Toowoomba City Council - no Plan B ...

It's the "do it or you'll die" attitude of the Toowoomba City Council.

Head of Engineering Services (now seconded full-time to the Yes campaign to convince Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage), Kevin Flanagan, states in today's Chronicle that Toowoomba has no "Plan B" if the July electoral poll on water recycling returns a "No" vote.

He believes it is up to the State goverment to "find us water". He also believes that the consequences of a "No" vote would be a huge extra cost.

Interesting.

Is Toowoomba City Council prepared to guarantee that the total and complete cost of the Water Futures recycled sewage project will be $68 million and no more?

Has Toowoomba City Council already signed a fixed price turnkey construction contract with its preferred construction consortium so that the price is locked in?

Has Toowoomba City Council signed a binding agreement with Acland Coal so they are contractually bound to take the RO waste stream and prevent (at least in the short term) an additional $70 million in cost overruns?

Didn't think so ...

4350water supports Amnesty International's campaign to target internet repression wherever it occurs:

The pledge

The Internet should be a force for political freedom, not repression.

People have the right to seek and receive information and to express their peaceful beliefs online without fear or interference.

Governments must stop the unwarranted restriction of freedom of expression on the Internet.

For more information and to voice your support see - Irrepressible.info.

Chief engineer stands by his costing figure ...

From the Chronicle:

Chief engineer stands by his costing figure

30 May 2006

By Kathleen Donaghey

Toowoomba City Council's chief engineer Kevin Flanagan stands by his costing of an alternative plan to water recycling.

Mr Flanagan said a proposal to swap 5000ML of recycled water annually from the proposed Advanced Water Treatment Plant with bore water from licensed holders in the Condamine Groundwater Management Area already had been rejected because it was too costly and impractical.

The swap had been put forward as a way to prevent Toowoomba residents having to drink recycled water by exchanging it for ground water.

The plan would require collection and distribution systems, storage, two pipelines for each water type, a reverse osmosis plant to desalinate the bore water and evaporation ponds.

But Mr Flanagan said it would cost $131 million for the complicated swap, not half the cost as claimed by Commerce Queensland South West regional chairman Ken Murphy.

Mr Murphy (The Chronicle, Friday, May 26) based his opinion on a set of notes produced for the NuWater Group by international consultancy group GHD on the potential supply from the Condamine allocation to Toowoomba.

Mr Murphy seized on a section of the two-page brief which claimed up to $40 million could be saved in costings if $35 million on a reverse osmosis plant to desalinate the bore water and evaporation ponds was deleted.

The notes also proposed $10 million could be saved if a pipe returning the recycled water to the licensees was reduced in size.

At the same time, however, $5 million would have to be added to provide for a longer pipeline transporting the bore water to Mt Kynoch as well as $4 million for a pump station to pump the water uphill.

That brought GHD's revised figure to $95 million, compared to council's $131 million.

However, Mr Flanagan has rejected the GHD assumptions as flawed. He said to presume bore water from the Condamine Management Area would not have to be desalinated was "not a possibility", as were a number of scenarios pondered in the notes.

He said the Condamine ground?water resource was not sustainable and would have to be abandoned after five years.

Mr Flanagan said Commerce Queensland had also failed to note that GHD considered council's costing of the project "reasonable".

Source - the Chronicle - Chief engineer stands by his costing figure.


Note that the Toowoomba City Council continues to refuse to allow water source options to be independently assessed.

What are they afraid of ...

Beattie MP calls for independent inquiry ...

... into water options for South East Queensland.

Excerpt from the Courier Mail:

30 May 2006

Dam divides party

by Rosemary Odgers

In an embarrassing rebuff to Premier Peter Beattie's plans to dam the Mary River, one of his own MPs is to introduce a private member's Bill opposing the project.

Outspoken Noosa MP Cate Molloy yesterday confirmed she was considering the anti-Traveston Dam Bill and was already taking advice from experts including Greens leader Bob Brown.

Ms Molloy said that as well as opposing the dam, the Bill would call for an inquiry to consider other options to provide water for southeast Queensland.

Source - Courier Mail - Dam divides party.


The Coalition should request that the private member's Bill be expanded to ensure that Toowoomba's water source options are included as part of any inquiry ...

