This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
A new planning application has been submitted for Staden Quarry in Derbyshire, the application is still for a bottling plant, but does differ significantly from the previous application. The current deadline for objections/comments is the 24th April... Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68842
In reply to UKC News:
what is the owner's stance on climbing now?
last i heard he said that climbing would be allowed again once the planning appeal had finished whatever the outcome. has that changed and is climbing just banned indefinitely now?
what is the owner's stance on climbing now?
last i heard he said that climbing would be allowed again once the planning appeal had finished whatever the outcome. has that changed and is climbing just banned indefinitely now?
In reply to Alex@home:
Yes, after making that promise last time he never re-allowed climbing. He stated that the promise had been made on the basis that in return climbers would not object to the development, and he gave the reason that at least a few climbers had submitted objections (though I think the BMC did not). It was always a dubious promise in that if he was planning on re-allowing access whatever, then banning it temporarily would not be a help to his application, so why do it?
At the moment climbing is banned indefinitely. I think a few people may go there occasionally in a low-profile way.
> last i heard he said that climbing would be allowed again once the planning appeal had finished
> whatever the outcome. has that changed and is climbing just banned indefinitely now?
> whatever the outcome. has that changed and is climbing just banned indefinitely now?
Yes, after making that promise last time he never re-allowed climbing. He stated that the promise had been made on the basis that in return climbers would not object to the development, and he gave the reason that at least a few climbers had submitted objections (though I think the BMC did not). It was always a dubious promise in that if he was planning on re-allowing access whatever, then banning it temporarily would not be a help to his application, so why do it?
At the moment climbing is banned indefinitely. I think a few people may go there occasionally in a low-profile way.
In reply to UKC News:
Objection sent and link copied to my club and climbing friends. My favourite Peak Limestone crag.
Objection sent and link copied to my club and climbing friends. My favourite Peak Limestone crag.
In reply to Coel Hellier:
yet in the meantime he seems to be perfectly happy to allow trail bikers access. it's his land and he can do what he wants but it seems strange to me to allow one recreational activity and not another (but don't let this descend into another argument about the rights and wrongs of off-roading - this isn't the place)
and yes, judging by the logbooks it seems some people do. i wonder if they would be prepared to share their experiences. have they been challenged by the owner? what happened if so?
if there is no prospect of him allowing climbing again do we as climbers have anything to lose by occasionally ignoring the ban?
yet in the meantime he seems to be perfectly happy to allow trail bikers access. it's his land and he can do what he wants but it seems strange to me to allow one recreational activity and not another (but don't let this descend into another argument about the rights and wrongs of off-roading - this isn't the place)
and yes, judging by the logbooks it seems some people do. i wonder if they would be prepared to share their experiences. have they been challenged by the owner? what happened if so?
if there is no prospect of him allowing climbing again do we as climbers have anything to lose by occasionally ignoring the ban?
In reply to Chris the Tall:
And was only too happy to let us climb there one afternoon.
Much to my distress, it was a cold afternoon and the climbs are not worth the fuss made about the place.
> As I understand it the owners grandson is a keen trails biker
And was only too happy to let us climb there one afternoon.
Much to my distress, it was a cold afternoon and the climbs are not worth the fuss made about the place.
In reply to Mike Highbury:
It must have been a bad day, or too easy for you! It has some of the best HVS-E3 routes on inland trad limestone and pretty much all of the decent off vertical ones.
>
> Much to my distress, it was a cold afternoon and the climbs are not worth the fuss made about the place.
> Much to my distress, it was a cold afternoon and the climbs are not worth the fuss made about the place.
It must have been a bad day, or too easy for you! It has some of the best HVS-E3 routes on inland trad limestone and pretty much all of the decent off vertical ones.
In reply to Alex@home:
Although I've not been for 18 months or so; I've been there fairly regularly for many years.
We've always kept a low profile and have never had any issues; it's probably worth parking further away from the village rather than using the old parking spot on the corner, and we've approached from the footpath and used the descent or abbed in, rather than using the main way in.
If you want long single pitch great quality trad lines in the HVS-E2 range their aren't many better places. The only reason some people fall out with it is that it doesn't get much sun!
Spend a day doing; Joint Effort, Nails, BRM, Charas, Liquid Courage and Captain Reliable and you'll have had a great day out!
Although I've not been for 18 months or so; I've been there fairly regularly for many years.
We've always kept a low profile and have never had any issues; it's probably worth parking further away from the village rather than using the old parking spot on the corner, and we've approached from the footpath and used the descent or abbed in, rather than using the main way in.
