Thames Water's inability to stop 'losing' water through leaking pipes underground confuses me. Where is this water 'lost' too? Is there a great unniversal plug hole that the water goes down, never to be seen again, or does it not just flow back and replenish the water table or underground aquifers, ready to be extracted once again? It cannot all flow into the sea surely? Thames Water refuse to answer any of my questions on this. It may make no commercial sense to lose treated water, but that is their problem. On a similar note, why they are also so keen for everyone to have water butts in their gardens to collect rainfall. Does this not reduce the amount of water they have available? Am I missing something obvious?
It returns to the water table. The lost water itself isn't really the problem, it's the wasted effort to deliver it to a leaking situation. Essentially the water goes back to the beginning of the system for extraction so in that sense it's the effort to deliver it that is wasted not the water itself.
Thanks LH, at last someone to confirm what I had thought. Why then do the media always latch onto the fact that during a drought it is an issue that TW lose so much water? Making a story out of nothing I think.
It's the simplest way to highlight the problem to the public. Imagine you had a lorry load of sand and as it goes along the sand leaks out, now that sand is all recoverable but it's not where you wanted it so the effort to haul it is wasted.
Good analogy.
But why pick on this issue I wonder?
There was no outcry that Cadburys had to throw away tons of chocolate recently, (although if my wife had found out there would have been). It is purely commercial, and the shareholders should be making the point to the company. What the press should be highlighting is how people waste water in their homes every day.