Drinking recycled sewage - what if things go wrong ...
The Council is offering no "100% guarantee" on the safety of its recycled sewage for drinking proposal.
Who will bear the responsibility in future years if it proves not to be as safe as the Council's claims?
Should the cost be borne by the local council which introduced it into the water supply, by the State or Federal governments who may provide funding or by the recycled water companies whose product was not as safe and efficient as they claimed it to be?
Will the recycled water companies still exist in the future or will they try a "James Hardie asbestos style arrangement" to distance themselves from liability?
Will there be any requirement to insure against the health risk? Will any insurance company be willing to provide appropriate insurance? What sort of liability tail would be needed - 20 years, 50 years?
Or will the residents of Toowoomba be left to self-insure - take the risk that if something does go wrong they will bear the financial burden themselves.
The more one thinks about the Mayor's scheme, the more questions arise ...
posted by Concerned Ratepayer at 7:38 AM
2 Comments:
The population of the southeast corner is projected to reach 3.7 million in 2025, a 117 per cent increase on the 1985 population of 1.7 million
It is those types of assumptions that are making certain people panic and behave like idiots.
The population of SEQ has only increased by 500,00 in the 20 years from 1985 and saying it is going to increase by a furher 1.7 million in the next 20 is just a wee bit overdone and nothing more then scaremongering.
5:33 PM, January 16, 2006
What if things do go wrong!? This scheme has many unanswered questions, and not enough answers, at least not enough provided by the Council. Maybe the council can be used as test subjects consumming this stuff for a few years, and see what happens!
12:21 PM, January 20, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home