On Mon, 16 May 2005 07:10:38 +0100, "Brian Watson"
wrote:

~
~"martin" wrote in message
.. .
~ On Sun, 15 May 2005 19:02:36 +0100, MM wrote:
~
~On Sun, 15 May 2005 17:09:43 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:
~
~ Of course, you'd get about 150 cubic
~metres of Anglian water for that kind of money instead, but it's the
~idea of getting something for nothing that appeals.
~
~ Have you worked out how much 20 cubic metres of water weighs?
~
~Or how much the petrol will cost to get it home? Or how much the container
~to hold it will cost?
~
~Waste of time and money, I call it.
~

Yes, but in a country which is heading for hosepipe bans due to a
shortage of clean water this summer, surely getting water directly
from a dyke will be much greener, as it's not been expensively
purified, saves using drinking water and is in any case gradually
making its way to the sea?

If it's not far away, and therefore not much in the way of petrol,
then surely it's a good idea? Especially if it's fun!

jane, who had a lot of fun wiring up her lottie shed to a water butt
the other week. Course it's hardly rained since... typical!