QUESTIONS and ANSWERS
Below are a list of questions that arose at and after the meeting on Feb 21ST.
Q1) Will multiple units on one title have multiple meters?
A1) Meters will be at the boundary for a single house on a single connection. Where there are
multiple houses on a section such as with a cross lease the meter will be within the property
measuring the water to each dwelling unit. This will require access agreements or easements. Over
the last ten years or more Council has been installing a water connection for each dwelling in these
situations, as preparation, if water meters were ever to be required. Council will own and maintain
the water meter and meter box.
Q2) Are we reaching absentee owners with our messaging?
A2) Notification is being made to the service address for each property.
Q3) Are overheads from MDC for the billing and administration side of metering factored into the
charge rate?
A3) Overheads will be factored into the cost for metered water charges.
Q4) What are the favoured options for User Charging if meters are introduced and what are the
annual projected costs per household.
A4) There were 4 options presented at the public meeting. (page 17 in Feb 21st presentation –
available on S&C website) The first was a simple cost per cubic meter (cost/m3) starting from the
first litre used. This favours low users but would tend to penalise bigger families so is not favoured
by the Water Group. Options 2 and 3 are the two favoured options.
Option 2 has a Base fee + volume usage charge - A base fee would be charged to all properties to
cover the base operational costs for Renwick based on an average level of consumption per
household, e.g. 200m3 per household per annum. Water consumption over this amount would be
charged at a m3 rate.
Option 3 has a Block tariff charge. It is similar to Option 2 in that all properties cover the base
operational costs for Renwick based on an average annual level of consumption per household, e.g.
200m3. Water consumption over this amount will be charged at a m3 rate in blocks, e.g. 200m3 300m3 will be at $1.00/m3, 300m3 – 400m3 will be at $1.50/m3 etc.
Option 4 is a variation on Option 3 with a seasonal tariff instead of a block tariff.
Figures will be presented at the public meeting on March 22 nd to show people what the costs of the
different options are likely to be for an average household. These figures will be comparative
figures based on the average Universal Annual Charge (UAC) in 2016 of $510.
Q5) If you own a bare section in Renwick and are not connected to the town supply, will you still
be metered and pay the charge even though you are not a water user?
A5) The bare section charge will be about the same as it is now, if 50% of the operating costs are
recovered through a fixed charge. The fixed charge is to cover the fixed costs for operating the
scheme. This will be explained in detail at the meeting. These costs are incurred whether the water
is used or not. We have to maintain the capacity to supply empty sections when they do want to
connect, so this for them could be called an opportunity cost. There are many bare sections that use
water and these would be metered and pay full costs.
Q6) The average NZ family consumption was mentioned. How is that worked out?
A6) These figures are available from the Ministry of Health. Average household population comes
from the census at about 2.6 persons per household. Here is a link to a water calculator for getting
an idea of water usage in your household - http://www.gw.govt.nz/household-water-use-calculator
(PLEASE NOTE – This is a useful tool but has a glitch. It has 7 steps and step 7 does not work. If
you do the first 5 steps it will give you an idea of water used in the house. Step 6 will add on your
irrigation water. Step 7 is unfortunately broken. We have contacted Greater Wellington Regional
Council to ask if it can be fixed.) Once you get an idea of the per person water usage in your
household you can use the chart below to give you an idea of how much water you use annually.
The measure is in cubic metres (m3). One m3 is 1000 litres.
Household water use
litres per person per
day
Number of persons in
the house
1
2
3
4
5
6
150
200
250
300
m3 per household per year
55
73
91
110
146
183
164
219
274
219
292
365
274
365
456
329
438
548
110
219
329
438
548
657
142
285
2013 average
person/household
2.6
190
237
Q7) I think most people thought the individual usage per person figure was totally ridiculous so
have to wonder how the figure was worked out.
A7) We know the total volume of water leaving the treatment plant and the number of people on
town supply in Renwick so the figure is easy to calculate. We expect consumption in Renwick to be
higher than the national average because of our hot dry summer climate, our free draining soils and
our generally large sections. When you also take into account, as two examples, that a sprinkler can
use 900 litres in an hour and water used in swimming pools then it is not hard to see total
consumptions at the level we have. In the last two years Renwick has proven this can be reduced.
Renwick consumers did very well reducing their usage from 869litres/person/day in 2015 to
719l/p/d in 2016, a reduction of 150l/p/d.
Q8) What proportion of reduced usage was due to repaired leaks and what proportion to
conservation?
A8) We estimate that the leaks repaired following the leak detection survey during December and
January to have saved about 3% of the daily average use. The voluntary reductions gave the
following results: The average annual use for 2011 to 2014 was 775,300 m3. 2015 usage was
672,554 m3 and 2016 was 557,177 m3 giving an average annual use in the last two calendar years
of 614,860 m3. This was about a 20% reduction.
