Another day another expert ...
Seems the Toowoomba City Council has another expert to convince everyone to drink recycled sewage.
The Chronicle today carries an article which states that the Mayor has found a new ally in the water debate - UQ Professor Jurg Keller.
But how independent is he?
Professor Keller is Director of the Advanced Wastewater Management Centre at UQ.
(see - Advanced Wastewater Management Centre)
Also at the Centre apparently is Adjunct Professor and ex-CH2M Hill Australia Managing Director Ian Law who also has his own consultancy, IBL Solutions.
(see - Adjunct Professor and also IWES presenters.)
Seems Professor Keller is also a director and shareholder of Wastewater Futures Pty Ltd which advises the private sector on wastewater treatment solutions. Fellow director and shareholder Paul Lant is also an Associate Professor at UQ and helped Professor Keller establish the Advanced Wastewater Management Centre at UQ. (see - Paul Lant)
Associate Professor Lant is working on a variety of research projects at the moment including one partially funded by the Toowoomba City Council worth $88,000. (see - Toowoomba City Council research). So the Centre established by Professor Keller and Associate Professor Lant is doing research funded by the Toowoomba City Council.
Wastewater Futures Pty Ltd also carries on a professional training business under the name IWES ("Australia's leading workshop for environment professionals"). Course presenters at their conference scheduled for Sydney in February 2006 include Professor Keller, Associate Professor Lant, Ian Law and, guess who, Dr Greg Leslie (also ex-CH2M Hill and now advising the Toowoomba City Council as a consultant to CH2M Hill). (see - IWES.)
IWES does paid training for a large number of clients including CH2M Hill.
[paragraph deleted - please see comment]
The wastewater world certainly is a small one!
Memo from Toowoomba City Council - please send another expert ...
posted by Concerned Ratepayer at 8:37 PM
6 Comments:
I'm usually not bothered about commenting in these forums, but I've got to admit that the "research" done by the "Concerned Ratepayer" even surprised me, but unfortunately a number of "facts" are very misleading or outright incorrect. Hence this does need a reply.
I need to state very clearly that I have had neither in the past nor at present any affiliation or contract with Toowoomba City Council and the "suggested link" through Paul Lant's research project is highly misleading. This project is not directly related to the recycling project and A/Prof Lant is currently in the UK and not at all involved in this recycling discussion. Similarly, we have or had a large number of industry related projects with water authorities in Brisbane, Gold Coast, Caboolture, Sydney and other councils or industry partners, which probably mainly demonstrates that our expertise is indeed well sought after by many of the leading water authorities in Australia.
Similarly, while Dr Ian Law is certainly an Adjunct Prof with our centre, we have several other leading Australian and international experts with adjunct or honorary positions in our Centre. Indeed, it is a small world in the water industry, at least for those who are keen in generating good scientific knowledge and using expertise for the benefit of the Australian and the world community at large! Dr Law had certainly nothing to do with my interview with the Toowoomba Chronicle as this is my personal opinion based on my professional knowledge and understanding of the matter.
The link to CH2M-Hill via the IWES courses is another excellent example of leading knowledge and expertise in this field in Australia. IWES courses have attracted participants from probably all major water authorities in every State and Territory plus numerous companies over the 20+ years of their existence. So you could probably connect just about any major consulting, operating or even manufacturing company plus most public water organisations in Australia to the IWES training courses. So this "link" is clearly one of the best demonstrations of the excellent reputation of ourselves and our presenters and major success in providing leading technical and scientific training and education to the water industry.
Finally, the most outrageous and clearly incorrect connection with -Hill is the Award for the Best PhD Thesis we have been awared by the Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors (AEESP) in the US. If the "Concerned Ratepayer" had done his/her research properly, it would have been clear that the AEESP was selecting this award and CH2M-Hill is just the sponsor for this award (or maybe this aspect was just conveniently left out?). Given that this is the first time in the 17-year history that a non-US PhD thesis has been given this award, it again reflects strongly on the excellence of our research and expertise rather than any other "fictional" connection with the sponsor of this award. And, incidentially, I would be most happy to visit Toowoomba and have discussion with anyone interested in actual facts rather than emotional arguments since I am not even attending the Award ceremony this week.
