government...

[Fan The Flames]

3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Pretty sure that the major investments in the water network are all government funded anyway - the AMP framework - whereas business as usual repairs and maintenance are funded by the water companies from household bill payments...

So, if the infrastructure isn't fit for purpose that goes back to the funding from central government...

So what you are saying, is that there was no great reason to privatise the water companies, what a surprise.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

So what you are saying, is that there was no great reason to privatise the water companies, what a surprise.

Double checked as it's been a while since I dealt with the 'AMPs' and the water companies are supposed to pay for infrastructure as well as BAU repairs, although Ofwat needs to sign off on the five year infrastructure packages....

[Sheaf Saint]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Double checked as it's been a while since I dealt with the 'AMPs' and the water companies are supposed to pay for infrastructure as well as BAU repairs, although Ofwat needs to sign off on the five year infrastructure packages....

This is correct. The water companies all need to submit regular (5-yearly IIRC) water resource management plans (WRMPs) which go hand in hand with the AMPs and need regulatory approval prior to implementation, and yearly reviews. A lot of hard work goes into producing these plans, to make sure that the private capital investment is targeted efficiently, so that the plans can adequately meet the demand/supply forecasts but also so that the water companies can make a decent return on their investment.

Also, you may have heard of a scheme called RAPID (Regulators' Alliance for Progressing Infrastructure Development) which is geared towards developing infrastructure to allow resources to be exported across WRZ boundaries and between different companies, and create something resembling a national grid for water supplies. It went out to consultation earlier this year, and surprise surprise, the common theme among water companies' responses was along the lines of "what's in it for us?", so they will be the ones meeting the costs for the new infrastructure.

[Weston Super Saint]

A couple of days of heavy rain now so stand by for BorrierSaint's avalanche of twitter posts...

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

A couple of days of heavy rain now so stand by for BorrierSaint's avalanche of twitter posts...

More rivers of his shit. 

[Warriorsaint]

On 30/10/2021 at 13:25, Lord Duckhunter said:

More rivers of his shit. 

Little bit chippy aren’t you? You could get a job. Does wonders for the mental health.

[Sheaf Saint]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/10/campaigners-celebrate-new-uk-environment-law-but-vow-to-fight-on

The Environment Act was given royal assent and passed into law last week. Still work to be done to fully address the river pollution problem, but it's a good start, requiring a comprehensive plan to reduce discharges from CSOs by September next year.

It's odd though, given how much attention this issue was receiving only a few weeks ago, that the Guardian seems to be the only mainstream outlet that has bothered to report this.

[Sheaf Saint]

Water companies could face legal action after investigation launched into sewage treatment works

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/water-companies-could-face-legal-action-after-investigation-launched-into-sewage-treatment-works

The Environment Agency (EA) and Ofwat have launched a major investigation into sewage treatment works, after new checks led to water companies admitting that they could be releasing unpermitted sewage discharges into rivers and watercourses.

This investigation will involve more than 2000 sewage treatment works, with any company caught breaching their legal permits facing enforcement action, including fines or prosecutions. Fines can be up to 10% of annual turnover for civil cases, or unlimited in criminal proceedings.

In recent years the EA and Ofwat have been pushing water companies to improve their day-to-day performance and meet progressively higher standards to protect the environment.

As part of this, the EA has been checking that water companies comply with requirements and has asked them to fit new monitors at sewage treatment works. This is to make sure the right levels of wastewater are being treated before overflows are allowed to enter the environment.

Following this action by the EA, several water companies have now revealed that many of their sewage treatment works may not be compliant. This would mean that water companies are in breach of their permits and failing to meet their legal duties.

EA and Ofwat are now looking into all water and sewerage companies to assess the scale of the problem.

Any company caught breaching these minimum standards will face a range of possible enforcement action – up to and including prosecution.

