I'd be happy if they connected up the planning law with the availability of sewage treatment capacity., As it is I believe there's no requirement for adequate sewage treatment capacity to be available when new houses are built, nor indeed even after they're connected to the sewers.

The complexity of water regs about using rainwater to flush loos, plus the practicalities of pumps etc and maintenance put me off even attempting it.

Posted By: djhThe complexity of water regs about using rainwater to flush loos, plus the practicalities of pumps etc and maintenance put me off even attempting it.

+1

Posted By: djhI'd be happy if they connected up the planning law with the availability of sewage treatment capacity.

In Kent they have linked sewage load to the planning -

Quote
In Kent, "nutrient neutrality" for sewage means new developments must ensure they don't worsen the nutrient pollution of nearby protected water bodies like the Stour catchment. This often requires developers to prove that their projects won't increase the levels of nitrogen and phosphorus entering these areas, either through on-site measures or by funding off-site mitigation.
End quote

I was speaking to a Kent architect a short while ago and he said that because of the requirement to show "nutrient neutrality" virtually all new PP has stalled.

I understand that nutrient neutrality can be traded so a new build can get its nutrient neutrality by say installing a self contained sewage treatment plant on a property with a septic tank or using a change of use from residential to office use, both of which reduce the nominal calculated load and the freed up calculated nutrient load can then be used to support the new build.

Given the state of the sewage system in the UK if they connected up the planning law with the availability of sewage treatment capacity what would happen to the governments plans to solve the housing shortage??

IMO the sewage issues in the UK would best be resolved by separating the rain water from foul water systems.

Posted By: Peter_in_HungaryIMO the sewage issues in the UK would best be resolved by separating the rain water from foul water systems.

If that were practicable and affordable I'm sure they would do it. I believe it's done when new estates are built, but the effort and disruption involved in building a second rainwater disposal network and connecting up the many millions of rainwater systems that would have to be connected to it mean it doesn't happen for existing properties. We get a discount off our water bill for not sending rainwater through the sewer.

Posted By: djhIf that were practicable and affordable I'm sure they would do it.

We had no choice but to combine them on our site due to ground conditions (heavy clay and close boundaries, so nowhere for soakaway).

In the end we agreed to include a water storage chamber to intercept flash flooding and release into sewer at a slower rate.

It was definitely expensive and I'd expect that UK ground conditions are so variable that it would be difficult to have a blanket country-wide mandate to separate flows.

"The complexity of water regs about using rainwater to flush loos, plus the practicalities of pumps etc and maintenance put me off even attempting it."

Not sure what is complex about it. I did not go with float valves and various types of cut-outs, etc. I have a submersible pump on a timer and a loft tank for the toilets. Pump is set to run for around ten minutes every six hours to top up the tank.

If the water runs out, because I'm lazy, I usually know when there is no water in a cistern, then I unplug the pump and active the mains supply.

In the 15 years, I have had to replace the pump around one year ago as too many parts had worn out. But by that time it had exceeded its 'life' expectancy.

Posted By: Rex"The complexity of water regs about using rainwater to flush loos, plus the practicalities of pumps etc and maintenance put me off even attempting it."

Not sure what is complex about it. I did not go with float valves and various types of cut-outs, etc. I have a submersible pump on a timer and a loft tank for the toilets. Pump is set to run for around ten minutes every six hours to top up the tank.

If the water runs out, because I'm lazy, I usually know when there is no water in a cistern, then I unplug the pump and active the mains supply.

Labelling on the pipework, air gaps, dual pipework and automatic system to switch to mains supply if no rainwater available (manual switchover not acceptable to SWMBO).

"Toilet flushing uses relatively little water nowadays, compared to other uses."

I think toilet flushing accounts for around a quarter of daily consumption so a fair bit to be saved by using rainwater??

Having stored rainwater without lots of filtering ,treatment and separation is going to make a mockery of all the legionairres requirements . If it were to be mandated for new builds the costs of installing and maintaining/cleaning the equipment , let alone the space needed , would make it an extremely expensive exercise. Surely far better to increase the infrastructure charges for new builds instead and have a mechanism that ensures the money is actually used to improve the water infrastructure.

I don't have any filtration for the rainwater, only on the input side to catch leaves and other bits of larger sediment. I do have to clean that filter as if it 'blocks' water just flows across the filter and into the soak-away rather than into the collection tank.

Certainly, the toilet cisterns get a bit of silt, but a bit of a clean and flush every few months and the cisterns are clean. I had no issues with regulations during the build; the BCO showed no interest. The collection tank overflows to the soak-away and he was happy.

The only downside of our 6000 liter tank is that the cost of the excavation, tank, concrete, pump etc was far greater than the cost of water and in my lifetime, will never pay for itself. But when the water table is dropping and there is too great a demand on the potable system, I feel good that I am doing more than is necessary.

Posted By: Peter_in_HungaryI understand that concessions on the sewage charge is made if you have a cess pit or septic tank or you don't put storm water down the sewer but AFAIK there is nothing in place to manage the loss of income when customers use harvested rainwater to flush loos and run washing machines.

Am I correct in this or can someone advise me differently.

I believe you're correct, but I suspect that so few people bother with rainwater harvesting for toilet flushing (as opposed to for garden use) that it's not a material issue for the water companies.

The water regulations already cover the use of rainwater for toilet flushing and other things, and they don't say anything about legionnaires. Cross contamination risk is dealt with by air gaps.

Posted By: ArtiglioDjh, i’d be very interested to see how that would be seen under a legionaries risk assessment if used in rented property. Especially in social housing where the extent of risk aversion is plain bonkers.

I have no idea about rented properties or social housing and any rules that may apply specifically to them. Nor what a 'sentinel point' is nor its testing. Nor the specific difficulties of dealing with councils - the usual advice seems to be to contact your councillor.