Toowoomba's recycled sewage debate gets expanded coverage ...

Excerpt from Time magazine:

Not a Drop to Drink?

Dry Australian towns want to put purified wastewater on tap, but some people find the idea hard to swallow

By Lisa Clausen

29 May 2006

Rosemary Morley doesn't deny that Toowoomba's water problem is grim. Like everyone else in this parched southeast Queensland city, she's been living with tough water restrictions for nearly three years. But the 60-year-old former president of the local chamber of commerce is sure she's being duped by Toowoomba authorities when it comes to a solution—and she's not alone.

More than 10,000 people have signed a petition rejecting the local council's proposal to make the 95,000-strong community the first in Australia to supplement its drinking water supply by adding its own treated effluent. "We'll be the lab rats for the rest of Australia," says Morley. "But this is not a road we need to go down."

Source - Time - Not a drop to drink? (Jun. 05, 2006 issue of TIME Pacific Magazine.)


One of the fundamental points of the debate in Toowoomba is the missing DNRM&W hydrology report. This is the report which the State government used to justify reducing the effective yields of Toowoomba's dams and the report which the Toowoomba City Council has used to justify needing to force Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage.

Toowoomba City Council say they have never read the hydrology report - yet they use it to justify their position. The State government is unable to produce it - yet it forms the basis of the apparent need for the Water Futures project.

The problem is - neither the State government nor the Toowoomba City Council will have any credibility without producing this report ...

Community Water Meeting ...

From WIN News:

First No campaign

Citizens Against Drinking Sewerage have held their first No Campaign community forum, attracting around nine hundred residents.

Strongly supported by local developer, Clive Berghofer, and the city's three rogue councillors, CADS encouraged the community to understand there are other options, and it's ok to vote no.

Source - WIN News - First No campaign.

WIN News has on several occasions referred to Councillors Beer, Barron and Shelton as "rogue councillors". It seems odd to describe three councillors who voted against spending $460,000 of ratepayers' money on funding only the yes campaign as "rogues". That term seems more appropriate for the other six ...

When political objectives collide ...

Mayor Thorley must be cursing Premier Beattie under her breath today.

In State parliament last Friday, Premier Beattie tabled several new Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water Information Sheets. One of these Information Sheets, No. 3, relates to desalination and recycling and contains the following comments:

"Desalination and water recycling are potentially longer-term water supply solutions. Technology is improving at a rapid rate. In the future, desalination may become economical and the recycling of water for potable purposes may be accepted by the community.

In the mean time, dams are still the most economical source of bulk water in south-east Queensland and recycling will generally be confined to industrial and other appropriate applications such as irrigation."

Now anyone knows that Toowoomba is in South East Queensland, notwithstanding attempts by the Beattie Government to somehow carve it out this region.

In State parliament on 25 May, Premier Beattie also referred to the "recycled water trials proposed for Toowoomba" (see page 1976). This is the clearest indication yet that State government policy is for Toowoomba residents to be used as the lab rats of South East Queensland.

Premier Beattie is staring down the barrel of the forthcoming State election and needs some deft political manoeuvring to escape the scandals surrounding his administration. He seems prepared to sacrifice the seat of Toowoomba North but appears desperate not to lose the seats in Brisbane. And he needs to be seen to be doing something about the lack of water infrastructure planning during his administration.

To have the Queensland Premier table documents in Parliament which state that "dams are still the most economical source of bulk water in south-east Queensland" and then refer to the "recycled water trials proposed for Toowoomba" are further blows to Mayor's Thorley's floundering recycled sewage project ...

The Yes case ...

... read it - here.

Honestly, for $5,000, 4350water could have written a much better "yes" case statement.

Seems the Council is unable to help itself when it most needs to ...

Mine trials waste water irrigation plan ...

Qld Gas Corp looks to irrigation as yet another use for gas water:

From ABC News:

29 May 2006

Mine trials waste water irrigation plan

A coal seam gas mine on the western Darling Downs is running trials to discover if its waste water can be used for irrigation.

The Queensland Gas Company opened Berwyndale South gasfields on a property east of Condamine on Friday.

