<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Water water everywhere but not a drop to drink</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/</link>
	<description>Conservative Party Member of Parliament for Wokingham</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 11:54:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: DennisA</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16141</link>
		<dc:creator>DennisA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 22:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16141</guid>
		<description>" the consequences of global warming" First show me evidence that there is "global warming". Is it warmer than 100 years ago, of course it is and thank goodness for that. Is this what the anti-carbon brigade are after?

Floods, Famines, and Emperors: El Ni</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8221; the consequences of global warming&#8221; First show me evidence that there is &#8220;global warming&#8221;. Is it warmer than 100 years ago, of course it is and thank goodness for that. Is this what the anti-carbon brigade are after?</p>
<p>Floods, Famines, and Emperors: El Ni</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bazman</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16132</link>
		<dc:creator>Bazman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 10:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16132</guid>
		<description>I have mentioned before that the cost of adding underground water storage tanks and a pump to the toilets would be like adding the cost of electric windows to a car. These systems are available at a popular DIY store now for about </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have mentioned before that the cost of adding underground water storage tanks and a pump to the toilets would be like adding the cost of electric windows to a car. These systems are available at a popular DIY store now for about</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Windisch</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16122</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Windisch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 00:07:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16122</guid>
		<description>The privatised water companies sell of reservoirs as they can make money from it, they care more for that than that the supply is reduced. 

No mention so far of collecting water from roofs, all houses should do this, starting with all new build. This non drinking water can be used for toilet flushing and showering. 

Also were paving over our land for parking, and reducing the groundwater recharge, and increasing the damage from flash flooding. Use methods that dont seal off the ground.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The privatised water companies sell of reservoirs as they can make money from it, they care more for that than that the supply is reduced. </p>
<p>No mention so far of collecting water from roofs, all houses should do this, starting with all new build. This non drinking water can be used for toilet flushing and showering. </p>
<p>Also were paving over our land for parking, and reducing the groundwater recharge, and increasing the damage from flash flooding. Use methods that dont seal off the ground.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bazman</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16117</link>
		<dc:creator>Bazman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 18:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16117</guid>
		<description>Water meters are an expensive way to pay for your water and it is known that water companies would love to see this made compulsory. I want to know how anyone apart from a single person in a flat can save money with one? It will be a sort of water poll tax. The government should build a water grid. To expensive is not an excuse. Northern rock? No problem.
I also suspect that the gas and electricity companies see a lot of slack in the prices and will not be happy until they get the prices to the max. Like petrol.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Water meters are an expensive way to pay for your water and it is known that water companies would love to see this made compulsory. I want to know how anyone apart from a single person in a flat can save money with one? It will be a sort of water poll tax. The government should build a water grid. To expensive is not an excuse. Northern rock? No problem.<br />
I also suspect that the gas and electricity companies see a lot of slack in the prices and will not be happy until they get the prices to the max. Like petrol.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16107</link>
		<dc:creator>Cliff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 13:12:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16107</guid>
		<description>Ed:

For your information.
At present, those on un-metered supplies are actually subsidising those on meters. The reason for this according to the water regulator is that there were so few on meters the costs involved made it uneconomic. Now that there are so many on metered supplies, this subsidy cannot be justified so expect a jump of about twenty percent in your bill soon.
Many people are suspicious when private companies "Want to save them money" this actually means the business wishes to make itself less profitable. Not something the shareholders would welcome. Water companies WANT people to go onto meters, this is the main reason so many were going for a drought order recently as they could then force people to have a meter installed.
I suspect the cost of water will rocket once everyone is on meters. This then adds to the burden for the poor. Many poor people are in fuel poverty and I suspect many will be in water poverty. This may have an added problem, as poorer people try to use less water to keep their costs down, they may choose not to flush their toilets or not to wash so often. They may choose to drink less water. Dehydration is a major problem for the elderly and is a killer.

Water is essential for life and as a wealthy country we should not deprive our citizens of it through economic policies.

