Water borehole

[gc100]

Hi,

 

Our site is in open countryside and its a long way to get connected to the mains. I had always thought we'd need to go the borehole route however it may be possible to get connected to the mains at a reasonable cost I have recently discovered. 

 

So I've been considering the pro;s and con's of a water bore, and have some specific questions about the equipment in terms of location. Some of the quotes I have state the bore will be drilled and capped off with a man hole, and that a shed needs to be provided for the pressure tanks and equipment. Does anyone know if this equipment can be fit say in the garage about 50m away from where I was thinking of putting the borehole? Does it need to be next to the actual hole?

 

Does anyone have a idea of the real-world costs of running a water borehole in terms of maintenance, replacing parts, electricity?

 

Thanks

[Jeremy Harris]

The tale of our borehole is documented in my blog (link in the signature below) and may help.

 

The quick answer is that our 53m deep borehole cost around £8.5k, for drilling, lining, grouting, supply and fit a Grundfos pump, pressure switch and manhole cover over the top of it.  The pressure vessel, water treatment (if required), disinfection system etc can be as far away as you like, within reason.  50m is no problem at all.

 

Running costs are around £150 a year, including a sinking fund to cover the cost of replacing the pump after around 10 years (should last 20 years though, with luck).

[gc100]

Thanks for the information. Thats a good price - my quotes are coming in around 15K for similar depth. 

[Ferdinand]

12 minutes ago, gc100 said:

Thanks for the information. Thats a good price - my quotes are coming in around 15K for similar depth. 

 

Perhaps also a little regulatory risk analysis

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/norfolk-villagers-and-farms-hit-in-first-water-war-r5f9wmhwn

 

The village that has lost its aquifer supply has 1300 people.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Ferdinand

[scottishjohn]

main problem with bore hole  is that until they stop drilling the price is just a guesstimate .

now you would have thought where we are it would be simple 

my architect who is involeved with this monster country house refurb  got a quote for bore hole 

then they had to go deeper --than quoted 

 then they tested water and it has traces of arsenic -- not an end of the world problem  just  more expense in fitting something to remove it

so If cost of mains is even close to borehole --that would be my choice every time --

that price will be  fixed with  known water quality +supply volume and pressure 

 latest plot i,m trying to get --just in case others finally fall through --

elec cost could be 30-40k 

but would i go wind turbine etc which is similar -- doubtful

not a direct comparison to what you end up with 

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by scottishjohn

[Mr Punter]

Unless the cost is more than 15% of the total build cost, get a mains connection.

 

The borehole nearly finished off @JSHarris and he is one of the most resourceful members here.

[Jeremy Harris]

38 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

 

Perhaps also a little regulatory risk analysis

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/norfolk-villagers-and-farms-hit-in-first-water-war-r5f9wmhwn

 

The village that has lost its aquifer supply has 1300 people.

 

Worth noting that the problem in Norfolk isn't private water supplies abstracting groundwater (as they are miniscule, as far as impact on the aquifer is concerned) it's licenced farm boreholes.

 

The law is that you only require an abstraction licence if you draw more than 20,000 litres of water per day from a borehole or other water source.  A domestic supply won't come close to this; as a general guide it will be around 150 litres per person per day (so we probably draw around 1.5% of the maximum we could use without needing a licence).

 

Farms will need an abstraction licence, as they will likely use very large volumes for crop irrigation.  It is the farm and commercial abstraction licences that are possibly being revoked in Norfolk, not the unlicensed use of private boreholes that don't require any licence.

 

The impact of reduced levels in aquifers is still there, but this varies markedly with the region and the underlying hydrogeology.  Where we are, the lower greensand aquifer doesn't seem to vary at all, the level stays a constant ~4m below the top of the borehole all year around and from one year to the next.

 

As for uncertainty, then this depends entirely on how good the hydrogeological survey is.  We used a very good chap, who produced a detailed survey, complete with a drilling profile and borehole design.  Even though we had problems with the drilling company, it turned out that the hydrogeologist was absolutely spot on, in that the water was exactly where he said it would be (within about 1m, as far as I can tell) and the water quality is also exactly as he predicted, with significant levels of ferrous iron that has to be removed by our water treatment plant.

 

Although the borehole saga was a PITA (as @Mr Punter mentions above), the very best £300 I spent was on the hydrogeological survey, as that took pretty much all the risk out of the initial decision to go for a borehole rather than pay a great deal of money to get mains water to the site.

[Ferdinand]

That is useful comment, Jeremy.

 

Though according one Industry Assoc the limit in 10,000l per day as of right.

http://www.ukwta.org/technology-areas/private-water-supplies/

 

Thanks,

Edited April 26, 2019 by Ferdinand

[janelondon]

On 26/04/2019 at 10:33, JSHarris said:

the very best £300 I spent was on the hydrogeological survey

Would you mind PM-ing me your contact for the hydro survey? Thanks @JSHarris

[Jeremy Harris]

19 minutes ago, janelondon said:

Would you mind PM-ing me your contact for the hydro survey? Thanks @JSHarris

 

Happy to give it out publicly, as the chap was very helpful and gave a good service.  The chap we used was Tim Baker at http://bahsltd.com/index.htm

 

The cost was £250 + VAT when we used him, but that was a few years ago, so prices might have increased a bit.

[janelondon]

19 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

Happy to give it out publicly, as the chap was very helpful and gave a good service.  The chap we used was Tim Baker at http://bahsltd.com/index.htm

 

The cost was £250 + VAT when we used him, but that was a few years ago, so prices might have increased a bit.

Thank you! Stay tuned for lots of borehole-related questions... 

 

@gc100 How are you getting on with your decision?

[janelondon]

2 hours ago, JSHarris said:

The cost was £250 + VAT when we used him, but that was a few years ago, so prices might have increased a bit.

In case anyone's interested, just got a quote from them and it's now £425 + VAT. 

[Jeremy Harris]

That's a bit of an increase, more than I'd have expected, although it is about 6 years since they did our report, and it was very comprehensive.

 

You can get an idea as to whether or not a borehole may be viable by looking at the BGS website and looking for borehole records near to where you are.  I found about a dozen boreholes around our village, so knew that we had a pretty good chance of being able to use one.

[janelondon]

1 hour ago, JSHarris said:

You can get an idea as to whether or not a borehole may be viable by looking at the BGS website and looking for borehole records near to where you are.

Yup already done. There is a handful around us. Fingers crossed!