NRW comprise meter under registration, pilferage, water for fire-fighting and other operational use and leakage. The bulk of NRW is meter under- registration, pilferage and leakage. Cutting down meter under - registration and pilferage does not reduce consumption. It only increases revenue. Only the leakage component constitutes wastage.

According to JBAS, the leakage in Selangor is only 16%.

This leakage rate 16% is similar to that of many other countries.

If we reduce leakages from 16% to 6%, or a 10% reduction, this only means a 2 year deferment of SSP3. This is assuming replacing old pipes can be done overnight. It will probably take RM 1 billion over 10 years to tackle this problem. This is a lot more expensive than developing a new source of water.

It is probably true that any one time, 97% of the water is in the ground. On average, every cubic metre of earth contains from 350 litres to 500 litres of water.

Unless you have an aquifer, which is basically clean sand and gravel, the water is trapped in the soil matrix. It is for this reason that only certain areas like Kota Baru have ground water. In Selangor, ground water was found in Olak Lempit. But this is on an isolated case and it is not known if prolonged pumping will cause subsidence or infiltration of salt water. In any case, it is a very small source - less than 1% of Selangor's needs.

A neighbouring country has intentions to go ahead with a 136 mld desalination plant at a cost of RM2.4 billion. This is about 10-15 times more expensive than a conventional plant.

The whole Sg Selangor Phase 3 scheme for 1,050 mld including dam, treatment plants, pipelines and reservoir cost less than this. In addition, the operating and maintenance will also be many times the conventional cost. All in, the consumer will have to pay about at least RM10-RM15/m3 against about RM0.50-0.80/m3. It is no wonder that only a few isolated island resorts can afford such a price.

Keeping the river clean should be enforced as there will be less pollutants which may have long term detrimental health effects. Also the treatment cost will be lower.

However keeping the river clean does not change this amount of water flowing past the intake point. Keeping the river clean will enable water to be abstracted from more rivers. In Selangor this would be the Sungai Klang downstream of Kuala Lumpur.

It took 10 years and 2 billion dollars for Singapore to clean up the Kallang River. Even then it still cannot be used for potable water supply. In the case of Sg. Klang, it would take billions of Ringgit at today's price. At the end of it, during the dry season when water is needed most, all you will get is treated sewage. It is unlikely that the public will accept this.

(1) Reducing household consumption
Average household of 5 spends about 60 sen a day on water. To try and cut down on consumption by say, 30% means saving about 20 sen. A 30% reduction is equivalent to the reduced production of the Langat and Semenyih treatment plants during the drought crisis.

(2) Get industries to recycle water
There are a few isolated cases of success but these are isolated cases. Only industries that use large quantities of water in a non-consumptive way and where the waste water can be easily treated and reused can be persuaded to see the economics of recycling.

The bulk of the industries uses only a few hundred to a few thousand cubic metres of water a day and to set up a treatment plant to treat the waste to a standard than can be reused just does not make economic sense.

(3) Raise tariffs
If you raise tariffs by 20 to 30% it will not cover the true cost of bringing water to the consumer. It is also not likely to affect the way they use water. If they are to pay for the true cost of water, tariffs will likely have to be raised by a much higher amount.

(4) Educate the public
It will certainly take a long time before the realisation sinks in that resources are limited, alternatives start to get very expensive and it is not sustainable economically to continue subsidising water

The flows in a river are highly variable and seasonal. The drought flows in a river can range from 0 to 20-30% of the average flows depending on catchment size and characteristics.

In the case of Sg Langat, it was about 12% (90MLD) at Sg Selangor ,18% (990MLD) during the 1998 drought. If there were no regulating reservoirs and if compensation flows past the intakes are made, in the case of Langat where a volume of 90MLD is recommended, there would be nothing left to abstract. In Sg Selangor, where 300MLD is recommended, the maximum abstraction would be 690 MLD.

With a regulating reservoir, it is possible to abstract up to 3000MLD from Sg Selangor with a minimum compensation release of 300MLD. In Sg Langat, it is possible to abstract 376MLD with 90MLD compensation flows.

The above demonstrates the importance of reservoirs in giving reliability to a water supply system. China has more than 80,000 dams, UK more than 3,000 and US more than 70,000. There must be a very strong and compelling reason for their being.

The authorities are planning for the implementation of such schemes and the construction cost will be much more than SSP3. It also involves the construction of a dam and relocation of Orang Asli and private land owners. The interstate water transfer is not an alternative but part of the long term solution.