Another day, another water supply option ...

Another water supply option reported in today's Chronicle - Driller claims aquifer will halt water woes.

It might not solve Toowoomba's water supply issues but it's interesting that the more people look the more options there seem to be ...

New costings released ... but where's the detail?

Perhaps as a result of some prodding, the Toowoomba City Council has released its revised costings for the proposed recycled water project.

We were promised costings which break down the entire cost of the proposed recycled water project. Here's what is now on the Toowoomba Water Futures website for the project (labelled the "explain-all cost analysis"):

Water Futures Toowoomba
Recurrent Cost ($/kl) - 0.56
Subsidy Rate (%) - 66
Annual Cost of Capital ($/kl) - 0.24
Total Cost ($/kl) - 0.80

See - just four numbers.

These four numbers represent everything the Council has just disclosed on the Toowoomba Water Futures website as part of its detailed breakdown of the project's costs.

Now does that explain where the $68 million is being spent? How much will the Visitor Centre cost? $3 million? Who could tell?

Do the ratepayers deserve a better explanation?

New detailed costings released ... where?

The Chronicle announced on page 3 on Saturday 26 November 2005 that the Toowoomba City Council had released detailed new costings which break down the entire cost of the recycled water project and two other proposals, showing the recycled water proposal as the cheapest.

The only problem is - where did the Council release these new costings?

They haven't put them on the Toowoomba Water Futures website.

It makes it hard to review the figures if the Council won't actually distribute them ...

Redwood City California says no to drinking recycled water ...

Redwood City California is proceeding with a recycled water project. Here's what the website says about drinking recycled water:

"Adverse health effects from recycled water could appear only if it were ingested in large quantities over an extended period of time. That is why it is not intended for drinking. There are no reported cases of people getting sick from recycled water."

See Redwood City Recycled Water Project

Again, the Toowoomba Water Futures website only gives half the story ...

Toowoomba's Drinking Water Management Policy

On 2 November 2005, the Council added its Drinking Water Management Policy dated 1 October 2004 to the Toowoomba City Council website:

See - Drinking Water Management Policy.

Interestingly, it states:

"Toowoomba City Council has implemented .... systems that:

- ensure that the needs and expectations of our customers, stakeholders, regulators and employees are included in our planning.

- encourage discussion and debate on industry regulations and guidelines, and other standards relevant to public health and the water cycle."

Would the residents of Toowoomba and the surrounding Shire Councils agree that the Toowoomba City Council is currently complying with its own policy ....

Sydney residents will not be drinking recycled water ...

NSW Utilities Minister Carl Skully said earlier today that:

"The Government would not force Sydneysiders to drink recycled sewage because he did not believe the public was ready to accept it."

Minister Skully made the comment at the same time as rejecting reports claiming desalination was almost twice as expensive as building a recycling plant.

See - Desalination - cheaper water option.

Qld Gas Company and SunWater look at alternatives ...

Press release by QGC in relation to drought-proofing Chinchilla using gas water and the possibility of supplying it to other areas on the Darling Downs.

This shows that there are other options - the gas water proposal is an innovative use of a by-product of coal seam gas extraction.

See - press release.

Why I disagree with the Mayor's proposal ...

1. There is a need for a consistent national approach to water recycling.

2. Water recycling projects should only proceed once all stakeholders are satisfied that all health issues have been dealt with.

3. The Toowoomba City Council and Mayor Thorley are trying to rush through a proposal to introduce recycled sewage for drinking in Toowoomba.

4. The Council is relying on the advice of consultants who are either related to one of the contractors or otherwise stand to gain financially from an increase in water recycling in Australia.

5. The Toowoomba City Council proposal has been prepared behind closed doors without any open debate among Councillors or the public. The Council is not even providing sufficient information to surrounding shires which buy water from Toowoomba.

6. A significant proportion of Toowoomba's residents are against the proposal. The Mayor denies this.

7. There are three recent reports prepared for the Federal government which state that further research is required on the effects of recycled water on humans. The "Sustainable Cities" Inquiry Report calls for an independent review of water options for major cities and regions.

8. There are an increasing number of State and Federal politicians against the use of recycled water for drinking.

9. The Qld Premier has stated that he does not support the use of recycled water for drinking in South-east Queensland.

10. If Toowoomba were to proceed with this proposal, it would be the only community in the region to do so - all the surrounding communities are looking at other alternatives.

Toowoomba City Council misses the point yet again ...

The Toowoomba Water Futures website contains a link to an ABC program transcript - Purifying Water with Sunlight.

While the program made some interesting points, it continues to promote the idea that people can't taste the difference between recycled water and other water so therefore it must be ok.

Quite simply, it's the things you can't taste that cause the most concern, including potential residual chemicals. See AWA workshop on 29 November. Using a "taste test" is hardly going to allay people's concerns regarding endocrine disrupting compounds.

The program also commented that all water is recycled so what's the difference?

There is a clear difference between using dam water which is not combined with recycled sewage and drinking a combination of dam water and recycled sewage.

Why take the risk? Drinking recycled sewage should be considered a last resort and there are other options.

It's interesting that the Toowoomba Water Futures website still has no reference to the three reports prepared for the Federal government which state that further research on recycled water is necessary. Nor does it refer to the House of Reps "Sustainable Cities" Inquiry Report which recommended an independent review of water options for major cities and regions.

I wonder why not ...

Why California is a bad example for Toowoomba to use ...

The Toowoomba City Council often uses Orange County in California as their golden example of water recycling. But, once again, it's not quite the complete picture.

In Santa Cruz (also in California), desalination has been chosen as the preferred route notwithstanding a higher estimated project cost.

Water Department Director Bill Kocher recently discussed the issue of water options in the Santa Cruz Sentinal. The article commented that:

"Kocher says there's hardly room left for water customers to scale back use any more than they have, and recycled water isn't allowed for drinking, leaving desalination as the best and only option during dry years.

"I've been studying this stuff for 20 years," he said. "If something else would work, we would have found it by now."

If ultimately approved by the California Coastal Commission, Santa Cruz would join other coastal areas with desalination plants such as Marina, Santa Barbara, Long Beach and Marin County. "

Interesting comments.

So when the Mayor raises the example of Orange County, remember that down the road they see things a little differently ...

Also read this comment on why Singapore is a bad example for Toowoomba to use.

