Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Rain of terror

Letters

Your enthusiasm and that of your correspondents for the water butt is commendable, but spare a thought for the poor old leakage engineer. If everyone were to suddenly start being sensible with their water usage, it would compromise his ability to meet reduction targets - no doubt linked to his annual bonus!

Leakage, normally expressed as a percentage, continues day and night, therefore a reduction in demand will increase the leakage percentage and the leakage engineer will be chasing an increasingly remote target.

At least water leaks return to the environment with (normally) no adverse effects.

The same cannot be said for the power sector. Leakage rates for water may be expected to be around 25 to 30%.

A centralised fossil fuel power station, however, leaks energy at every stage between consumption of the primary energy source (30%), through transmission and distribution (3.5%), to inefficient consumption (13%).

For every 100 units of fossil fuel consumed, 88 units go to atmosphere and in doing so compromise our children's future.

What a pity there isn't an energy butt! !

Peter Leach (M), ess consulting, Mold, CH7 4EL

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.