[Weston Super Saint]

6 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Water companies could face legal action after investigation launched into sewage treatment works

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/water-companies-could-face-legal-action-after-investigation-launched-into-sewage-treatment-works

The Environment Agency (EA) and Ofwat have launched a major investigation into sewage treatment works, after new checks led to water companies admitting that they could be releasing unpermitted sewage discharges into rivers and watercourses.

This investigation will involve more than 2000 sewage treatment works, with any company caught breaching their legal permits facing enforcement action, including fines or prosecutions. Fines can be up to 10% of annual turnover for civil cases, or unlimited in criminal proceedings.

In recent years the EA and Ofwat have been pushing water companies to improve their day-to-day performance and meet progressively higher standards to protect the environment.

As part of this, the EA has been checking that water companies comply with requirements and has asked them to fit new monitors at sewage treatment works. This is to make sure the right levels of wastewater are being treated before overflows are allowed to enter the environment.

Following this action by the EA, several water companies have now revealed that many of their sewage treatment works may not be compliant. This would mean that water companies are in breach of their permits and failing to meet their legal duties.

EA and Ofwat are now looking into all water and sewerage companies to assess the scale of the problem.

Any company caught breaching these minimum standards will face a range of possible enforcement action – up to and including prosecution.

Excellent news.

Unless of course you have a water bill, which will undoubtedly rise to cover the cost of the water company's fine (I imagine the shareholder's dividends will be fine though).

[Sheaf Saint]

14 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Excellent news.

Unless of course you have a water bill, which will undoubtedly rise to cover the cost of the water company's fine (I imagine the shareholder's dividends will be fine though).

It'll be nothing compared to when compulsory metering is inevitably introduced in the coming years...

https://nic.org.uk/app/uploads/NIC-Preparing-for-a-Drier-Future-26-April-2018.pdf

"The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs should enable companies to implement compulsory metering by the 2030s beyond water stressed areas, by amending regulations before the end of 2019 and requiring all companies to consider systematic roll out of smart meters as a first step in a concerted campaign to improve water efficiency."

There was no change to the regulations before 2019 (this was only a recommendation), but it's only a matter of time.

Edited 19 November, 2021 by Sheaf Saint
link provided

[Weston Super Saint]

10 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

It'll be nothing compared to when compulsory metering is inevitably introduced in the coming years.

For some.

I bought my house 18 years ago and have had a meter ever since so will be more than happy when everyone else catches up  

[saint1977]

It’s an example of where I favour a pragmatic approach to who runs key services and infrastructure regardless of ideology. In the 1970s probably too much was run by government but not sure that’s the case today. Some utilities simply do not work as private entities long term, water is a case in point, gas and electricity work a bit better but there are still limitations with market systems. Railways ditto, NE Mainline has had multiple failed privatisations, whereas the line makes c£15m pa in public hands so there’s an obvious answer.

If it works better in private ownership for consumers, who are the same thing as taxpayers, keep it private, if it doesn’t bring it back in. A lot of Tory Councils are bringing core services back in house as they are more efficient than large private-public agencies trying to scrap small margins from post-austerity contracts. 

[badgerx16]

If the companies are fined then the senior executives and Board should be liable for payment.

Edited 19 November, 2021 by badgerx16

[whelk]

Am I missing something with the excuse to dump raw sewage in rivers and the sea being excess water that uses the same drainage so only way it can process? But haven’t we had one of the driest summers on record so where is the excess water coming from?

[buctootim]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Am I missing something with the excuse to dump raw sewage in rivers and the sea being excess water that uses the same drainage so only way it can process? But haven’t we had one of the driest summers on record so where is the excess water coming from?

It's just corporate BS designed to save money, knowing they wont be fined anything meaningful. 

There are two sets of drains. Blackwater sewage - which is used water from houses and commercial buildings (toilets, dishwashers, industrial processes etc) which should go to treatment works before being discharged (expensive) and rainwater runoff which goes directly into rivers (cheap). Increasingly water companies and private industry deliberately 'mix up' the two knowing they almost certainly wont get caught or prosecuted by the Environment Agency which has been emasculated and budget cut by successive Tory Governments.        