If you want long single pitch great quality trad lines in the HVS-E2 range their aren't many better places. The only reason some people fall out with it is that it doesn't get much sun!
Spend a day doing; Joint Effort, Nails, BRM, Charas, Liquid Courage and Captain Reliable and you'll have had a great day out!
In reply to UKC News:
19,000-50,000 lorry movements! that's a lot of lorries and a massive range, can they be a bit more specific?
I've only climbed at Staden once and didn't really find it that amazing, but I am quite concerned about the impact to the surrounding areas that will have to suffer almost 2 years of construction noise and disruption and 19k+ lorries.
19,000-50,000 lorry movements! that's a lot of lorries and a massive range, can they be a bit more specific?
I've only climbed at Staden once and didn't really find it that amazing, but I am quite concerned about the impact to the surrounding areas that will have to suffer almost 2 years of construction noise and disruption and 19k+ lorries.
In reply to UKC News:
I have really enjoyed climbing in Staden over the years and in fact have done a couple of first ascents there.
However, it is the product of an industrial process and it would only revert to the same
I live and work in The Peak and unless you are retiring from down South and want to open a coffee shop or gift shop, ordinary or industrial type jobs for local people are very scarce and normally as a default stance,they are opposed by the Peak Park Planning Board. They would have us all live in a quaint time warped country theme park if they could!
This project will create alot of work for local hauliers and later staff at the plant. The disruption on the roads would be no more than from any of the local quarries and in reality it,s probably down to local residents to object about noise and disruption if they are so minded.
In the meantime, currently we never have any grief climbing in Staden as long as you don,t park in the village
I have really enjoyed climbing in Staden over the years and in fact have done a couple of first ascents there.
However, it is the product of an industrial process and it would only revert to the same
I live and work in The Peak and unless you are retiring from down South and want to open a coffee shop or gift shop, ordinary or industrial type jobs for local people are very scarce and normally as a default stance,they are opposed by the Peak Park Planning Board. They would have us all live in a quaint time warped country theme park if they could!
This project will create alot of work for local hauliers and later staff at the plant. The disruption on the roads would be no more than from any of the local quarries and in reality it,s probably down to local residents to object about noise and disruption if they are so minded.
In the meantime, currently we never have any grief climbing in Staden as long as you don,t park in the village
Post edited at 12:31
In reply to UKC News:
From the way you've presented it it sounds like an elaborate ruse for some quarrying given the volume/value of aggregate they plan to extract for access.
jk
From the way you've presented it it sounds like an elaborate ruse for some quarrying given the volume/value of aggregate they plan to extract for access.
jk
In reply to rocksol:
Where do you park?
> currently we never have any grief climbing in Staden as long as you don,t park in the village
Where do you park?
In reply to ChrisJD:
But Cowdale is - isn't the boundary the wall running along the top of the crag ? Is it really odd that we want our national parks to be peaceful and tranquil, rather than being hemmed in by industrial estates ?
> And Staden quarry (like all of Buxton) is not in the PDNP.
But Cowdale is - isn't the boundary the wall running along the top of the crag ? Is it really odd that we want our national parks to be peaceful and tranquil, rather than being hemmed in by industrial estates ?
In reply to Chris the Tall:
>Is it really odd that we want our national parks to be peaceful and tranquil, rather than being hemmed in by industrial estates ?
Got to be a boundary somewhere!
And no, the PDNP should not be viewed as a somewhere that should (in its entirety) be peaceful and tranquil (as someone who works and lives in the PDNP). It is not a museum.
>Is it really odd that we want our national parks to be peaceful and tranquil, rather than being hemmed in by industrial estates ?
Got to be a boundary somewhere!
And no, the PDNP should not be viewed as a somewhere that should (in its entirety) be peaceful and tranquil (as someone who works and lives in the PDNP). It is not a museum.
In reply to rocksol: So you're really saying that it's absolutely fine to re-industrialise anywhere that used to be industrial?
You also seem to think that the numbers that have been given by the developers for employment are accurate. They are wildly exaggerated by the standards of the bottled water industry. Just have a look at the numbers working at Water Swallows etc.
In the meantime...and in contrast to what you say we do have grief climbing there. I assume you haven't seen the 13 notices around the quarry saying "Private Property KEEP OUT"?
And anyway...bottled water? Isn't that a total rip off and waste of time and money? I thought the rest of the world knew that. It takes 3 times the amount of water to make a plastic bottle as it does to fill it. That and 17m barrels of oil worldwide to support the industry.
