I guess semantically you are right. But as it is all on my one and only “water” bill, it is a fixed charge. Not going to argue about it.

Still if you want to fixate on it go ahead.

For me to pay 1.27 per cubic meter of water is nothing. I will water to my hearts content at that charge. At 0.127 cent per litre I am not going to worry about it.

Heck I might even bottle some, add a little lemon and sell it for $4 per bottle. Want some?

There is not a fixed charge for water.
There is a fixed charge for disposal of wastewater to reflect the true cost of the service.

If there was a fixed charge for water it is likely that your charge for water would be substantially higher, to reflect the true cost of having the service available to you.

If you do “water my garden to my hearts content” you would quickly find that your water charge was no longer “the smallest component of my water bill” and I would expect that would cause you to review your water usage….. which suggests that the variable water charge has a conservation impact.

I do find it bizarre that as a low water user you seem to be suggesting that the system is unfair … when the rewards of low water usage are so readily apparent when you look at your water bill.

The argument was about cost savings on water if you use less. Yep I can save a whle $80 if I cut my water consumption in half.

Will I do that?

No sir, I will water my garden to my hearts content, knowing my fresh water charge is the smallest component of my water bill.

I dont actually have a problem with the fixed waste water charge per se.

Just your reference that it there was no fixed charge, when clearly there is.

As a low water user, it could equally be argued that you are being subsidised by larger water users as the fixed cost of having a water system available to you arent recovered by your usage….. but I think it’s better that you get an incentive to continue saving water.

Good on you for minimising your water costs and having a low water bill… but the fact is that the majority of water consumers in Manukau can reduce their costs further by reducing their water use. The less they use the less they pay and that is a very effective conservation mechanism which probably explains why Manukau is the only part of Auckland where per capita water use has fallen over the past couple of years.

If someone chooses to install their own collection system than that’s also great….. but I believe the cost and hassle of that is not going to convince many people to do so…… so a variable charge is the most effective conservation mechanism for most people….. I think lobbying for variable water charges throughout the country is the most effective water conservation measure that could be made by anyone in NZ at the moment.

There is a huge fixed water charge on Manukau Water bills.

Called waste water. Accounts for over 60% of my bill.

I pay over $400 per year fixed waste water charge as compared to $160 for my metered fresh water.

So no matter if I dont even use a toilet (ouch), I cannot lower my waste water charge.

No matter how much water I save. I cant reduce my bill by a significant amount.

But the cost of that is high so my personal belief is that your utopian dream is a bit unrealistic.

So we keep using water without recycling? Cool.

Even retrofit cost wont be that high, a few extra metres of plumbing and a tank There are a heap of ex dairy farm stainless steel tanks out there for very little outlay. Biggest cost is a pump. If you had a collector tank at ground (or underground) and a header tank than the cost to run the pump would be slight compared with a full pressure system. Remember we are only talking laundry, toilets and garden. Not high pressure hot water cylinders.

Many rural properties have sell contained sewerage systems that “feed” the garden. Not at all expensive compared to the cost of communal sewerage systems in rural areas.

I don’t know where you get your data…. but it is wrong.
Manukau Water Limited does not have a fixed charge for water, nor does it have a minimum charge.

The water price in Manukau is $1.28 per cubic meter, the lowest in the Auckland region.

The less you use, the less you pay.

What you are advocating is a penalty regime to punish people…. I think the carrot rather than the stick is a much better approach.

If someone still wants to install a tank and grey water system they can, and good on them for doing so. But the cost of that is high so my personal belief is that your utopian dream is a bit unrealistic.

Yes they do and it is ……….$0.27 per cubic meter.

Now with fixed charges of $400 per annum, Even saving water at 27 cents per cubic meter is not worth it. What they should do is have no fixed charge but a high user charge.

That way I would install a roof water catching plus grey water reticulting system to make a meaning ful water saving.

But a a fixed charge plus 27cents per 1000 litres usage, why bother?

Manukau Water Limited have a variable price for water…. so there is a real incentive to use less.

In fact, of all of the water companies in the Auckland region, Manukau Water Limited is the only one whoe per-capita water consumption is going down…. it’s down more than 5% over the past two years.