Edited 30 August, 2022 by buctootim

[Tamesaint]

The podcast "The rest is politics" is worth a listen on this subject. Rory Stewart and Alistair Campbell. 

Stewart was a junior minister in DEFRA (under Truss!!) and explains how we have ended up with this state of affairs. Essentially it comes down to a question of money.

[whelk]

41 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

The podcast "The rest is politics" is worth a listen on this subject. Rory Stewart and Alistair Campbell. 

Stewart was a junior minister in DEFRA (under Truss!!) and explains how we have ended up with this state of affairs. Essentially it comes down to a question of money.

Yes very good podcast indeed. Campbell is always worth listening to and speaks so much sense on so many things. Starmer could do with someone as shrewd as him on his comms.

Rory Stewart is a decent bloke too.

[Weston Super Saint]

Finally, the rivers of shit are sorted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65626241

Well, they've made an apology, so that's a good start isn't it?

Quote

Ruth Kelly, Water UK chair, told the BBC: "We're sorry about the upset and the anger from the fact that there have been overspills of untreated sewage onto beaches and into rivers over the past few years. We're sorry that we didn't act sooner, and but we get it."

I'm guessing Ruth is Welsh judging by the last line of the statement!

What's that you say, it's a pretty hollow apology as they're only promising to cut spills by 35% in the next SEVEN years!

Quote

Alongside the apology, the companies promised to triple funding available for sewer system upgrades, provide the public with "near real-time" data on sewage spills and cut spills by up to 35% by 2030.

 

[rallyboy]

If they do manage to get all that done by 8.30 tonight as promised, I think that's fair enough.

Infrastructure before shareholders.

[badgerx16]

 

[whelk]

Can anyone come up with any reason why water shouldn’t be nationalised? Thames Water staggering example of everyone getting ripped off apart from shareholders. Fuckers paying huge dividends and running up debts and now need bailing out when have a complete monopoly. Couldn’t make it up

[egg]

30 minutes ago, whelk said:

Can anyone come up with any reason why water shouldn’t be nationalised? Thames Water staggering example of everyone getting ripped off apart from shareholders. Fuckers paying huge dividends and running up debts and now need bailing out when have a complete monopoly. Couldn’t make it up

Nope. No reason whatsoever. It's the most basic and essential utility. Scandalous that it was ever privatised. 

[Fan The Flames]

4 hours ago, whelk said:

Can anyone come up with any reason why water shouldn’t be nationalised? Thames Water staggering example of everyone getting ripped off apart from shareholders. Fuckers paying huge dividends and running up debts and now need bailing out when have a complete monopoly. Couldn’t make it up

It'll cost too much money to re-nationalise.

[trousers]

5 hours ago, whelk said:

Can anyone come up with any reason why water shouldn’t be nationalised?

Because Governments are historically crap at managing and running stuff...? 

Edited 28 June, 2023 by trousers

[StDunko]

8 hours ago, trousers said:

Because Governments are historically crap at managing and running stuff...? 

Compared to the private sector (train and water co's etc.) who show them how it should be done.

[moonraker]

9 hours ago, trousers said:

Because Governments are historically crap at managing and running stuff...? 

Well, I don't see any great competence, efficiency or effectiveness from the the private sector.  They have a monopoly and still they can't run it, only priority is dividends and bonuses.  In public ownership ministers are directly responsible for performance.  Thatcher's privatisation experiment with national infrastructure and utilities has failed, and we will pick up the bill while shareholders and senior executives count their winnings.

[trousers]

3 hours ago, StDunko said:

Compared to the private sector (train and water co's etc.) who show them how it should be done.

 

3 hours ago, moonraker said:

Well, I don't see any great competence, efficiency or effectiveness from the the private sector.  

I wasn't casting a judgement on whether or not the private sector are better or worse at running stuff than governments. I was simply highlighting that governments running stuff isn't necessarily the holy grail that some seem to think it is. 

Maybe they're just as bad as eachother? 