It's fine if you want to support such a pointless and parasitic industry, but you're on your own buddy!
You also seem to think that the numbers that have been given by the developers for employment are accurate. They are wildly exaggerated by the standards of the bottled water industry. Just have a look at the numbers working at Water Swallows etc.
In the meantime...and in contrast to what you say we do have grief climbing there. I assume you haven't seen the 13 notices around the quarry saying "Private Property KEEP OUT"?
And anyway...bottled water? Isn't that a total rip off and waste of time and money? I thought the rest of the world knew that. It takes 3 times the amount of water to make a plastic bottle as it does to fill it. That and 17m barrels of oil worldwide to support the industry.
It's fine if you want to support such a pointless and parasitic industry, but you're on your own buddy!
In reply to gethin_allen:
THe planners are saying 19000 but the group leading the village objection say they have overestimated the load capacity of the trucks and only counted the journeys away from the site (full of aggregate) and not the returning empty lorries. They therefore propose a number closer to 50000
THe planners are saying 19000 but the group leading the village objection say they have overestimated the load capacity of the trucks and only counted the journeys away from the site (full of aggregate) and not the returning empty lorries. They therefore propose a number closer to 50000
In reply to jon:
Yes, I do. Apart from the developers of course, and the lawyers who will be slugging this out...they are completely in favour (of making a huge amount of money). Are you in favour of the development, against it or not at all bothered one way or the other?
Yes, I do. Apart from the developers of course, and the lawyers who will be slugging this out...they are completely in favour (of making a huge amount of money). Are you in favour of the development, against it or not at all bothered one way or the other?
Post edited at 22:05
In reply to Coel Hellier:
FFS ENGLAND! Get some decent access rights!!!
Keep on the fine movement of the kinder mass trespass. Access should be a right!
> Yes, after making that promise last time he never re-allowed climbing....
FFS ENGLAND! Get some decent access rights!!!
Keep on the fine movement of the kinder mass trespass. Access should be a right!
In reply to UKC News:
This feels like a local issue which needs to be decided by local people. Some will be in favour because of the economic benefits, others against because of the disruption. Is it right for us as outsiders to make planning application objections without necessarily fully understanding the issues involved and without having a local perspective? Clearly the development will cause lots of disruption during the construction phase but in the long term it will bring valuable employment. It's a disused quarry, largely hidden out of view, and from memory there's already some kind of industrial complex nearby (cement works?). I'm not convinced that the answer is a clear cut 'no', though if I lived in the village I would probably object because of the disruption. As for losing access to Staden, it's a good crag but it's on private land and they have every right to propose a development on their land, subject to planning permission. Obviously it would be a shame to lose it but other than our pure self-interest as climbers is it appropriate for us to object?
This feels like a local issue which needs to be decided by local people. Some will be in favour because of the economic benefits, others against because of the disruption. Is it right for us as outsiders to make planning application objections without necessarily fully understanding the issues involved and without having a local perspective? Clearly the development will cause lots of disruption during the construction phase but in the long term it will bring valuable employment. It's a disused quarry, largely hidden out of view, and from memory there's already some kind of industrial complex nearby (cement works?). I'm not convinced that the answer is a clear cut 'no', though if I lived in the village I would probably object because of the disruption. As for losing access to Staden, it's a good crag but it's on private land and they have every right to propose a development on their land, subject to planning permission. Obviously it would be a shame to lose it but other than our pure self-interest as climbers is it appropriate for us to object?
In reply to Frank the Husky:
I'm with Phil. If you think that an activity such as climbing should take precedence over jobs, then you are deluded. And I should say that I used to live in Tideswell before moving away from the soggy isle and so know the area well.
> Are you in favour of the development, against it or not at all bothered one way or the other?
I'm with Phil. If you think that an activity such as climbing should take precedence over jobs, then you are deluded. And I should say that I used to live in Tideswell before moving away from the soggy isle and so know the area well.
In reply to jon:
Fair enough, but if that's your only argument it's extremely weak. So you used to live in Tideswell? I live in a village about 8 miles from there of the same size...what's your point? It's nothing to do with localism, it's to do with an awareness of how the industry works, and how money oriented the application is. He will make millions from the aggregate in a thinly disguised quarrying operation for a start.
I'm certainly not arguing that climbing should take precedence over jobs (even though there'll be few of those long term), I'm arguing that a wholly pointless industry that does more harm than good on a global and national scale should not exist anywhere, let alone in the Peak.