General manager Richard Cottee says it is trialing irrigated cotton and other grain crops on its property.

"The major problem with our water from an agricultural point of view is sodium absorption ratio," he said.

"Basically you need to treat the sodium through the soil, it's a combination of the soil and others. We've gone a fair bit on the agricultural trials at the moment, obviously it's going to be another six to nine months before we can declare it successful."

Source - ABC News - Mine trials waste water irrigation plan.

Council getting desperate ...

... relying on tasting comments from 12 year old and 15 year old.

The Chronicle reports today on Toowoomba City Council's sewer water sipping taste trials conducted in Laurel Bank Park yesterday. As part of the story, the Chronicle reports the comments of a 12 year old and a 15 year old. One thought "all water taste the same" and the other "didn't notice any difference in taste".

Perhaps Mayor Thorley's latest "secret" plan is to delay the referendum until some of the 12 and 15 year olds are old enough to vote ...

Anti-recycling campaigners voice their defiance ...

From the Chronicle

29 May 2006

CADS gathers to voice defiance

Water debate rages

Anti-recycling campaigners voice their defiance

'No' campaigners convinced of other sources of water

By Sarah Balderson

AS THE words of 80s song, We're Not Gonna Take It, boomed out over the auditorium, CADS (Citizens Against Drinking Sewage) launched its "It's OK to say no" campaign at full volume.

More than 900 people attended Saturday's forum, the first public meeting since the water recycling poll was announced for July 29.

Member for Toowoomba South Mike Horan said never before had an issue so inflamed the Toowoomba community.

"I have never seen anything tear this beautiful city apart like this," Mr Horan said.

"The issue of recycled water has been forced upon us.

"What we do need is a source of water & and there are some very significant sources available for Toowoomba. Mr Horan believed other viable water sources included building a dam at Emu Creek, which would nearly double the city's water storage.

He also outlined recycled water for non-drinking purposes such as watering sporting complexes and industrial use.

Other water source options spoken about at the forum were sustainable supplies of underground water in the Condamine alluvium, a pipeline from Wivenhoe Dam to Cressbrook and water supply from natural gas fields and the Great Artesian Basin.

"There are other options, Mr Horan said.

"They should be our first options – not the last." The meeting coincided with the lodgement of the No case statement for the July 29 referendum.

Cr Graham Barron said he and his two "renegade" colleagues pushing the "No" vote – Crs Lyle Shelton and Keith Beer – would not claim any of the $5000 allocated.

Cr Lyle Shelton was greeted with cheers as he spoke about his qualms with drinking recycled water and recalled an interview on ABC with New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma.

"In the interview he says ... there are 'still unresolved issues with the health authorities'," Cr Shelton said.

"I believe we are being played for fools in Toowoomba."

Property developer and former mayor Clive Berghofer admitted being frightened by the prospect of recycled water in the town.

"It is the perception of it I don't like," Mr Berghofer said.

"Right through Australia we are known as the Garden City ... now we are the 's--- city' or 'Poowoomba'."

Mr Berghofer said 75,000 people a year were moving to Queensland and at the moment many were moving to Toowoomba.

He said Brisbane and other South-East Queensland towns would capitalise on Toowoomba using recycled water.

"It will do the city so much damage it is frightening," Mr Berghofer said.

"I have put so much money into this city.

"The last thing I want to do is see it die."

Toowoomba identity Snow Manners, who has been vocal in the water recycling debate, referred to the six "Yes" voting councillors as a "six pack of Singapore sewer sippers".

"We're not here to argue with experts. I am not a water expert," Mr Manners said.
"I am waiting for council to bring in an economic expert and tell us drinking recycled water will not hurt the economy.

"I believe it would."

Mr Manners said he believed people travelling would stop in Warwick and say "let's skip Toowoomba and push on through to Esk."

"There will be a sign in the RACQ book: don't drink the water',' Mr Manners said.

"That will be the perception of Toowoomba all over the world."

The meeting was also attended by Jondaryan Shire Mayor Peter Taylor and CADS Co-ordinator Rosemary Morley.

Source - the Chronicle - 'No' campaigners convinced of other water sources (plus additional material from print edition).

Monday morning ...

When $460,000 = less than 50 ...