One additional worthwhile bit of information should also be considered by everyone involved in this debate. SBS Insight program today (Tue, 1 Nov, 7:30pm) will provide a documentary on the water shortage and recyling issue. And they have done a poll where people have been asked to even choose between desalinated and recycled water or neither. The result given on their webpage http://news.sbs.com.au/insight/index.php
may be a great wake-up call to the obviously very few, but vocal opponents of water recycling. Currently, the tally stands at:
29% prefer desalinated water
63% prefer recycled water
3% prefer neither of the two; and
4% didn't care.
Now this has nothing to do with me and just considers people's opinion but it tells a very clear story. So I would suggest that those people who do have a problem with drinking this recycled water should just choose to buy bottled water (if they believe this is cleaner and safer) rather than trying to force their small minority opinion onto everyone else. There are already some people that don't drink tap water now, but they don't try to force the council to provide bottled drinking water to everyone just because they choose not to drink the tap water.
Maybe this would resolve the whole issue very quickly.
Any comments would certainly be welcome and I even provide my email address if someone would like to contact me directly.
Jurg Keller
j.keller@awmc.uq.edu.au
10:26 AM, November 01, 2005
SBS online poll currently shows:
59% want desalinated
34% want recycled
3% neither
3% don't care
5:43 PM, November 01, 2005
I don't think the SBS online poll is accurate - regardless of whether the "recyclers" or "desalinaters" are ahead. It is too easy to manipulate by multiple voting.
I'll wait to see the results of the SBS survey to be announced on the program which hopefully is a bit more scientific.
But like any survey, it depends on the questions asked.
5:52 PM, November 01, 2005
I thank Dr Keller for providing his response.
The purpose of the "research" was to show how inter-related the parties are in this debate and how many of these links go back to the contractor on the Toowoomba project.
I made no comments on, nor do I have any concerns regarding, the expertise of those at the Centre - UQ is a fine institution.
I established a financial link between the Centre and the Toowoomba City Council which readers would probably not know existed.
I think the winner of the AEESP awarded CH2M Hill award for best dissertation is to be congratulated - beating out so much competition is not easy.
On the basis that Dr Keller is not attending the Conference, I will amend the blog comment.
6:32 PM, November 01, 2005
The following paragraph was deleted from the blog comment following the comments raised by Dr Keller. I accept that he is not attending the 2005 WEFTEC Conference in Washington DC. Just to be clear, readers should also be aware that the CH2M Hill award is awarded by the US Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors (AEESP). CH2M Hill is the sponsor of this award.
Deleted paragraph:
But don't expect Professor Keller in Toowoomba this month. He'll be off to the 2005 WEFTEC Conference in Washington DC. At the conference - CH2M Hill is a conference gold sponsor (see - http://www.weftec.org/about/sponsorship.htm) - his PhD student, Adrian Oehmen will collect the CH2M Hill Award for his dissertation. Prizes will also be given to Dr Oehman's advisers, Zhiguo Yuan and Professor Keller. (see - http://www.eng.uq.edu.au/default.asp?pageid=94)
6:39 PM, November 01, 2005
Full poll results:
SBS Insight
EXCITING NEWSPOLL RESULTS RELEASED!
A majority of Australians (61%) say they would feel safer drinking
treated desalinated water. Only 21% say they would feel safer drinking treated recycled water. A further 18% said neither/don't know to this question.
There were no significant differences of note in the results on the basis of age, marital status, children in the household, education or income. Males (25%) were significantly more likely than their female counterparts (17%) to say they would feel safer drinking treated desalinated water.
Sydney residents (52%) were significantly less likely than those living in Melbourne (66%), Brisbane (70%) or Perth (64%) to say they would feel safer drinking treated desalinated water.
56% of Australians (56%) say they would prefer treated recycled water for non-drinking purposes in their home compared to 29% who express a preference for treated desalinated water. 14% said neither/don't know to this question.
Respondents aged 35-49 (61%) were significantly more likely than those aged 50+ (51%) to say they would prefer treated recycled water for non-drinking purposes in their home.
Respondents with children (70%) were significantly more likely than those without children (49%) to say they would prefer treated recycled water for non-drinking purposes in their home.
Married respondents (60%) were significantly more likely than non
married (51%) to say they would prefer treated recycled water for
non-drinking purposes in their home. Sydney residents (64%) were significantly more likely than those living in Melbourne (53%), Adelaide (45%) or Perth (47%) to say they would prefer treated recycled water for non-drinking purposes in their home.
The comfort level with using treated recycled water for non-drinking purposes in their home increases with income (under $30K: 43%, $70K+:62%).
5:49 PM, November 02, 2005
Post a Comment
<< Home