When I say "pointless" I'm referring to the amount of water it takes to make a bottle which is then filled with...water. I'm talking about the 17m barrels of oil that the uindustry uses every year. I'm talking about the fact that tap water is consistently rated as tastier than bottled water and that in practically every measure, the stuff out of the tap is as good as or better than the bottled stuff.
If you can make some coherent arguments for the bottled water industry, then go right ahead, but I suspect you'll struggle.
> I'm with Phil. If you think that an activity such as climbing should take precedence over jobs, then you are deluded. And I should say that I used to live in Tideswell before moving away from the soggy isle and so know the area well.
Fair enough, but if that's your only argument it's extremely weak. So you used to live in Tideswell? I live in a village about 8 miles from there of the same size...what's your point? It's nothing to do with localism, it's to do with an awareness of how the industry works, and how money oriented the application is. He will make millions from the aggregate in a thinly disguised quarrying operation for a start.
I'm certainly not arguing that climbing should take precedence over jobs (even though there'll be few of those long term), I'm arguing that a wholly pointless industry that does more harm than good on a global and national scale should not exist anywhere, let alone in the Peak.
When I say "pointless" I'm referring to the amount of water it takes to make a bottle which is then filled with...water. I'm talking about the 17m barrels of oil that the uindustry uses every year. I'm talking about the fact that tap water is consistently rated as tastier than bottled water and that in practically every measure, the stuff out of the tap is as good as or better than the bottled stuff.
If you can make some coherent arguments for the bottled water industry, then go right ahead, but I suspect you'll struggle.
In reply to Frank the Husky:
Bit of a straw man.
What about the tapped water industry - spending billions and billions making water good enough to drink, then we flush it down the toilet, or use for washing, bathing, cleaning the car etc etc.
There are good arguments for everyone using bottled water and stop wasting money making potable water out the tap.
Bit of a straw man.
What about the tapped water industry - spending billions and billions making water good enough to drink, then we flush it down the toilet, or use for washing, bathing, cleaning the car etc etc.
There are good arguments for everyone using bottled water and stop wasting money making potable water out the tap.
In reply to UKC News:
who has actually made the application? is it buxton water? if so they why as they have only recently opened their new plant at waterswallows.
regardless, i just don't believe that this is the best available site. there is such a huge amount of work required to prepare the site i don't see why people consider it to be financially viable.. there is a precedent for this kind of development at waterswallows so why not there? or on the site of the unit that is being dismantled behind buxton railway station?
who has actually made the application? is it buxton water? if so they why as they have only recently opened their new plant at waterswallows.
regardless, i just don't believe that this is the best available site. there is such a huge amount of work required to prepare the site i don't see why people consider it to be financially viable.. there is a precedent for this kind of development at waterswallows so why not there? or on the site of the unit that is being dismantled behind buxton railway station?
In reply to Alex@home:
The application is from the owner of the site, and the choice of site is because he owns it and wants to make money out of it.
> i just don't believe that this is the best available site.
The application is from the owner of the site, and the choice of site is because he owns it and wants to make money out of it.
In reply to ChrisJD:
>There are good arguments for everyone using bottled water and stop wasting money making potable water out the tap.
I don't think there are!
jcm
>There are good arguments for everyone using bottled water and stop wasting money making potable water out the tap.
I don't think there are!
jcm
In reply to jkarran:
Indeed.A point of view that is encouraged by the detail in the planning application when it comes to aggregate volumes and the relative lack of detail for the bottling plant itself.
> From the way you've presented it it sounds like an elaborate ruse for some quarrying given the volume/value of aggregate they plan to extract for access.
Indeed.A point of view that is encouraged by the detail in the planning application when it comes to aggregate volumes and the relative lack of detail for the bottling plant itself.
In reply to Coel Hellier:
i see. it's all starting to fall into place now.
and where is the water that will be bottled going to come from?
i see. it's all starting to fall into place now.
and where is the water that will be bottled going to come from?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Well we could use grey water for flushing the toilet; any external standpipes; washing machines; dishwashers. Probably not a good idea to have non-potable water for sink, wash basin, bath, shower.
Well we could use grey water for flushing the toilet; any external standpipes; washing machines; dishwashers. Probably not a good idea to have non-potable water for sink, wash basin, bath, shower.
In reply to Frank the Husky:
If I'm out and about in town or on business and want a drink, I'm certainly not going to drink the tap water from the nearest public toilet.
> If you can make some coherent arguments for the bottled water industry, then go right ahead, but I suspect you'll struggle.