AWA workshop on Chemicals in Waste and Reclaimed Water

Anyone interested in learning more about chemicals in waste and reclaimed water can attend a half day workshop being held in Brisbane on 29 November 2005 by the Australian Water Association in conjunction with the CRC for Water Quality and Treatment.

At the workshop, they will present information and research data on a number of emerging contaminants that are not currently controlled by discharge limits and the need (or otherwise) for risk minimisation.

One day it's all approved, the next there's nothing ...

Mayor Thorley's view changes daily.

She has previously stated that her controversial recycled water project had been approved by the Council because Councillors had signed off on forward estimates in Budgets and approved the NWC application for funding. (Other Councillors disagree with this.)

On 19 October 2005, the Chronicle quotes her as saying (in response to a request for a referendum on the issue):

"[a referendum] about what? There's no project until we get Federal funding. Once we get an answer [from the NWC], we have a project to sell."

So, suddenly, there's nothing but an application for funding to the NWC. This is an amazing reversal from her previous stance - this is the only option and we are pushing ahead.

Update on Asia junket

At the Council meetings on 15-16 November, they approved the Asia junket for next April.

See - Council minutes .

The Mayor and several Councillors will be going - you can bet those Councillors who are against the Mayor's water recycling proposal won't be invited ...

New candidate for Toowoomba North's comments on drinking recycled water ...

New National Party candidate for the State seat of Toowoomba North (and current Toowoomba City Council Councillor) Lyle Shelton made these comments last month regarding drinking recycled water:

"I think it will be hard to sell drinking recycled sewage when 27,000 megalitres of proven, safe yield of potable water is available within kilometres of the city,'' Cr Shelton said. "It doesn't make sense to put potable water on cotton and drink recycled effluent." (Courier Mail 13 October 2005).

Current Toowoomba North member, Labor's Kerry Shine, may find it hard to hold onto his seat at the next State election. At the last election in 2004, the primary vote for Toowoomba North was:

- Shine (ALP) - 11,785 votes
- National Party Candidate - 8,567 votes.

What chance a new member for Toowoomba North at the next State election?

Necessity is the mother of invention ...

A new idea from a Sydney inventor - a cheaper solution to dual flush toilets.

See - Inventor flush with success? Absoloo-tely.

Goulburn Council has already ordered 50 to test. Perhaps Toowoomba City Council should follow their example.

Five Toowoomba Water myths ...

Myth 1 - There are no other alternatives to using recycled sewage for drinking in Toowoomba.

There are other options. Federal MP Ian Macfarlane has told the Council to examine and cost them. The "Sustainable Cities" Inquiry report recommends that an independent review of water options be conducted.

Myth 2 - The Council has looked at all the alternatives.

Clearly, the Council has not looked at all the alternatives in sufficient detail. This is just something the Mayor says to mislead the public.

Myth 3 - Recycled sewage is 100% safe for drinking.

Not once has the Mayor or any Councillor said that recycled sewage is without risk. Nor can they. And there are three reports in Canberra which say more research into recycled sewage is required. Why doesn't the Council mention these reports? At a minimum, the issues raised in these reports should be resolved before proceeding.

Myth 4 - The Council has discussed using recycled sewage for drinking with the community.

Everything is being done behind closed doors. Even other Councillors are being locked out of the decision making process. The Mayor is on record as saying that she does not need to discuss the recycled sewage proposal with the community. The Mayor's need to "shut down debate" is worrying.

Myth 5 - Other towns and cities in Queensland will introduce recycled sewage for drinking.

Name another place in Queensland which is considering the use of recycled water for drinking. Brisbane's Mayor is against it. Other alternatives are being reviewed for the Gold and Sunshine Coasts. Towns west of Toowoomba are looking seriously at gas water - Dalby has a successful pilot plant operational. Even Jondaryan Shire which currently takes water from Toowoomba is looking at ways to become water self-sufficient to avoid taking recycled sewage from Toowoomba. There is clearly a need for a "whole of region" approach to resolving water issues.

Draft Code of Conduct for Councillors

The Qld Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation has released the new draft model Code of Conduct for Councillors. The Toowoomba City Council must adopt a Code before 1 March 2006 otherwise the model Code provisions will be deemed to apply. (The Council apparently intends to adopt the Model Code.)

The draft Code contains some pretty woolly feel good stuff but it does state that:

- Councillors must ensure that they do not harass or intimidate other councillors, council staff or contractors engaged by the council.

- Councillors must disclose, through appropriate processes, any suspected fraud, corruption or mal-administration of which they become aware.

Also, the Code improves the provisions for the disclosure of financial and non-financial interests. This includes "gifts" used for election campaigns.

It will be interesting to see the final version adopted by the Council and some of the disclosures made in relation to financial and non-financial interests. Hope they're accurate!

See - Code of Conduct

More on endocrine disrupting compounds ...

Back in the news - recent articles on EDCs sure to spark debate among water recyclers:

A sea of evidence reveals outlets for sex change - The Age - 15 November 2005

Alberta Environment monitoring rivers for drugs - CBC News - 25 October 2005

San Francisco to adopt recycled water but not for drinking ...

The Toowoomba City Council often uses Orange County California as an example of recycled water use in its argument for adopting a recycled water for drinking strategy for Toowoomba.

San Francisco (also in California) has announced that it will adopt a new recycled water strategy for the city but it will not include using recycled water for drinking.

Water recycling may come to city

The City has ambitious recycling plans for paper, aluminium and plastics, but it may come as a surprise that San Francisco is the only county in the Bay Area that does not have a major recycling program for an even more important resource: water.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is set to change that later this month, when it adopts a final plan for the $4.3 billion program to upgrade The City’s aging Hetch Hetchy water system.

The plan includes $204 million for the first phase of a citywide recycled water program. The first phase would recycle 4.2 million gallons a day to be used for watering Golden Gate Park, Harding Park and other sites on the west side of The City, as well as topping off Lake Merced. The lake is used as an emergency source of water for firefighting.

City officials said using recycled water could also stave off water rationing during future droughts, since less drinking water would be used for irrigation and industrial uses. The City would not use recycled water for drinking water.

“Water is our most precious natural resource,” said Tony Winnicker, a spokesman for the SFPUC. “Using recycled water helps preserve high-quality drinking water, reduces treated wastewater flowing into the Bay and ocean and helps protect against a future drought.”

