|WikiProject Water supply and sanitation||(Rated B-class, Low-importance)|
Apparent or apparent?
"Losses can be apparent losses (through leaks, sometimes referred to as physical losses) or apparent (for example through theft or metering inaccuracies)." Apparent or apparent? NickelShoe (Talk) 16:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for the mistake. It should have read "real losses" and then "apparent losses". Have fixed it now. Thanks for pointing this out.--Mschiffler 19:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Got to be joking
- It is true that NRW in a G8 country consists mostly or exclusively of leaks. Concerning the second comment, reduction of NRW is a complex process. Reducing NRW requires a credible plan, political will and funding for investments. Holding back investment funds is unlikely to help reduce NRW. Non-payment of customer bills actually is not part of NRW which only measures whether water has been billed, not whether bills have been paid or not. The latter is measured by another indicator, the bill collection efficiency.--Mschiffler (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Add some pictures of apparent losses
I'd like to add the following picture as an example of an apparent loss. This is an 80mm Elster Helix combination meter. Although the body of the meter is 80mm in size, a 50mm pot had been fitted fitted. Water flows under the impeller as well as through it.
This was found at a prison in the South of England. The meter was recording 63 cubic meters per day. But 119 cubic meters per day was going under the impeller. A lot of non-revenue water at one property!