Hosepipe ban

Yes, much the same, and different words for similar things. There are two different types that I know of, but they both have in common that they water all along their length, rather than specifically at the point of each plant:

There are hoses that are flat (usually 3 round hoses, bonded together side-by-side) so that it sits flat on the ground. It has small holes pricked in one side. You can lay it holes-up and the water will "arch" out (the holes are small, the water comes out under force, quite high) and the wind will blow it about a bit, so it covers a rectangular area. You can turn it upside down so the holes are towards the ground for "soaking". I've known this as "soak/soaker hose".

Then there is hose (made from old car tyres I believe) which is "porous". The water squeeze out of the pores, and just drips out. I expect this means that delivery is more constant along its length. The rate of leaking is quite slow (so "dripping"), as there are no punched holes, as such. I know this as "leaky hose" or "seep hose". It leaks from all round its circumference. Good for hedges / rows of plants.

Those two are pretty much the same, and run at full water pressure.

Additionally there is drip irrigation. This is different and has a "dripper" next to each plant, so it only "drips" where there is a plant, so could be used for trees, with wide spacing between each plant or for, say, lettuces which are close to each other.

Drip irrigation runs at low pressure (you have to use a pressure reducing device when connecting to the water main). I suppose because it is low pressure, and delivers water directly to each plant, it is seen as much more frugal - it certainly is compared to the indiscriminate use of a sprinkler, but you could leave the drip irrigation on 24/7 and it would still use a lot of water! Also, the nature of the "drip" means that it is absorbed into the soil, and thus less evaporation. Personally I would say that of leaky hose too, especially if it is under a mulch - but it is watering the zone between each plant (again, I think that is fine for a hedge, or a row of closely spaced plants, it would be prohibitive (in both set-up time and money) to use drip irrigation for 1,000 hedge plants ... but the water company obviously don't see it that way)

There is also "water tape" (or some name like that) which has minute holes at fixed intervals along its length. I suppose you cold plant your lettuces (say) right next to a hole in the tape. I haven't see one so I don't know if the location of the holes has a marker so you would know where they are - no way of getting your lettuces aligned with the drip holes otherwise!

 

Thanks Shiney and Kristen.. But i'm still not grasping the fact that Drip hoses and trickle hoses are ok yet seep hoses aren't sorry to be a pain

 

Ah....ok..so does anyone know of any really good waterproof tape...i could wrap it round the hose at intervals....thus creating a 'trickle'...:WINK1:

 

Even if I LOOK like a drip?

 

Calling in at B&Q as they opened this morning I discovered they water the trays & pots of plants outside with sprinklers, with at least 80% of the water going down the drainage gullies. Cheaper to pay for wasted water than the wages of somebody to do it properly I suppose - another letter for Clueless1 to write.

 

In the proposed amendments to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, under section 76 it states :

A water undertaker which issues a prohibition must make arrangements for a reasonable reduction of charges which are made in respect of prohibited uses (including arrangements for repayment or credit where charges are paid in advance).

From what I can see that part of the amendment is proposed but not yet agreed, but if/when it does, it will be interesting to see what the water companies do.

 

Well ... presumably nothing off Water Rates as Sprinklers etc prohibited anyway?

If they refund me for "failure to supply" that's good, I'll put the money against what I have spent on rainwater harvesting tanks and STILL not have to pay the Water Company that 50% of my metered usage in future years!

If they compensate people with companies that provide outdoor pressure-washing facilities and the like that seems like a good outcome (too much red tape for such people to actually benefit, I would think ... but I'll hope not ...)

 

I'll have to make do with the 50% saving that I will make in future years (and the Water company's loss ...) ... having said that, I will probably water twice as much in future years when I have plenty in my tanks, so my gain will actually be greater.

Ah ... fair enough then.