See San Francisco Examiner article

MP Kerry Shine - AWOL from the debate?

MP Kerry Shine was in State Parliament last week but noticeably silent on the issue of the Toowoomba recycled water project.

His electorate (Toowoomba North) will be affected by any decision to proceed with recycled water for drinking in Toowoomba. His National Party rivals whose electorates are also affected by the project were very vocal in their comments in State Parliament last week. But Mr Shine was very quiet on the issue.

He is the only State government elected representative for the Toowoomba area who has not clearly stated his position on the recycled water proposal.

How many voters do you think there are in Toowoomba North who are against the Mayor's proposal and would support a similarly thinking (anti-recycled effluent drinking) candidate at the next State election?

Maybe party politics are getting in the way of Mr Shine saying what he really thinks ...

Uproar in State Parliament over recycled water plan ...

There was uproar in Qld State Parliament last week as a number of MPs rejected the idea of forcing Toowoomba residents to drink recycled water.

State MPs Hopper, Horan and Copeland each raised concerns regarding the Mayor's controversial plan to introduce recycled sewage into Toowoomba's drinking water.

Some of the comments, as reported in Hansard, reflect the public's concern regarding the rush to adopt the recycled water proposal in the absence of an independent audit of all water source options and a regional approach to resolving water supply issues.

The Mayor's decision to push on in spite of opposition makes you wonder why she is against an independent appraisal of water options for Toowoomba. Is she concerned that an independent review would not judge the recycled water proposal as the preferred option?

Some of the MPs comments:

The Hon. Ray Hopper MP (Member for Darling Downs)

"The Toowoomba City Council mayor has been talking about recycled sewage and waste water. I do not expect anyone to have to drink that water. I talk to people in that city all the time. Most of those people are very, very unhappy. The people are even worried about the thought of having coffee in that town. There are other ways of providing water to Toowoomba."

"I am extremely concerned that Toowoomba Mayor Di Thorley has stated on many occasions that she will cut off the water to Gowrie Creek. The mayor herself was an irrigator on Gowrie Creek. When she was an irrigator, she was the biggest advocate for an increase in the licence. Now look at the changes. Di Thorley wants to go down as the first mayor in history to put recycled waste water into an Australian city. There are other ways of doing this. We can use Qld Gas Co. water."

"I ask the Minister to seriously look at the situation in Toowoomba, because no-one wants to drink their own sewage."


The Hon. Mike Horan MP (Member for Toowoomba South)

"I have real concerns that there are other alternatives which should be looked at first."

"Today I commented in a media release that the Minister is getting bad advice and that bad advice is going to the Toowoomba City Council on that sustainable yield."

"and water is pumped to within about two kilometres of Toowoomba to Withcott. I believe that, if we are truly to be considered worthy citizens of Queensland, consideration should be given to giving a small amount of water as a boost to the city's supply."

"People are also concerned about the image of the city as the most beautiful garden city of Australia. I refer to real estate agents and people in food processing, factories and all those sorts of industries. Members can imagine what their competitors say to people behind the scenes. It might be as good and as safe as it can be, but those are the facts of commercial life."

"What about a little help for us - just a drop in the bucket out of Wivenhoe for us?"


The Hon Stuart Copeland MP (Member for Cunningham)

"I do have some concerns about the recycling of sewage water to be used for indirect potable use."

"It's an issue which has generated a lot of angst within the Toowoomba community."

"There are a lot of issues to be dealt with before it happens in Toowoomba. I have to say that I support the actions of Ian Macfarlane."

"It's a little disappointing because some of the statements in here [the Dept of Natural Resources and Mines report "Toowoomba and area supply future directions: Review of recently identified alternatives"] make it look more like justifying the need to support the drinking of recycled water or justifying the need to get money from the national water initiative than looking at the alternatives for securing the supply of water to Toowoomba."

"This document seems to be more about justifying the need to drink recycled water than it is about realistically looking at alternatives. That is a real shame."

Regarding the Dept of Natural Resources and Mines comments that certain alternatives are "not innovative", Mr Copeland said:

"That is not a reason why it should be ruled out. To rule it out because it is not innovative is simply ridiculous to the people of Toowoomba [and surrounding shires] who are having to look at drinking recycled water. We do not have to do something simply because it is innovative."

For the full text see -

Hansard 9 November 2005

Hansard 10 November 2005

CH2M Hill - a vision of the future?

CH2M Hill running Toowoomba - is that something the ratepayers would want?

It's going to happen in one US city. As the article says, it's a $29.7 million roll of the dice.

See - ajc.com article

Another State MP says no to drinking recycled water ...

State MP Stuart Copeland, the Member for Cunningham, joins the list of State MPs with concerns regarding Toowoomba's controversial recycled water project.

Speaking in State Parliament last week, he said:

"I do have some concerns about the recycling of sewage water to be used for indirect potable use."

"It's an issue which has generated a lot of angst within the Toowoomba community."

"There are a lot of issues to be dealt with before it happens in Toowoomba. I have to say that I support the actions of Ian Macfarlane."

"It's a little disappointing because some of the statements in here [the Dept of Natural Resources and Mines report "Toowoomba and area supply future directions: Review of recently identified alternatives"] make it look more like justifying the need to support the drinking of recycled water or justifying the need to get money from the national water initiative than looking at the alternatives for securing the supply of water to Toowoomba."

"This document seems to be more about justifying the need to drink recycled water than it is about realistically looking at alternatives. That is a real shame."

Regarding the Dept of Natural Resources and Mines comments that certain alternatives are "not innovative", Mr Copeland said:

"That is not a reason why it should be ruled out. To rule it out because it is not innovative is simply ridiculous to the people of Toowoomba [and surrounding shires] who are having to look at drinking recycled water. We do not have to do something simply because it is innovative."

See - Hansard 10 November 2005

Dual flush loos 'key to saving water'

Interesting report from the Sydney Morning Herald:

Dual flush loos rather than desalination plants and new dams could be the best way to save billions of litres of water.

An infrastructure conference will hear on Tuesday that dual flush toilets - which enable the user to choose a small flush over a large one - could save the nation more than 101 billion litres of water every year.

See - Dual flush loos

Singapore - recycled water one day - desalination and a new dam the next ...

Proponents of the controversial Toowoomba recycled water project often say that it should be introduced because Singapore has recycled water.

