Advertisement
The daily news coverage contains a growing number of reports about the failure of municipal water systems.
Of increasing concern, we are hearing of major metros in crisis. We hear that the Minister of Water and Sanitation has decided to mandate a policy of “water shifting” as a response to the growing anger of residents unable to access water. Think of load shedding, but now applied to pipes moving molecules, rather than wires moving electrons. Molecules must first fill the pipes and tanks, whereas electrons instantly dance across the wires, so a time delay separates these two applications of the same core logic. We hear of the leadership in Johannesburg, either shifting the blame onto Rand Water, or calling for a research program that will make the city independent of its current bulk supplier. This ignores the collective wisdom of over 120 years of complex engineering, that progressively pumped water uphill to the center of economic development, from increasingly distant rivers (Tugela) and through mountain ranges (Lesotho Highlands). We hear that the bulk water supplier in KZN has been ordered to cut back delivery to Durban, because it is exceeding its license allocation. Everywhere there is blame-shifting, and nobody accepts responsibility.
All this noise means one simple thing – South Africa has lost the water security it once boasted – but what does this mean to the average household?
For starters, we need to understand that three forces are colliding at present. Once we understand them, we can begin to develop a viable strategy. The first force is population growth. In the last 30 years the population has doubled in South Africa, increasing demand for water. The second force is urbanization. When influx control was abandoned in 1994, there was a massive movement of people from rural to urban areas, exacerbated by foreign migrants entering across the porous borders. This placed growing demand on the infrastructure, but most notably on water provision and sewage treatment. The third force is the radical restructuring of the architecture of decision-making and governance that was triggered by the promulgation of the first two pieces of legislation in the post-apartheid era – the National Water Act and the Water Services Act. This happened while influx control was being abolished, driven by powerful rhetoric about the perceived imperative of “restructuring” to achieve “equity”.
The collective result of the collision of these three forces is that at the very time when sophisticated design and planning was needed to upgrade infrastructure in urban areas, there was institutional instability and the loss of skills. Stated differently, the infrastructure that existed was never upgraded, and has now been run into the ground. But, more importantly, the skills deficit in the various water management bodies (think Johannesburg Water or Durban Corporation) is such that the current leadership is simply overwhelmed by the complexity of the problem they are now forced to “manage”. Self-correction is thus increasingly unlikely, which now places the emphasis back on the individual homeowner.
The simple reality is that water security can no longer be guaranteed by the state, so it is up to the individual to now decide what they must do to achieve what the state is unable to deliver. This is our New Normal. To assist the homeowner, think of the following three core elements.
Advertisement
Element No. 1 is onsite storage.
Stripped to its core, the problem is about the loss of storage capacity in the municipal systems, so this must be replicated at the household level. At a minimum, there should be storage capacity to carry a household through a 48-hour period. This implies the prioritization of water use and a plan that has been formulated by someone, and agreed to by all. High-priority use would be things like water for food preparation, personal hygiene, and survival. This must, of necessity, be high-quality water. The next priority is toilet flushing with lower-quality water such as bath or shower water that has been captured before it drains into the sewer. This implies some thought and investment into the design of greywater systems, because this is the ugly part of our New Normal, so a bucket with bath water to flush the toilet might not be the most elegant way forward. When considering such systems, it is best to engage with a professional service provider, to design and quote on the most cost-effective solution. Make sure that guarantees of design performance are included, for the consequences are unpleasant, and can be costly.
Element No. 2 is safety.
It’s a scientifically verifiable fact that the most immediate human health risk is directly associated with water that is stored onsite in temporary containers. This is why it makes more sense to consider our collective reality as the New Normal. In other words, your temporary solution is likely to become a permanent one, so plan it with the assistance of a professional service provider. Balance cost against effectiveness, health risk and convenience. Living in an estate, the most cost-effective solution is typically implemented at the level of the Body Corporate (BC) or Homeowners Association (HOA), simply because the economies of scale favour any collective solution over an individual solution.
Element No. 3 is pressure management.
Having onsite storage implies the need to also provide pressure to the system. Nothing triggers internal conflict more than a scalding shower caused by someone opening a tap elsewhere in an under-pressurized system. This is a technically complex field, so once again it is best to make use of a certified professional service provider. The logical way would be for the HOA or BC to have a list of approved service providers within an estate if the pressure solution is to be implemented at the household level. Once again, pressure management is best implemented as part of an integrated service, including onsite storage at the level of the estate.
In conclusion, the reader needs to reflect on the likelihood that the bulk service provider in their unique circumstances is going to be capable of securing water supplies into the future. If that likelihood is low, then the reader needs to accept that a New Normal is upon them. Once that acceptance has been achieved, then the next step is to decide if this will become a self-help solution, applied at the household level, or a collective solution, applied to the whole estate. The economics will generally favour the collective solution, but that implies the ability to gain consensus among all homeowners, some of whom are likely to reject the New Normal perspective. In this case, the individual homeowner needs to consider the three elements noted above – storage, safety, and pressure – when allocating budget to the harsh reality of their New Normal.
Reach out to professional service providers, and don’t be afraid to get references that must be checked, for nothing is more costly than a poorly designed system that over-promises and under-delivers.