I was a major supporter of Mrs T and her privatisation of many of our state owned industries, however I feel it is very wrong for water to be in the hands of a private company and in our area, a foreign company.

reply: What is wrong is for water to be in the hands of a monopoly - just look at the problems Scotland has had with state monopoly water.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ed:</p>
<p>For your information.<br />
At present, those on un-metered supplies are actually subsidising those on meters. The reason for this according to the water regulator is that there were so few on meters the costs involved made it uneconomic. Now that there are so many on metered supplies, this subsidy cannot be justified so expect a jump of about twenty percent in your bill soon.<br />
Many people are suspicious when private companies &#8220;Want to save them money&#8221; this actually means the business wishes to make itself less profitable. Not something the shareholders would welcome. Water companies WANT people to go onto meters, this is the main reason so many were going for a drought order recently as they could then force people to have a meter installed.<br />
I suspect the cost of water will rocket once everyone is on meters. This then adds to the burden for the poor. Many poor people are in fuel poverty and I suspect many will be in water poverty. This may have an added problem, as poorer people try to use less water to keep their costs down, they may choose not to flush their toilets or not to wash so often. They may choose to drink less water. Dehydration is a major problem for the elderly and is a killer.</p>
<p>Water is essential for life and as a wealthy country we should not deprive our citizens of it through economic policies.</p>
<p>I was a major supporter of Mrs T and her privatisation of many of our state owned industries, however I feel it is very wrong for water to be in the hands of a private company and in our area, a foreign company.</p>
<p>reply: What is wrong is for water to be in the hands of a monopoly - just look at the problems Scotland has had with state monopoly water.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Fairney</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16083</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Fairney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:48:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16083</guid>
		<description>Curious isn't it how leftist "solutions" to issues of flooding and water supply are to ban and restrict.  Ban development anywhere close to 1:100 year floodplains and ignore technical slutions like jacking up buildings or making them flood proof.  Restrict water supply with useless hosepipe bans.

More intelligent, actual solutions involve increasing water supply and actually using technical solutions to make new and existing towns less prone to flood damage.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Curious isn&#8217;t it how leftist &#8220;solutions&#8221; to issues of flooding and water supply are to ban and restrict.  Ban development anywhere close to 1:100 year floodplains and ignore technical slutions like jacking up buildings or making them flood proof.  Restrict water supply with useless hosepipe bans.</p>
<p>More intelligent, actual solutions involve increasing water supply and actually using technical solutions to make new and existing towns less prone to flood damage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Evans</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16081</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16081</guid>
		<description>Isn't it time that politicians (both in the UK) and globally face mankind's biggest danger?  

Population growth!  Virtually all mankind's problems - including those associated with water - surely stem from the excessive global population.  Politically difficult it may be, but logic dictates that the period of growing population must come to an end. Surely it would be better to manage this process now and at least to start talking about the issue seriously before this, mankind's boom period, is followed by a catastrophic bust.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t it time that politicians (both in the UK) and globally face mankind&#8217;s biggest danger?  </p>
<p>Population growth!  Virtually all mankind&#8217;s problems - including those associated with water - surely stem from the excessive global population.  Politically difficult it may be, but logic dictates that the period of growing population must come to an end. Surely it would be better to manage this process now and at least to start talking about the issue seriously before this, mankind&#8217;s boom period, is followed by a catastrophic bust.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16080</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 10:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/28/water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-drink/#comment-16080</guid>
		<description>I agree with all that - we don't need to starve ourselves of water on this wet island! The only thing I would add is that surely producing clean water and transporting it around is very energy intensive - that would be a good reason to be economical with drinking water.

One thing I think Parliament should do is finally get rid of the water rates - they were supposed to be gone by now but clearly the water companies persuaded the government that they shouldn't have to introduce meters in all homes.  In my flat the rate was something like double the metered bill - I don't see why single people should be subsidising large families and a flat rate doesn't encourage economy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with all that - we don&#8217;t need to starve ourselves of water on this wet island! The only thing I would add is that surely producing clean water and transporting it around is very energy intensive - that would be a good reason to be economical with drinking water.</p>
<p>One thing I think Parliament should do is finally get rid of the water rates - they were supposed to be gone by now but clearly the water companies persuaded the government that they shouldn&#8217;t have to introduce meters in all homes.  In my flat the rate was something like double the metered bill - I don&#8217;t see why single people should be subsidising large families and a flat rate doesn&#8217;t encourage economy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