If I'm out and about in town or on business and want a drink, I'm certainly not going to drink the tap water from the nearest public toilet.
In reply to Alex@home:
That is a good point - why would the bottled water company want to use this particular site. Obviously the owner wants to use Staden as he owns it and will make some money from it but that doesn't explain why the bottled water company want to use it as they could look elsewhere if there are other sites available. Presumably the other sites aren't as suitable or simply more expensive. Clearly it will cost money to develop and build the Staden site but I suspect what makes it work financially is the money from the quarrying and the fact that the actual land isn't going to be worth much (it's just farmland - obviously with quarrying potential) compared to a site in central Buxton for instance which could be turned into flats etc.
That is a good point - why would the bottled water company want to use this particular site. Obviously the owner wants to use Staden as he owns it and will make some money from it but that doesn't explain why the bottled water company want to use it as they could look elsewhere if there are other sites available. Presumably the other sites aren't as suitable or simply more expensive. Clearly it will cost money to develop and build the Staden site but I suspect what makes it work financially is the money from the quarrying and the fact that the actual land isn't going to be worth much (it's just farmland - obviously with quarrying potential) compared to a site in central Buxton for instance which could be turned into flats etc.
In reply to Alex@home:
From the planning docs:
----------------
The Water Resource
The Rockhead Spring is a natural Artesian spring located a short distance to the east of Cowdale Quarry on land owned by the applicant. The Spring is a high quality source of Spring Water which is a natural and sustainable resource when utilised in accordance with the Environment Agency licensing arrangements. It is one of only two such springs in Derbyshire, the other being the St. Ann’s Spring in Buxton
------------------------
> and where is the water that will be bottled going to come from?
From the planning docs:
----------------
The Water Resource
The Rockhead Spring is a natural Artesian spring located a short distance to the east of Cowdale Quarry on land owned by the applicant. The Spring is a high quality source of Spring Water which is a natural and sustainable resource when utilised in accordance with the Environment Agency licensing arrangements. It is one of only two such springs in Derbyshire, the other being the St. Ann’s Spring in Buxton
------------------------
In reply to ChrisJD:
A quick google and as I expected all the research on potable water seems to show its way better for the environment than bottled water. Where is you evidence to the contrary?. You can't say its because we should be recycling water at home (which I think we should) as the benefit still applies to any lower levels of potable water consumed.
A quick google and as I expected all the research on potable water seems to show its way better for the environment than bottled water. Where is you evidence to the contrary?. You can't say its because we should be recycling water at home (which I think we should) as the benefit still applies to any lower levels of potable water consumed.
Post edited at 16:53
In reply to UKC News:
The bottled water company wanting supposedly to move to the quarry, is Mangiatorella, they have a website and you will see they are based in Sicily/Calabria and have no presence outside Italy. They only employ 80 folk in the whole of Italy! Why 100 in Buxton? You can work out lorries for yourself. 300-400,000 cu.metres at 2,6 tonnes each = 780,000 - 1,040,000 tonnes. Each lorry takes 30 tonnes max. so 52,000 - 69,300 trucks. One empty arriving and a full one leaving. If each tonne is worth £15 then loads of money. Take years to cart it all away.
If we just want jobs for truck drivers then let them dig up any part of the high peak and make money. Why not dig it out faster from an existing quarry than blast out a greenfield space like Staden. Objection sent.
The bottled water company wanting supposedly to move to the quarry, is Mangiatorella, they have a website and you will see they are based in Sicily/Calabria and have no presence outside Italy. They only employ 80 folk in the whole of Italy! Why 100 in Buxton? You can work out lorries for yourself. 300-400,000 cu.metres at 2,6 tonnes each = 780,000 - 1,040,000 tonnes. Each lorry takes 30 tonnes max. so 52,000 - 69,300 trucks. One empty arriving and a full one leaving. If each tonne is worth £15 then loads of money. Take years to cart it all away.
If we just want jobs for truck drivers then let them dig up any part of the high peak and make money. Why not dig it out faster from an existing quarry than blast out a greenfield space like Staden. Objection sent.
In reply to Offwidth:
Bottled water is just another 'luxury' item - might not make sense to all of us, but clearly (excuse the pun) a lot of people value it (rightly or wrongly) given how much is consumed - worth 1.4 billion a year I read somewhere?. But hey, some people are happy to spend hundreds of pounds eating out when they could do the same at home for so much less, I don't I expect Frank would want to ban eating out? What next, fast cars or flying to climbing destinations?
