The IWC report is a welcome and overdue insight into the challenges faced by the sector, but the headline changes to regulatory governance are not a ‘silver bullet’ and, as ever, the devil lies in some of the detail.
The report highlights the ignorance surrounding asset health and location, and that refurbishment strategies are based on retrospective analysis rather than predictive science. All too often, short-term solutions are adopted, such as patching and repair clamps, which only transfer problems to the next weakest point on the network.
Across Europe, lining is seen as business as usual on both potable and waste networks, saving money, future-proofing assets and minimising customer disruption. The application of these technologies in the potable sector in the UK is hindered by the regulatory environment and the lack of a laboratory capable of conducting Reg 31 testing.
Belatedly, the industry is slowly waking the elephant in the room and hopefully, the work-in-progress at WRC and on the Designer Liner, ironically sponsored by OFWAT, will facilitate real innovation in addressing leakage as we begin to recognise that seasonal water scarcity is a strategic issue that won’t go away.
The report highlights what many of us have known for years, that the sector is data rich but knowledge poor
The lack of compulsory metering in the domestic sector represents another failing that prohibits real knowledge of consumption and masks the real cost of water losses. Following the progressive lead of some companies, notably Southern Water, adopting universal metering would allow companies to address leakage at source and have the additional benefit of managing demand through proactive social tariffs that could potentially reduce peak demand.
The report highlights what many of us have known for years, that the sector is data rich but knowledge poor, despite initiatives like Mapping the Underground, we still don’t know the size, condition or even the location of many critical assets. This knowledge was lost when district managers were replaced by digital mapping and virtual interpretations.
These problems will not be solved by transferring regulation to different agencies and removing duplication. Neither is the debate over ownership going to change the situation on the ground. The truth is that to effect the changes required our industry needs more investment, which probably means we must all accept paying a sustainable rate for water. More than that, there needs to be a cultural change that challenges traditional methods and accepts proven innovation without using regulation as a barrier to adoption.
The IWC report probably poses more questions than answers. OFWAT have carried the can of decades of failings, but the responsibility does not rest solely with them. The real positive is that the report has highlighted real issues and opened a debate on priorities and needs. It is vital that the whole sector responds positively and seizes the opportunity to effect real change.