Council not expecting bore backlash ... should expect voter backlash ...
From ABC News:
Council not expecting bore backlash
Toowoomba City Council says it does not expect a backlash from residents who could face restrictions on using backyard bores to water their gardens.
A Natural Resources Department paper has proposed giving councils the power to restrict the bores. The Government says a number of councils, including Toowoomba council, have asked it to regulate private bores in urban areas.
Toowoomba council's deputy Mayor, Joe Ramia, says people should not be allowed to use bore water to keep their lawns green when the city is facing one of its worst droughts.
"Make sure they're not used for anything other than for domestic use and by domestic use ... I mean inside the house," he said.
See - Council not expecting bore backlash.
Deputy Mayor Ramia stated on WIN News last night that he had an open mind on the issue of gas water.
Is this political speak for "I will continue to ignore requests from people to examine other water source options for Toowoomba"?
How long does this debacle need to continue before the Toowoomba City Council is forced to look at other options in detail?
How would a new Council CEO feel coming on board to be told to only focus on the recycled sewage option and ignore other potentially viable options such as gas water?
Remember, Councillors immunity from personal liability under the Local Government Act only applies where they are acting honestly and without negligence:
Section 240 of the Qld Local Government Act 1993 states that "[a] councillor does not incur civil liability for an act or omission done honestly and without negligence under this Act".
Could the continued failure to look at other water source options be considered negligence on the part of Councillors?
Anyone want to be part of a class action against individual Councillors?
posted by Concerned Ratepayer at 1:35 PM
10 Comments:
Coal seam gas water has been investigated and shown not to be an economical viable option unless it is supplied to a user within about a 20 km radius of the source. The treatment and pumping costs make it a very expensive water supplybeyong that distance.
Also, you have raised the issue before with regard to the disposal of the brine stream from the Water Futures Proposal, should the Ackland Mine close down in 15 years. My question is what to you propose to do with the brine stream as a result of the treatment of the coal seam water. this water will also have to under go reverse osmosis treatment to make it suitable for consumption, which will prodruce a brine stream which will have to be disposed.
2:27 PM, February 10, 2006
The water from Coal seam process will be treated on site at the gas plant and sold onto the coal field similar to that which is proposed for Ackland Coal field. This water is the 1/10 of the salt content of sea water and it has none of the nasties we would have to deal with the reclaimed sewage water. We have to deal with YUK factor.
YET UNIDENTIFIED KEMICIALS.
2:50 PM, February 10, 2006
I'd like someone other than the Toowoomba City Council and the State government to tell me that gas water is too expensive.
In any event, it's necessary to adopt a whole of region approach.
To the extent that coal seam water solves the problems of Chinchilla and Dalby, some of their water sources could be pushed eastwards to assist Toowoomba. Pipelines exist for all but the Dalby-Oakey link.
It takes some thinking outside the box but that is what is needed.
I haven't raised the issue of disposal of the brine stream should the Acland mine close down in 15 years (you may be thinking of another blog).
The NWC application has serious deficiencies on the RO waste stream issue, particularly if Acland does not take the reject stream. Even the Council's consultants say that the Council's preferred alternative is full of uncertainties.
The Council's recycled sewage project is all about making money - "making" the water and retaining the profit rather than buying the water off a third party and only being able to charge a margin to consumers.
2:52 PM, February 10, 2006
Gas Water is a proven supply - ask Chinchilla and Dalby.
The brine stream can be accomodated in the current evaporation ponds within the gas fields.
3:39 PM, February 10, 2006
Council will get a backlash if it regulates bores.
NRMW will first need to register every bore before it comes under their legislation. There is a seven yaer backlog in bore registration.
Until a bore is registered NRMW can't give anyone, least of all TCC, power to regukate its use.
3:45 PM, February 10, 2006
I am neither State Government or TCC, and I am saying that the pumping and treatment costs alone would make obtaining water from a coal seam gas field very expensive. TCC would not only charge the margin of the costs to source this water, that would have to charge the whole lot, and that would mean a great increase in costs.
8:03 PM, February 10, 2006
It's not that they would charge the margin, it's that they would only earn the margin.
With recycled sewage, they are the "manufacturer" rather than merely a water wholesaler.
This game is being driven by profit for the Council (and presumably some performance incentives for particular staff) rather than what's best for the community.
8:43 PM, February 10, 2006
Why is it that the treatment costs are so much more expensive than treating sewage?
Has any independent report been prepared showing a comparison of the two?
8:54 PM, February 10, 2006
Using reverse osmosis to treat sewerage water is going to cost a hell of a lot more then what your council has implied!
1:05 PM, February 11, 2006
Australians have shown that they do not wish to use recycled effluent for domestic use. Any city or region contemplating doing so will need to look further then just the cost of the water. They will need to look at the economic cost such and undesirable thing is going to have. People will move away (I know of two families so far and the project isn't even up and running.), people will not move in, businesses will close as the workforce downturn will leed to more of them becoming unviable and major investors will look elsewhere.
These are the thing that people like njta and the TCC need to look at instead of just the cost of the water.
6:44 PM, February 11, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home