If recycled water is the right strategy, why is it that Singapore has the "four taps" policy? Why has Singapore just opened the largest desalination plant and why is it planning a new dam?

See - Reuters article

Singapore has two water agreements with Malaysia - one expiring in 2011 and the other in 2061. Singapore's shift to recycled water (mainly for industrial uses) and desalination has been justified on national security grounds - to minimise the influence Malaysia has on it because of the water agreements.

The situation in Toowoomba is completely different and the two situations should not be confused.

"Di Swims Solo on Recycled Scheme ...

... but Mayor says she doesn't care"

That's the banner headline from the front page of Saturday's Chronicle (oddly enough not put online though).

The article on page 8 is headed:

Politicians join those opposed to recycling of water

Toowoomba Mayor Dianne Thorley apparently swimming solo on controversial issue

It goes on to say:

Toowoomba Mayor Dianne Thorley looks like she is swimming solo.

Her counterparts on the State and federal scene have combined to seemingly scotch the notion of Toowoomba residents drinking recycled water.

Federal Member for Groom Ian Macfarlane already had, saying he was yet to be convinced the notion of recycling water for human consumption was safe.

Then, Member for Toowoomba South Mike Horan and Member for Darling Downs Ray Hopper stepped up to the plate in State Parliament.

"Toowoomba used to be called the Garden City," Mr Horan said. "It's sad there's another term being used abut the city".

The plans most passionate supporter, Cr Thorley said she couldn't care less.

"It's easy to take the easy way," she said of what she has often described as a lack of political courage among her peers.

"They are just being politicians."

Members Hopper, Horan and Macfarlane each want alternative proposals to be considered, leaving Cr Thorley virtually alone on a State and federal level as she forges ahead with the controversial plan to supplement the city's water supply with recycled water.

The debate over the water project has escalated and become more confused over the months as opponents have peddled their own ideas of where and how to source water, and the support of politicians has been dropping like flies.

Mr Horan added to the list of alternative proposals, calling on the State Government to allocate water from Wivenhoe Dam for Toowoomba.

"All we need is 5000ML (a year)", Mr Horan said.

"If we can just get that, it's a absolute drop in the ocean at Wivenhoe."

Mr Horan said Brisbane, Logan, Beaudesert and Gympie were all sharing in the dam but the State Government was "giving Toowoomba nothing".

While Mr Horan said he applauded Toowoomba City Council's initiative in looking for solutions to the ever-dwindling dams, he said the perception of drinking recycled sewage was doing more to harm the city's image than it would do good.

Mr Horan also told State Parliament this week he was supportive of a plan to buy or swap recycled water from Toowoomba with underground water from local irrigators.

His National Party colleague Mr Hopper was adamant that people would not be drinking recycled water.

"I've done a poll of 100 people and 70% didn't want recycled water", he said.

Mr Hoper was also angered that irrigators in his electorate would lose their waste water allocation which they currently receive from the Wetalla plant.

Federal Liberal MP Ian Macfarlane has already requested council put the recycling plan on hold until all other options have been fully investigated.

In his news letter (see Downs Diary) the member for Groom called for a "detailed, independent audit of all the alternatives by an organisation or body independent of government, council or farmers".

His stance contradicts Liberal Party policy which support recycling. [The Chronicle is incorrect here - the Liberal Party does not have a specific policy dealing with drinking recycled water. Several Federal Liberal MPs - Macfarlane, Nairn, Gain, Turnbull - have said there is no need to use recycled water for drinking.]

Liberal State president Michael Caltabianco said the party supported recycling on a greater scale, and all options including recycling for drinking purposes, were open [not according to Liberal MPs Macfarlane, Hunt, Nairn and Turnbull].

Toowoomba Chronicle, 12 November 2005, Page 8

Drinking recycled sewage - those for and against (updated) ...

The scoreboard as it currently stands:

Toowoomba City Council

Councillor Barron - against

"For me, I don't believe I've signed off on it." (Toowoomba Chronicle 20 October 2005)

Councillor Beer - against

"All the way along, all this stuff has been kept too hush-hush." (Toowoomba Chronicle 20 October 2005)

Councillor Shelton - against

"I think it will be hard to sell drinking recycled sewage when 27,000 megalitres of proven, safe yield of potable water is available within kilometres of the city,'' Cr Shelton said. ``It doesn't make sense to put potable water on cotton and drink recycled effluent." (Courier Mail 13 October 2005)

Mayor Thorley - for

"I'm finding it really depressing that I'm sitting here and there are people acting like they didn't agree with the project." (Toowoomba Chronicle 20 October 2005)

Deputy Mayor Ramia - for

Councillor Albion - for

Councillor Alroe - for

Councillor Englart - for

Councillor Schneider - for

Qld State politicians

The Hon. Peter Beattie MP, Premier - against (but inconsistent views being given by his fellow Ministers)

"What we're trying to do is free up drinking water for drinking."

In relation to clean drinking water, he said:

"Instead of using it in industry, instead of using it in on our garden, there is a clear strategy here and it makes good sense."

See - Courier Mail article

The Hon. Kerry Shine MP - seems to be in favour of it so far

The Hon. Henry Palaszczuk - publicly not in favour of it but sending mixed signals:

From the Australian Financial Review on 30 September 2005:

"But [Qld] Natural Resources Minister Henry Palaszczuk and Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, who is Council of Mayors (SEQ) chairman, stopped short of backing recycled water for domestic consumption."

The Hon. Mike Horan MP - against

"I have real concerns that there are other alternatives which should be looked at first."

See - Qld Parliament Hansard - 9 November 2005

The Hon. Ray Hopper MP - against

"The Toowoomba City Council mayor has been talking about recycled sewage and waste water. I do not expect anyone to have to drink that water. I talk to people in that city all the time. Most of those people are very, very unhappy. The people are even worried about the thought of having coffee in that town. There are other ways of providing water to Toowoomba."

"I ask the Minister to seriously look at the situation in Toowoomba, because no-one wants to drink their own sewage."

See - Qld Parliament Hansard - 10 November 2005

Federal politicians

The Hon. Ian Macfarlane MP - against

"I still support parts of the project to supply recycled water for industry, resources and agriculture. However, given information I have obtained from independent sources I am currently unable to support recycled effluent being discharged into Cooby Dam."

