I've always wanted to make my beer with rainwater runoff but until recently didnt have the harvesting aspect of it in place. But I've got a water butt fitted now so next batch (if I don't chicken out) will be born in heaven!!
If the purpose was actually to save water they could spend the €600 Million it will cost to roll out the meters on upgrading the ancient leaky systems themselves, as suggested here[/url:8j8oymxv].
"Ichiban":2go1nei3 wrote: I've always wanted to make my beer with rainwater runoff but until recently didnt have the harvesting aspect of it in place. But I've got a water butt fitted now so next batch (if I don't chicken out) will be born in heaven!![/quote:2go1nei3]
Not sure that's a good idea. Rainwater has no calcium or other minerals in it and the pH tends to be rather low. I would also be concerned about what else it might have picked up in the atmosphere, your collection system, or indeed your water butt. Using rainwater to run your chiller would be a good idea though.
"sbillings":3rskg7hq wrote: If the purpose was actually to save water they could spend the €600 Million it will cost to roll out the meters on upgrading the ancient leaky systems themselves, as suggested here[/url:3rskg7hq].[/quote:3rskg7hq]
I'm up for anything which involves more jobs for engineers. <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->
Seriously, I hope that having to pay for water means that people will actually put a value on it. I believe that because we have been getting water without paying directly for it people assume it is worthless, and will pay for bottled water. When in fact most of the water from your tap is better quality than the stuff you would get from a bottle. I've been to the treatment works at Ballymore Eustace and it is actually pretty interesting.
&quot;sbillings&quot;:kimdu94h wrote: If you really do want to reduce the amount of water used by your chiller, you could pre chill your water.
The idea is to use two immersion chillers in series, with the first sitting in an ice bath. The water from the tap runs through the first chiller, cooling down as it passes though the ice, then on to the second chiller, which is sitting in your hot wort. This would chill your beer faster, thus saving water.[/quote:kimdu94h]
I think the best way of saving water (using an IC)would be to have a pump then (in theory) all you would ever need is the same water which you could save in a water butt and recycle,or use grey water or harvested rainfall.Ideally thats what I'd do but I think it's a while before I start investing in pumps!
What about the ice?thats alot of water and energy used.
(BTW It'll cost you about 2cent to flush the toilet) [/quote:kimdu94h]
Thats a great idea. We could save the expense of putting in meters and having bill ssnet out by just throwing 5 cent into the toilet everytime we used it. They could filter out the coins at the end and all our water would be paid for.[/quote:kimdu94h]
&quot;sbillings&quot;:2vwxu1hz wrote: If the purpose was actually to save water they could spend the €600 Million it will cost to roll out the meters on upgrading the ancient leaky systems themselves, as suggested here[/url:2vwxu1hz].[/quote:2vwxu1hz]
I think there's a good case to be made for charging for the amount of water used. Makes no sense to me that we use drinking water to flush the jacks or water the garden etc. Rainwater is easy enough to collect and we've no shortage of it.
I lived in a house where the next door neighbour left an attic tank overflowing for an entire summer. I'm guilty of it myself, having left the toilet leaking for about two weeks. I'd imagine water charges would help focus the mind on getting these things fixed quickly and save a lot of wasted drinking water.
" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->