Bottled water is just another 'luxury' item - might not make sense to all of us, but clearly (excuse the pun) a lot of people value it (rightly or wrongly) given how much is consumed - worth 1.4 billion a year I read somewhere?. But hey, some people are happy to spend hundreds of pounds eating out when they could do the same at home for so much less, I don't I expect Frank would want to ban eating out? What next, fast cars or flying to climbing destinations?
In reply to Bob:
>Well we could use grey water for ....... dishwashers.
I'm not sure about that! Anyway, the repiping involved would be huge. It's got to be easier to do what we do now.
jcm
>Well we could use grey water for ....... dishwashers.
I'm not sure about that! Anyway, the repiping involved would be huge. It's got to be easier to do what we do now.
jcm
In reply to ChrisJD:
Well, that's very wise, if your case is that we should stop providing drinking water in taps and all use bottled water instead. I wouldn't get involved in discussions with anyone about that if I were you.
jcm
> Sorry, I don't want to get involved with any discussions with you.
Well, that's very wise, if your case is that we should stop providing drinking water in taps and all use bottled water instead. I wouldn't get involved in discussions with anyone about that if I were you.
jcm
In reply to ChrisJD:
Here's a tip. Buy one bottle of water, cheapest you can find. Tip the stuff away as it is probably full of leached pthalates out of the plastic 'cos it has been sitting in a warehouse for ages and pthalates make your male parts shrink. Rinse it under the tap and fill it up, reuse it all the time - but don't leave it full for days and then drink (see above). Even better, buy a proper water bottle and keep using it. Best of both worlds!!
Here's a tip. Buy one bottle of water, cheapest you can find. Tip the stuff away as it is probably full of leached pthalates out of the plastic 'cos it has been sitting in a warehouse for ages and pthalates make your male parts shrink. Rinse it under the tap and fill it up, reuse it all the time - but don't leave it full for days and then drink (see above). Even better, buy a proper water bottle and keep using it. Best of both worlds!!
In reply to UKC News:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51453
The previous application in 2010 made reference to leaving access to the rockfaces as in the news item above, has anything similar been mentioned this time? Who owns the fields immediately south of the footpath, the applicant?
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51453
The previous application in 2010 made reference to leaving access to the rockfaces as in the news item above, has anything similar been mentioned this time? Who owns the fields immediately south of the footpath, the applicant?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Well we are on a private water supply, no treatment whatsoever, it's straight out of the spring. Doesn't appear to have done the dishwasher any harm in the 12 years we've been here.
Agree re the repiping, but it's one of those things that should be mandated in new builds (along with things like solar water heating systems) then it would start to be seen as normal. The main barrier is cost - you need to install a large tank as storage, plus have a means of pumping it up (though solar panels could provide some of that) plus have a system whereby in times of drought the grey water system automatically switches to the mains. You need some form of filtration to remove particles but you don't need to bring it up to public water supply standard in terms of acidity, chemical content.
Well we are on a private water supply, no treatment whatsoever, it's straight out of the spring. Doesn't appear to have done the dishwasher any harm in the 12 years we've been here.
Agree re the repiping, but it's one of those things that should be mandated in new builds (along with things like solar water heating systems) then it would start to be seen as normal. The main barrier is cost - you need to install a large tank as storage, plus have a means of pumping it up (though solar panels could provide some of that) plus have a system whereby in times of drought the grey water system automatically switches to the mains. You need some form of filtration to remove particles but you don't need to bring it up to public water supply standard in terms of acidity, chemical content.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Very sneaky segway..... you still haven't given us any evidence for your previous statement that we should all be giving up potable water and buying bottled water instead. Its a pretty serious conspiracy you seem to have uncovered as it goes against all the research evidence I've ever seen, so I for one am still quite keen to hear it.
Very sneaky segway..... you still haven't given us any evidence for your previous statement that we should all be giving up potable water and buying bottled water instead. Its a pretty serious conspiracy you seem to have uncovered as it goes against all the research evidence I've ever seen, so I for one am still quite keen to hear it.
In reply to Bob:
I agree very much with this sort of thing but it still doesn't undermine the case for a potable water supply in the vast majority of homes
I agree very much with this sort of thing but it still doesn't undermine the case for a potable water supply in the vast majority of homes
In reply to Kipper:
No the smooth transition and now becoming an accepted version through usage in our ever changing wonderful language. Segue was the original and more formally correct version for smart arse pedants.
No the smooth transition and now becoming an accepted version through usage in our ever changing wonderful language. Segue was the original and more formally correct version for smart arse pedants.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...