"I cannot support the proposal as it stands until all of these unresolved issues are properly addressed, detailed explanations on costings and technology made public, and all options fully investigated and costed."

The Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP - against

See - ABC Insiders

The Hon. Greg Hunt MP - against

See - Water Myths

The Hon. Gary Nairn MP - against

See - Water Myths

The Hon. John Howard MP, Prime Minister - unknown so far

Others

Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman - against

From the Australian Financial Review on 30 September 2005:

"But [Qld] Natural Resources Minister Henry Palaszczuk and Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, who is Council of Mayors (SEQ) chairman, stopped short of backing recycled water for domestic consumption."

Commerce Queensland - against

“The major concern now is that, if we do not fully assess the alternatives and health perceptions, Toowoomba will miss out altogether on Federal Funding and the local Ratepayers may be left to pay the bill. A Regional Water Plan looking at all alternatives is crucial for the overall benefit of the region."

See - Commerce Qld press release - 1 November 2005

I'll add more as their views become known ...

Time to wheel out some doctors ....

Expect the Toowoomba City Council to wheel out some doctors next to say they support the Mayor's proposed recycled water project.

The Council's "let's get buy-in from the community" campaign is just a little too predictable. They're really missing the point on what will win or lose this debate and the project.

I wonder who's feeding them this campaign routine ....

Where's the Mayor in 2006 ...

Will Mayor Thorley actually spend any time in Toowoomba in the first half of 2006?

First, it's the Australian Water Summit in Melbourne on 21-24 February.

Then it's the Water '06 Conference in Brisbane on 1-3 March.

Next up (subject to Council sign-off), it's the great Asian junket between 4-13 April.

The Agenda for the Council meeting on 15-16 November indicates that the Mayor and other Councillors are scheduled for the following Japan/Korea trip at ratepayers' expense:

4 April - fly to Tokyo
5 April - sightseeing in Tokyo
6 April - meetings and (more) sightseeing with JACEA
7 April - travel from Tokyo to Osaka by bullet train, sightseeing in Osaka, travel to Takatsuki
8 April - attend Cherry Blossom Festival
9 April - meetings with Ishida family, AETs and (more) sightseeing
10 April - meetings with Mayor and councillors of Takatsuki, meetings with Board of Education and school visits
11 April - fly to Seoul, South Korea, meetings with Trade Commissioner (a phone call would be cheaper!)
12 April - meeting with Mayor and councillors in Paju
13 April - fly to Brisbane

See pages 103-104 - Council meeting agenda

That's a lot of sightseeing and not much Toowoomba-related work being done!

Purpose of the trip - "to maintain established protocols" ?!?

Why is there a need to visit Paju's Mayor and councillors when they came to Toowoomba just over two weeks ago?

See - ABC News

Wouldn't it be better to stay at home and deal with the recycled water debacle she has created?

Stay tuned for future Council minutes to see where the Mayor is next jetting off to at ratepayers' expense ...

Toowoomba recycled water debate hits State Parliament

The recycled water debate hit State Parliament this week with several MPs calling for a rethink on the controversial recycled water proposal.

More details shortly but here are the Hansard links:

9 November 2005

10 November 2005

It seems more and more MPs are voicing their concerns over the Mayor's proposal.

House of Reps recommends independent report on water options ...

On the topic of the recent House of Representatives Inquiry report on Sustainable Cities (12 September 2005), Recommendation No. 13 of this report states:

"the Committee recommends that the National Water Commission, in consultation with the States and Territories and the public, prepare an independent and transparent report on water options for each of the capital cities and major regional centres".

This also reflects the views of Federal MP Ian Macfarlane who said "I support the call for a detailed, independent audit of all the alternatives by an organisation or body independent of government, council and farmers".

(see - Macfarlane calls for independent review)

It is becoming very clear that an independent and transparent report should be prepared for Toowoomba and the surrounding region. It's our region and it is in our best interests to have an independent report outlining all the options.

See - House of Reps Inquiry Report

MP Malcolm Turnbull - no need to use recycled water for drinking ...

At a discussion in Sydney on 8 November 2005, Federal MP Malcolm Turnbull reiterated previous comments regarding the need to use recycled water for drinking.

Discussing the recent House of Representatives Inquiry report on Sustainable Cities, he made the following comments:

"But from a practical point of view there is simply no need to introduce recycled water into the potable water system. There are ample uses for recycled water: industrial, parks, gardens, street cleaning and above all, replenishing the streamflows of our rivers and thereby replacing the potable water currently released into them."

An advocate of recycling water, Mr Turnbull does not see the need to use it for drinking purposes.

See - Turnbull speech.

Federal MP Macfarlane calls for independent review of Toowoomba water supply options ...

Federal MP and Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources made the following comments on Toowoomba's proposed recycled water project in his most recent Downs Diary:

Downs Diary

Toowoomba’s water future -

A message from Ian …

As you know there has been a strong community debate about the future of Toowoomba’s water supply. The proposal by Toowoomba City Council to introduce treated effluent into the city’s drinking system has been widely discussed as has the further proposal to bring waste water from Brisbane to irrigate crops in the Lockyer Valley and west of Toowoomba.

Water is a very important issue in this region and needs to be supported by both the urban and regional communities of Toowoomba and the Darling Downs. We should all work towards a single, long-term, whole-of-region solution that includes residents, businesses and farmers.

Over the past 6 weeks, I have asked Council several times to consider alternatives other than the use of treated effluent for drinking water (via Cooby Dam). I have conveyed to the Mayor and councillors my concerns about growing opposition from the business community, community leaders, farmers and the general public to the proposal.

In a number of meetings I have asked if there were any other options and if a combination of the Council’s proposal and the farmers’ proposal was possible.

At the same time, I have been contacted by Commerce Queensland who have expressed their concerns and stressed the need to look at alternatives. I have also been told by the Department of Natural Resources, Queensland Gas and farmers that alternative water supply opportunities exist.

Since this time, the community has put forward a range of alternatives. I welcome the preliminary analysis of these options by Council and the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and I support the call for a detailed, independent audit of all the alternatives by an organisation or body independent of government, council and farmers.

However, people in the community still have concerns.

• The business sector is justifiable concerned about the potential impact of the use of treated effluent on Toowoomba’s future industrial development, especially in the food services and manufacturing sectors;

• We still don’t have a solution for local irrigators who will lose the majority of their water supply if water is to be diverted out of Gowrie Oakey Creek for this project; and

• 7,082 people signed a petition against drinking recycled sewage and my office has done a representative audit finding almost 70% of signatories live at an address where they will drink Toowoomba water.