If we consider only the demand over summer the daily peak was reduced from a peak day of 4000
m3 to a peak day of 3100 m3 – this is a reduction of 22%.
Q9) If we go with the Base fee + volume usage charge option (Option 2), will this be based on the
usage of an average Renwick family?
A9) This would be our aim but usage can vary so much from one household to another. A family in
a house whether it be in Renwick or elsewhere will use about the same per person. What is different
is the volume of water used in irrigation.
Q10) A variety of questions were asked about Smart Meters.
A10) Some answers are below. A comprehensive list is also available from an Auckland WaterCare
info pack about a smart meter trial they are running in Waiuku. Here is the link.
https://www.watercare.co.nz/common-content/watermeters/meter_replacement_project/Pages/Waiuku-smart-meter-trial.aspx
Q11) What protection is there from Smart Meters being hacked?
A11) As at June 2016 there were about 1.6M smart meters installed in NZ, not one of which has
been subject to software hacking.
Q12) Who or what entities will have access to any private information gleaned from smart meters?
A12) Council and the property owner.
Q13) How can we verify readings from smart meters?
A13) By reading the digital display on the meter. There would also be a process to check the
calibration of meters if property owners think they are out of calibration. If a calibration is
undertaken and it is found accurate, the property owner would have to pay costs of the calibration.
Q14) Why not provide a metered scheme with incentives for those saving water?
A14) Some tariff structures available with smart meters can provide this - for example, cheaper
water if used off peak.
Q15) Do we know yet what the average household charges including water meters are projected to
be over the next few years as the supply upgrade progresses?
A15) The finance team are still finalising how the new shared funding model will work in practice
and figures are not available yet. At this stage we only have the projected water rate for an average
household of $825 by 2021 from the 2016-17 Annual Plan Review. This is made up of a rating on
the capital land value plus the fixed UAC. The cost of introducing meters would be a very small
proportion of the total upgrade costs.
Q16) There was much emphasis at the meeting on how the introduction of meters reduced
consumption in many areas by 25%. While I have no doubt reductions of this magnitude have been
achieved I do wonder if this has been due to the pricing structure in the area's concerned.
A16) Pricing structure doesn’t generate any more income than necessary to operate the scheme but
does create equity of charges versus volume of water used. This encourages very high users to
reduce their demand or pay higher costs. This would also be very likely to reduce over watering, as
is current practice by some, for instance leaving irrigation systems running over night.
Q17) Is there any possibility of Marlborough’s water supply being privatised? Rules can change!
A17) Privatisation is currently not possible. The Local Government Act prevents Local Authorities
from selling off their interests in water supplies. Yes, rules can change, but this would have to be a
change promoted by Central Government and, as with the current process, at a local level through
consultation with the community. This is very unlikely to occur.
Q18) Much has been said of the difference in flow rates for Blenheim & Renwick. I believe the
difference can be directly attributed to the poor state of our reticulation system, which with repairs
and education, has reduced the consumption to similar to Blenheim. It is doubtful there is a major
variation for actual household water consumption needs between Blenheim & Renwick. It is
therefore considered any benchmark consumption rate for Renwick should be based on Blenheim
with a possible increase loading for Renwick due to the area's soil drainage & generally larger
section size in our village.
A18) Leak detection has found water losses over three years to be 3% to 12% of total consumption.
This alone does not account for the difference between the average daily demand between Blenheim
& Renwick. As the questioner alludes to, this is more likely to be the large section sizes and soil
type in Renwick. The use of the K-Line irrigation system, as used on some dairy farms, has been
noted in Renwick. Also the demand average in smaller communities can be affected significantly by
a few very high users. We saw this in the Wairau Valley situation (see Q22 below).
Q19) One has to wonder where the power would come from to run the electronic versions?
Householders would not be impressed to have another item added to their monthly power
consumption.
A19) Power for smart meters is supplied by an on-board battery with a life of ten years. In all
likelihood the battery would last as long at the meter.
Q20) What would be the position for multi story flats where two or more properties used the same
Toby and meter.
A20) This currently happens in Picton where individual meters have been used at the flat door (even
above ground) with a multi reader device in a central location, which provides the reading from
each meter. It is expected the multi reader would not be needed if smart meters are used.
Q21) One of the advantages put forward for water meters is the ease of checking for system leaks at
the household level. While this is true it is doubtful if the metering cost will be outweighed be the
convenience of leak checking. After all, one would assume any ongoing maintenance program of
the reticulation system would include a noise leak check as is current practice.
A21) A small leak will generate a large water loss if left unattended. For example a leak generating
1 litre per minute will result in a water loss of 1.4 m3/d. If water charges were say $1/m3 this leak
would cost $511/year. As a comparison a hose tap will flow at up to 25 or 30 litres per minute.
