Water, Water, well at least enough for Hayling
- Mon 19th Jan 2009
HIRA held its quarterly public meeting on the 15th January on the topic of our water supply. This covered its provision, removal and whether it should be fluoridated in future.
Portsmouth Water
Paul Fisher first introduced Gareth Simmonds, an engineer from Portsmouth Water Company (PWC), this Company being the supplier of water to Hayling. PWC is the only independent private water company and has the lowest charges of all in the UK. PWC has been operating in the area for 150 years and operates from Fareham to Littlehampton and has 300,000 customers.
Gareth continued by describing the various sources of our water and the degree of treatment needed from each source. In this area there are boreholes (50% of supply) springs (35% of supply), as at Bedhampton and some 28 others in this area and rivers such as the Itchen (15%). The degree of treatment follows the same sequence though some boreholes need special treatment when excessive rainwater enters the aquifers without having been filtered through the chalk.
All water is filtered by automatically flushing sand filters and subsequently by special membrane filters that ultimately produce a water quality that exceeds that of 80% of bottled water. This last stage removes organisms that can cause various kinds of sickness. Chlorine is added and removed as necessary. Nitrate content from farming is removed by mixing such supplies with cleaner sources. Hayling water is supplied via the plant and reservoir at Farlington.
PWC has 3000Km of pipes, some very old, that must be maintained. PWC claims the lowest complaint record in the country. Finally Gareth suggested that low usage customers in large houses would save money by installing a water meter.
Gareth finished by saying that the current water supply was adequate, but that to allow for future demand, a new surface reservoir was destined for Havant Thicket, that would also provide considerable recreational facilities.
Southern Water
Next Nick John, from Southern Water, took to the floor. This Company supplies and processes waste in many areas, but on Hayling it only deals with surface and foul water disposal and environmental/flooding issues.
Nick said that bringing their systems up to date was often quite difficult as sewage plants were not viewed as favourably as those supplying clean water. The Eastney/Budds Farm saga was one that had taken a long time to resolve and problems in the Brighton area have dragged on for years.
In many ways sewage disposal was a similar process to that of water supply but dealing with a vast spread of ‘nasties’ that people put down their toilets, often of significant size. There was much more filtered waste to dispose of (often used as fertiliser) and the final filtering, while producing ‘near drinking water’ quality, was not of course used for that purpose. In areas of the country where waste was finally put into rivers, such outfall was greatly diluted by river water before re-processing.
SWA were investing a further £33M at Budd’s Farm and had recently spent £87M dealing with environmental matters.
At this point a general discussion ensued and questions asked. Various matters relating to local flooding and release of sewage were raised but it was felt that must of these had been dealt with. Some discussion took place of the separation or not of surface water and foul water drains. It was noted that, in the past, there was no point in having then separate as pollution from horse droppings needed to be dealt with in the same manner as human waste.
Fluoridation
After a coffee break with extensive discussion groups round the hall, the session on fluoridation took place. Paul Fisher started by stating that none of the pro-fluoride lobby was prepared or able to attend, so the floor was left to Peter Richards to make the case for the opposition.
Peter first apologised that his wife, the intended speaker, was not able to come, so he would make the case. They were members of Hampshire against Fluoride. He started by saying that the movement to add fluoride to water started in the USA in the 1940s. The aim was to provide medication to help improve the teeth of children whose parents could or would not provide regular dental support.
As the years progressed many countries and regions adopted the same approach, in parallel with which developed a lobby that felt that the process was flawed and had a number of detrimental side effects. In addition a view developed that medication should not be forced on people in a way that they could not counter, i.e., they had to drink and there was no way of controlling the dose.
Over the years the argument has continued and now the Government has washed its hands of the problem in a national sense and passed the decision making process to local authorities. In Hampshire, Southampton, being a unitary area of some size, has raised the matter for consultation and is in the process of trying to reach a view as to what is the outcome of that process.
As an observer of this process it is clear that neither side of the argument accepts the view of the other and thus it is difficult to reach a considered view.
Whatever the outcome on this issue, it was felt that the meeting was useful and informative and HIRA would like to thanks all the presenters.
Recent letters in the Hayling Islander
In the last Hayling Islander there was a letter that claimed that HIRA was in some way not doing its best for the Island. That is its only purpose. Indeed, there was an unfortunate hiccup in publicity for the AGM. Our chairman, Paul Fisher, probably does as much for the Island as anyone. If you have views, come and contribute.
Tony Higham
Main contacts:
Chairman: Paul Fisher 92461412
Membership: Brenda Greenland 92466716
Notice Board: Lois Neale 92469339
Reporter: Tony Higham 92464723.
By forum user, PaulFisher Discuss this news item in our forum
|