All of these issues need to be worked through and weighed up. I believe Council is listening but we still have some way to go. I have asked the Toowoomba City Council to put the project on hold while all the options are thoroughly considered. They have responded to my request by saying that the proposal is going ahead as is.

Ultimately this is a Toowoomba City Council project to be built by the Toowoomba City Council and funded by the rate payers of Toowoomba and the taxpayers of Queensland and Australia.

On that basis it is up to Council to decide whether or not to proceed. However, I cannot support the proposal as it stands until all of these unresolved issues are properly addressed, detailed explanations on costings and technology made public, and all options fully investigated and costed.

If we are to tackle our water problems successfully we need a whole-of-region solution."

Is Minister Palaszczuk giving incorrect advice to Toowoomba City Council?

State MP for Toowoomba South and Shadow Minister for Primary Industries & Fisheries Mike Horan issued the following press release on 9 November 2005:

"Minister wrong on Darling Downs pipeline

Natural Resources Minister Henry Palaszczuk is wrong to claim a wastewater pipeline to the Darling Downs “does not stack up”, Member for Toowoomba South Mike Horan said today.

The Beattie Government recently announced it would provide $20 million towards piping recycled water to the Swanbank power station and possibly to farms on the Lockyer Valley.

In State Parliament today, Mr Palaszczuk said: “I want to make it perfectly clear to the House today there is no intention whatsoever of extending this (recycled water) pipeline to the Darling Downs. Those people still promoting such an initiative are simply peddling false hopes because the cost benefits of the proposal do not stack up.”

Mr Horan said the Minister was clearly receiving bad advice from his department about NuWater’s proposal to pipe recycled wastewater from Brisbane to the Lockyer Valley and then on to the Darling Downs.

“The business plan shows the project stacks up, a peer review by independent consultants who have previously worked for the State Government shows the project stacks up and the National Water Commission is happy the project stacks up,” he said.

“I have been advised the Department of State Development also believes it stacks up, so there is clearly a conflict between State Government departments.

“About 130,000 megalitres of wastewater is dumped into the Brisbane River and Moreton Bay every year, and the power stations and Lockyer Valley farmers won’t use it all, that’s why there is a proposal to extend a pipeline right through to the Darling Downs.”

Mr Horan said he also understood Mr Palaszczuk’s department had given incorrect advice to Toowoomba City Council about the availability and sustainability of underground water supplies from the irrigation areas of the Downs.

“This water has been put forward as a possible alternative for additional potable water for the city,” he said.

“It is extremely serious when the Minister is giving misleading advice to Parliament and councils on not one, but two major water issues that affect the Toowoomba and Darling Downs region.” "

See - National Party press release.

More press releases questioning Toowoomba recycled water project ...

Both Federal MP Ian Macfarlane and State MP Mike Horan have issued press releases commenting on the Toowoomba recycled water proposal.

Both seem to have concerns about the Mayor's proposal and the need for independent assessment of all water supply options. Mr Horan made similar comments in State parliament on 9 November.

I will post these press releases shortly.

Sydney: early desalination plant results encouraging

The developers of a prototype desalination plant off Port Kembla, south of Sydney, say early results using wave energy are favourable.

"We were drawing the water up from the ocean there off the breakwater, we've just got the results back from an independent test lab and the water samples passed all of the Australian drinking water standards, so we've proved that we can produce drinking water out of the ocean with zero emissions and [it is] a very low cost solution," Mr Bell from Energetech Australia said.

"We've proved that at a relatively low cost compared to a dedicated desalination plant, we can create drinking water and we think that has a lot of applications obviously in the current Australian situation," he said.

Mr Bell says work is under way to build similar plants in Portland Victoria, as well as Spain, England and New York.

See - ABC News - desalination plant results.

California opts for desalination plant ...

Santa Cruz in California has opted for a desalination plant to deal with future water shortages:

See - Santa Cruz Sentinal article.

NEWater explained ...

Ever wondered what NEWater stands for?

Maybe it's "Now Everyone's Water at Toilet Eventually Recycled".

Buying property - Toowoomba or Highfields ...

The recycled water project will effectively split Toowoomba's housing market into those on recycled water and those not.

Highfields, an extension of Toowoomba but officially under Crows Nest Shire Council, will not be taking recycled water from Toowoomba.

Crows Nest Shire currently takes its water supply mainly from Cressbrook and Perseverance Dams located in the Shire with a smaller proportion from Council bores. It does not currently take water from Cooby Dam into which Toowoomba City Council proposes to pour the recycled water.

So you end up with a real estate market split between those in Toowoomba who get recycled water and those in Highfields who don't. Imagine the impact that could have on housing prices.

The Mayor's Director of Engineering Services need not worry though - he lives out in Cabarlah - well away from the recycled water he and the Mayor are trying to introduce.

See - Crows Nest Shire water sources.

Also see - Toowoomba's Director of Engineering Services.

At least we can debate the water issue ...

Australia has free expression when it comes to blogs - unlike some other countries ...

See - news.com.au article.

Water Futures Toowoomba Advisory Panel Chairperson in another war ....

Seems Leith Boully, Chairperson of the Mayor's Advisory Panel for the Toowoomba Water Futures project, has her hands full with another war.

As Chairperson of the committee determining the rules for water sharing in the Lower Balonne cotton-producing district in southwest Qld, she has been accused of having "significant economic interests in the outcome of recommendations".

A number of committee members are boycotting meetings.

See - Water wars leave peace plans high and dry.

Also see - Leith Boully profile.

When it rains it pours ... for CH2M Hill

More bad press for Toowoomba Water Futures contractor, CH2M Hill, with allegations of shoddy work and ballooning costs on another project.

"DWP workers, regional air regulators and independent subcontractors alleged that the Colorado-based mega-firm has profited from its own shoddy work in irrigating the dry lakebed to reduce dust. As both engineer and construction manager on the six-year project, Ch2M Hill has been paid over $100 million for designing the project, then overseeing changes when their designs failed. Which, employees say, has been often."