(FWIW, in my experience, the railway service was poor before it was privatised, slightly better initially when privatised, but is now as bad as it ever was before privatisation. At no point, under either regime has it been well run during my lifetime)

Edited 29 June, 2023 by trousers

[Sheaf Saint]

13 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

I wasn't casting a judgement on whether or not the private sector are better or worse at running stuff than governments. I was simply highlighting that governments running stuff isn't necessarily the holy grail that some seem to think it is. 

Maybe they're just as bad as eachother? 

(FWIW, in my experience, the railway service was poor before it was privatised, slightly better initially when privatised, but is now as bad as it ever was before privatisation. At no point, under either regime has it been well run during my lifetime)

I don't think it's necessarily the competence of the operators that's the issue, because I agree that whoever runs it there is still the constant, unlimited human capacity for fallibility.

However, if you offer me a choice of a public service being run by incompetent people whose overriding responsibility is to its customers, rather than to its shareholders, it's a no-brainer really.

[Patrick Bateman]

18 hours ago, whelk said:

Can anyone come up with any reason why water shouldn’t be nationalised? Thames Water staggering example of everyone getting ripped off apart from shareholders. Fuckers paying huge dividends and running up debts and now need bailing out when have a complete monopoly. Couldn’t make it up

Exactly. It's a monopoly, we don't have a choice, just like the railways.  The shareholders win and I wonder how many privatisation decision makers from the 80s/90s are still profiting from this?  Absolutely outrageous.

And the water companies still waste money on marketing, leaflets, adverts and so on - should all be reinvested. What is the point of wasting advertising money apart from vanity, when the consumer has no choice? 

 

[Mystic Force]

I remember the reason that it was claimed that they had to be privatized in the first place was that otherwise the tax payer would be on the hook for having to pay to fix everything up to the necessary standard. Conveniently side stepping the fact the customer=tax payer (businesses and individuals) for the provision of a service to everyone. And then it seems they never spent the money to fix stuff anyway. But now it costs more and they want to ask the tax payer anyway to fix the stuff they neglected to do while saying they had to charge more to fix it!

 

The bloody cheek of these people!

[Gloucester Saint]

4 hours ago, trousers said:

 

I wasn't casting a judgement on whether or not the private sector are better or worse at running stuff than governments. I was simply highlighting that governments running stuff isn't necessarily the holy grail that some seem to think it is. 

Maybe they're just as bad as eachother? 

(FWIW, in my experience, the railway service was poor before it was privatised, slightly better initially when privatised, but is now as bad as it ever was before privatisation. At no point, under either regime has it been well run during my lifetime)

Don’t use the East Coast mainline often enough to comment on service/punctuality but hearing reports it’s been better since 2018 and certainly three times since 2005 it’s been taken back into public ownership after the commercial tendering and ownership processes have failed badly. It’s sustainable seemingly now as well. Utilities seemingly will need to follow suit with collapse of Thames Water and others in big trouble https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/government-to-continue-running-lner-to-at-least-2023

[ecuk268]

11 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Don’t use the East Coast mainline often enough to comment on service/punctuality but hearing reports it’s been better since 2018 and certainly three times since 2005 it’s been taken back into public ownership after the commercial tendering and ownership processes have failed badly. It’s sustainable seemingly now as well. Utilities seemingly will need to follow suit with collapse of Thames Water and others in big trouble https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/government-to-continue-running-lner-to-at-least-2023

ECML (and therefore the taxpayer) made a profit of £13m last year.

[Raging Bull]

 

[whelk]

https://x.com/parody_pm/status/1776579330686017847?s=61&t=SMhSD-dpl9sq7-ekGbXk7Q

[Weston Super Saint]

Not just rivers full of shit these days, it's now in taps way more often!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgll12v5z7xo

Quote

More than 600 households in a village in Surrey have been warned not to drink tap water, following concerns over a past fuel leak from a petrol station.

 

[whelk]

Dividend my arse

https://news.sky.com/story/ofwat-hits-ailing-thames-water-with-16340m-fine-over-dividend-payment-13146393