The leak detection we undertake currently is annual, ahead of summer demand. Even if the
frequency was increased to twice a year there will still be lengthy periods where a leak may go
undetected. Also small leaks may not be detected using the sound equipment. People would be able
to check their meter when they go to bed at night and again in the morning to identify even small
leaks on their property.
Q22) Are there any issues relevant to Renwick that were learnt from the introduction of water
meters in Wairau Valley?
A22) Before meters were introduced to Wairau Valley 53,000m3 was used annually for 48
properties. Projected usage and charges were worked out based on a 30% reduction in consumption.
In fact water usage dropped to 19,000m3 or a 64% drop. So the fixed charge (UAC) had to go up to
cover the annual water supply running costs. This significant drop in usage was largely due to some
heavy users choosing to provide their own supply of water for market gardening and stock watering.
Q23) With the new treatment regime will people need to run their taps for a while after being away,
as recommended by the Health Department?
A23) Running taps for a short period is advice from the MoH due to the possibility of
plumbosolvency (metals corroding from tapware as a result of acidic water). This will be overcome
with the new treatment plant having pH correction, such as dosing with very small quantities of
lime.
Q24) In regard to using figures from Tauranga, Nelson and Kapiti, wouldn’t it be relevant that those
places surely have much more rainfall than us? (page 17 in presentation)
A24) It is recognised that we have a hotter drier climate. The relevant point is that even though we
are starting with a higher consumption/person we can still expect a similar percentage drop of 25 –
30% in overall usage if meters are introduced, and hence a reduction in costs. The percentage drop
is likely to be from our high level of consumption (2015 – 869l/p/d) before the voluntary
restrictions of the last 2 summers.
Q25) Regarding the “Costs” figures in the chart on page 6 of the presentation - Is that “forecast
water rates” figure an annual one? It seems very high!
A25) Yes, the figures are annual. The "Forecast water rates in 2015-2015 LTP" figures were from
before the big decision last year to adopt the shared funding model for water supply in
Marlborough. We were projected to pay $1,689 and with the subsidies it is now projected to reduce
to $825. As noted in question 17, this is not a final figure, as the financial gurus are still working on
how the shared funding model will finally work. The costs will increase to the new level, as capital
works are completed, over the next 4 - 5 years.
Q26) Are there restrictions on the capture, storage and use of grey water?
A26) Grey water is untreated water. Water treatment requirements are set by the Building Act and
Health Act. Council are unable to influence this.
Q27) How did council provide water for the scout jamboree. Did they tap into the local supply?
A27) The total water use by the scouts was 35 - 50 l/d per scout x 4200 scouts = 147 - 210 m3/d.
Shower and toilet water was supplied from the irrigation bore at the Giessen Centre. The drinking
water was supplied from the Renwick network using tanks to buffer peak periods (but only for
drinking water). The volume of drinking water used was probably 5 to 6 litres/scout per day = 21 to
25 m3/d.
Renwick demand during the week scouts were here was a minimum of 1816 m3 per day to a
maximum 2907 m3 per day. The scout water use was 1 to 1.5 % of the total daily demand. Even if
these estimates of use were over conservative and the volumes were doubled the use would still
only be 2 to 3% of the total.
A question was also asked about the impact to the aquifer. The well at the Giessen Centre is in the
same aquifer albeit downstream from the Renwick water supply bore field. This well normally
provides irrigation water to the sports fields. When in operation it pumps at a high flow for a large
portion of every day over summer. The scouts used this for toilet flushing and showers. This use
will have been much less than the normal irrigation demand.
In the two weeks following the jamboree the Renwick community used the following daily amounts
in m3 – 3186, 3215, 2938, 2776, 3090, 3006, 3124, 3062, 3371, & 3147. These daily amounts all
exceeded the highest day demand when the scouts were present.
Q28) Are subsidies being considered to help with installing rainwater storage for people on large
sections for example.
A28) Subsidies are not being considered. Large sections on the town supply will use the same
amount of water in the household as houses on small sections. The difference in water use is the
irrigation of larger areas and use of water for stock. While rain water storage will help if there is a
drought the property will still be reliant on the water network. Once the new water supply is
completed there will be more water available and the relative cost/m3 for storing water is likely to
be higher than the metered cost for consuming excess water in the short to medium term,
considering stored water would also need a pump to make it available for irrigation. There may be
an incentive for people to install their own rainwater storage for some uses, dependent on the final
cost of the excess water? Some may also want to explore the use of existing bores on properties for
irrigation use.
If you want to discuss anything before the meeting on Wednesday, please contact Budyong Hill –
[email protected] or 0211367936.