"Harasick told the board that the DWP has spent $304 million thus far, of which $120 million is earmarked for Ch2M Hill. The contract began as a $550,000 sole-source consulting contract, he said. It soon rose to $12 million in 1998, then jumped to $13.9 million in 2001. Later that year, the DWP put out a bid for project design and construction management through 2007, Harasick said. Ch2M Hill was the low bidder, he said, adding that the board at the time approved amending the contract as it developed, to avoid paying a lump sum. That forced the council to approve a pair of retroactive amendments in 2002 and 2003, and a third one in 2004, according to the CAO’s 2004 report. 'So we didn’t know where we were going,' Patsaouras broke in, 'but we were going to take Ch2M Hill along for the ride. What a ride it has been.'"

One interesting comment is "the science [of reducing dust pollution] was uncertain and incomplete." Remind you of another science which Toowoomba is about to embark on?

See - LA Weekly article.

Toowoomba City Council perpetuates the Dr Leslie "independence" myth ...

The minutes of the Council's meetings on 1-2 November 2005 refer to presentations being given by "Dr Leslie of the University of New South Wales".

Why is it that the Council refuses to add "and consultant to CH2M Hill"? They don't seem to want Toowoomba residents to know this.

There are certainly people to whom Dr Leslie has spoken as part of these sessions who are surprised ("shocked" was one person's reaction) when subsequently told that he is a consultant to one of the contractors on the project.

It's little wonder that there is so little trust among the parties when these are the games being played. It reflects poorly on all those involved including the institutions they represent.

See page 80 - Council minutes

Does Singapore really disclose everything?

Much is said about Singapore's recycled water facility and how safe it is (even though they have just opened a desalination plant).

But if it wasn't safe, do you think the Singapore government would disclose this to the public? Would the Singapore press report it?

Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong recently defended Singapore's lack of press freedoms: "my simple point is this," he said, "it has not been proven that having more press freedom would result in a clean and efficient government or economic freedom and prosperity".

Would you ever get the real story out of Singapore?

But is it "all" contaminants or "potentially almost all" contaminants?

Dr Aravinthan's paper on the Toowoomba Water Futures website makes an interesting statement:

"Therefore, a multiple barrier technique making use of activated carbon, ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis could potentially remove almost all the newly emerging contaminants from the tertiary treated wastewater effluent."

We're not really sure but potentially it could remove almost all the contaminants in the water.

See - Dr Aravinthan's paper.

Obviously no guarantees ...

End of story or is it?

If the advanced treatment works as well as Dr Aravinthan and others claim, why was it necessary to do a whole day workshop on 29 October at the 2005 WEFTEC Conference in Washington DC on endocrine disruptors, emerging organic contaminants, personal care products and pharmaceuticals. I thought they weren't a problem?

See - 2005 WEFTEC Conference Schedule.

Dr Aravinthan finds solution - we can all go home ...

Dr Vasanthadevi Aravinthan (ex-post-doctoral research fellow at the Advance Wastewater Management Centre at UQ) and now at USQ makes a surprising statement in today's Chronicle. She says "under the Water Futures project, advanced treatment would ensure no unwanted chemicals or pharmaceuticals got through."

Well, that's a relief!

Here was I worrying about the three Federal government reports in the past five months which say that more research is needed on the health effects of what remains in recycled water and these bright scientists have solved all the problems with their "advanced treatment".

Maybe they should tell the politicians in Canberra that they got it wrong - the scientists who prepared the reports for them are wrong - the advance treatment works - no need for more research - end of story.

Do you think Dr Aravinthan is willing to guarantee this?

Toowoomba City Council meeting agenda 1-2 November 2005

Why is the Council having a "confidential" briefing on the Darling Downs Vision 2000 water proposal at its meetings this week. Why does it need to be confidential?

The meeting agenda cites Section 463(1)(h) of the Local Government Act as the justification for the confidential briefing. That section states:

Section 463 Closed Meetings

(1) A local government or committee may resolve that a meeting be closed to the public if its councillors or members consider it necessary to close the meeting to discuss:

(h) other business for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government or someone else, or enable a person to gain a financial advantage."

Subsection (3) states that a local government or committee must not make a resolution (other than a procedural resolution) in a closed meeting.

Just whose interests are being prejudiced?

See - Council meeting agenda.

Toowoomba Grammar dumps Cooby Dam property (update No 2)

Seems any buyer of this property is not going to get the benefit of the easements and water access rights currently granted by the Toowoomba City Council to TGS.

See Toowoomba City Council meeting agenda - 1-2 November 2005 - pages 66-7

One of the reasons given is that it may have an impact on the Water Futures Project.

Buyer beware!

Update - this property is still for sale. Having failed to sell at auction, is there a concern with its proximity to Cooby Dam?

Toowoomba Water Futures website presents only half the story ...

Why is it that the Toowoomba Water Futures website contains no reference to the following reports prepared for the Federal government in the past 5 months each of which states that further research is required on the health effects of recycled water:

- Report for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in June

- Parliamentary Research Report in August

- EPHC draft Guidelines in October

There is also the Senate Inquiry report from 2002.

Could it be that the Council doesn't want Toowoomba residents to read these reports?

SBS Insight - update

Update on the SBS Insight program on recycling v. desalination.

Mayor Thorley held her own - which you would expect for a seasoned politician. At times, she didn't let others speak - which you would also expect from a seasoned politician ("DI THORLEY: No, I will butt in on you, and I don't have much problem doing that at the moment.")

The live online debate should be renamed the "lively debate" as there was plenty of spirited discussion following the program.

Interesting comment from the online session on the Mayor's factual accuracy:

"I manage the Dalby water supply. Di Thorley does not have her facts straight. Very little of Dalby's water comes from the river so is rarely impacted by Toowoomba's wastewater. Generally less than 10% pa comes from the Condamine. Most of the water is used by irrigators before it gets to our storage."

This was a response to this comment from Mayor Thorley:

"DI THORLEY: No, but I'm just trying to check up that all the blokes in Dalby don't get really cheesed at us saying they've got small penises and they're feminised because we've been putting this water down for 70 years so I'm really worried that when I get home they're going to belt me up because I let it go through. So let's put it out there that the boys are fine in Dalby. I'll just stick up for them here. And they're not growing boobs so they'll be happy with that. Look, no, I don't think I am. And it is really simple for them to sit here and come up with some of the stuff - I hear about a project I took in 2001 and that was one that was to take water to the irrigators and water to Ackland coal, it was not about cleaning up any water at all. And at the time, the minister, our minister said that it wasn't a project that stacked up, they weren't going to put water in pipelines to irrigators and that was it. But to go back to the community... "

See - SBS Insight.

And then there was this comment from the program in relation to the draft National Guidelines for Recycled Water released last Friday:

"DAVID CUNLIFFE, WATER HEALTH EXPERT: I'm part of the team that's helped develop the draft national guidelines for water recycling that were issued late last week, they're out for consultation. At this stage they don't specifically deal with indirect potable re-use."

And this comment in relation to recycled water in Western Australia:

"JIM GILL: We've got some trials under way injecting treated wastewater into acquifers and ultimately we could use those for drinking water. But we're determined to get the science right before we do that and that's going to take quite a few years."

So isn't it a bit early for Toowoomba to start drinking it?

I must take issue with something Ian Kiernan said:

"IAN KIERNAN: I agree with both of you that we need to look at all of these options and we did that through the expert water panel. But at the same time, desal was the least favoured option because it will be exacerbating climate change through its energy consumption and we know that from the Saudi example of a major desal plant against the Singapore major sewage recovery plant, that the Saudi plant, even with subsidised oil, was twice as expensive as the Singapore plant."

If Singapore's recycling plant is so cost effective compared to the cost of desalination plants, why did Singapore just build a desalination plant (opened 13 September 2005)?

See - New desalination plant for Singapore.

As expected, the Mayor played the "NEWater party trick" - dragging out some bottles of Singapore NEWater for people to drink. She never seems to understand that it's not what you can smell that's the problem - it's what you can't smell and what the Federal government reports say could still be in the water that is the concern.

The results of the poll were not as some recyclers predicted or wanted - an overwhelming majority of those polled preferred desalination to recycled water. Remember this wasn't the online poll which was subject to manipulation.

"JENNY BROCKIE: Alright, well as I mentioned a little earlier, with the help of Newspoll we've conducted our own national survey on water, and we surveyed 700 Australians across five capital cities. Asked whether they would feel safer drinking desalinated water or recycled waste water, the majority, 61% said they would feel safer drinking desalinated water. Only 21% feels safe with the idea of drinking recycled waste water. Interestingly, men feel significantly safer drinking recycled water than women, which in the light of some of the comments about alligators earlier is interesting. And Sydneysiders seem to feel safer drinking recycled water than Australians in other cities. I think those results are pretty interesting, Ian Kiernan. You've got a big job on your hands selling this to people, haven't you?"

Perhaps the results may have been different if those polled were fully informed about each option or if they were asked: would you prefer recycled water once the Federal government has resolved all health risks referred to in their recent reports.

Maybe someone could explain what a "sweet bippy" is?!?

Toowoomba Water Futures proposal upsets Commmerce Qld ...

Commerce Queensland issued a press release on 1 November as follows:

"Business Raises Further Questions over Toowoomba Water

Commerce Queensland has today raised further question over the Toowoomba Water Futures strategy, suggesting health and financial concerns have not been adequately addressed.

While the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NRM) have supported the project, there is evidence to suggest that time pressures mean only cursory investigations have been explored.

Commerce Queensland Regional Chair South West Qld, Ken Murphy said it appeared that the NRM only reviewed limited information supplied by the Toowoomba City Council.

“Concerns voiced by Commerce Queensland regarding using recycled water, have recently intensified with the announcement that a similar project in Western Australia, will only be completed following a three year study on the potential health risks.

“CSIRO are quoted as saying they also need to be convinced about the health risks.

“Let us not forget, that in most cases recycled water is not recommended for drinking,” Mr Murphy said.

The recent NRM report estimates the NuWater project, another important Toowoomba project, as costing up to $1billion, yet actual costings put it at only $450 million.

“With this sort of discrepancy, Commerce Queensland still believes that further assessment of alternatives is absolutely necessity.

“What about the 27,000 Mega litre supply of potable water from the central aquifers of the Great Artesian Basin?

“Already areas like Pittsworth and Millmerran have been using this supply for the past 50 years, so isn’t it worth Toowoomba taking the time to consider an alternative, which has clearly proved successful in other regions?

“The major concern now is that, if we do not fully assess the alternatives and health perceptions, Toowoomba will miss out altogether on Federal Funding and the local Ratepayers may be left to pay the bill,” Mr Murphy said.

A Regional Water Plan looking at all alternatives is crucial for the overall benefit of the region."

Jondaryan Shire to NWC - we are being kept in the dark ...

According to today's Chronicle, the Jondaryan Shire Council has written to the National Water Commission as a customer of Toowoomba City Council (they buy water) explaining "concerns over a lack of consultation before the plan to recycle effluent was announced".

Jondaryan Shire Mayor Peter Taylor said his Council was waiting for detailed information from the Toowoomba City Council before taking a side. He was "of the view that all surrounding shires should be involved in developing a regional approach".

So it's not just the residents and ratepayers of Toowoomba who have been kept in the dark. It's the Council's water customers as well.

Another Top Gun comes to town

The Toowoomba Chronicle today finds yet another expert to blast the critics of water recycling.

This time it's Adjunct Professor Charles Essery from the School of Engineering, Industrial Design, University of Western Sydney in an article entitled "Maverick water expert blasts critics of recycling".

Dr Essery believes in sustainable water management which is to be applauded.

However, he uses the "cow and possum poo in the dam" argument to promote recycled water. (Not a good argument and certainly not "visionary" advice.)

He also rejects desalination as an option for Toowoomba. (I didn't know it was seriously being considered as an option. Sea water desalination certainly wasn't among the options so quickly dismissed by the Qld Department of Natural Resources. Does Dr Essery know where Toowoomba is?)

He speaks of his independence and yet the term "Adjunct Professor" usually means "I have another job".

And he does:

Dr Essery runs Sustainable Water Solutions Pty Ltd, a company established in 2003 offering "strategic and visionary advice to senior managers who are faced with the increasingly complex regulatory, water resource and consumer driven environment". His company provides specialised experts who cover a range of areas including "integrated/sustainable water cycle management".

So yet another expert is presented who stands to gain financially from an expansion of the recycled water industry.

Interestingly, Dr Essery does not refer to the recently released draft National Guidelines for Recycled Water. Nor does he claim that the sections in the Guidelines which state that we need to do further research are wrong.