Council's 90 minute Singapore sewer water tasting session in Laurel Bank Park earlier today attracted less than 50 people.

When you exclude the organisers and their family members, it leaves very few people turning up for the sewer water taste tests and accompanying ratepayer-funded pizza, BBQ and soft drinks.

Why do almost 1,000 attend Saturday's Community Water Meeting and then less than 50 (including organisers) attend Council's tasting session in Laurel Bank Park the next day?

Could it be that the Toowoomba community has heard enough nonsense from the Council and won't be bribed by offers of pizza and a BBQ to listen to more misleading information? (Interestingly, pizza sessions were used in California as an inducement to attend 'education sessions'.)

Based on 2005 figures, Toowoomba City Council has 819 employees (including 420 administration staff and 399 depot and outdoor employees but excluding the 9 Councillors).

So, notwithstanding the Council employee meetings held last week where council employees were apparently told to support the Water Futures project, almost none attended the Laurel Bank Park session.

Council would have you believe that there was no need for Council employees to attend as they will all be voting yes.

But will they?

Mayor Thorley is prohibited by law from looking over the shoulders of 819 employees as they vote on 29 July.

One thing for sure, Toowoomba City Council will be in crisis mode this week as it tries to create the impression of community support and put a positive spin on its floundering project for the media ...

How the State government wastes water ...

You have to wonder why a city's residents should be forced to drink recycled sewage when the decision-makers in Brisbane waste so much water ...

From the Sunday Mail:

28 May 2006

What a waste

By Ainsley Pavey

Government MPs and bureaucrats who preach the water-wise message to Queenslanders have been flushed out as some of our worst water wasters.

While southeast Queensland residents are being told to watch every drop, a Sunday Mail investigation has lifted the lid on the biggest leaks in State Parliament including:

- Single-flush cisterns that use twice as much water as dual-flush toilets compulsory in new homes since 2003.

- Urinals left to run 24 hours a day even when Parliament is not sitting.

- Water-hungry shower heads in members' private rooms in the Parliamentary Annexe that could easily be replaced with AAA-rated shower heads now common in private homes.

- Ageing top-loader washing machines that use three times the water of more efficient modern washers.

- Single flush cisterns were also discovered in the city offices of Water Minister Henry Palaszczuk.

State Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg said it was hypocritical of Premier Peter Beattie to allow so much water to be wasted at Parliament after declaring a month ago "many homes are still using far more water than they need to in this period of extreme drought".

"There are thousands of Olympic-sized pools just being wasted every week in State Government buildings while the Beattie Government lectures everybody else," Mr Springborg said.

"There is no better example of the Government's failure to recognise the importance of water."

He said the Government should be leading the way but had treated water as a low priority in the past 15 years.

"Is it any wonder that they have failed to provide basic infrastructure like dams when they are happy to waste precious drinking water flushing toilets 24 hours a day, seven days a week at Parliament House?" he said.

After being approached by The Sunday Mail, Public Works Minister Robert Schwarten said he would take a strategy to Cabinet next month to cut water usage in Government buildings across the state.

"Water-saving targets of at least 15 to 20 per cent are expected to be delivered initially through retro-fitting works in these buildings," Mr Schwarten said.

Speaker Tony McGrady said $200,000 was set aside in the next Budget for water saving at Parliament House, including low-flush toilets and gardening water tanks.

Mr McGrady said the complex had 157 toilets, 37 urinals, 81 bedrooms with showers and 123 offices.

"Investigations are under way to look at reduced flushing in toilets throughout the complex," Mr McGrady said.

But Mr Springborg slammed the proposed program as "too little too late".

Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman has also admitted chain-flush urinals and single-flush toilets were still in use at City Hall.

He made the admission after earlier criticising the Government for wasting water in its buildings.

"I would be disappointed if the State Government was not making every effort to conserve water during the worst drought in 100 years," Cr Newman had said.

Source - Sunday Mail - What a waste.

The NO case in full ...

Here - the NO case.

When a Council fails to listen to the community ...

The large number of people who attended the Community Water Meeting at Harristown High School will make the Toowoomba City Council very nervous.

While the Council was unable to gather more than a few dozen to their meeting at the Empire Theatre, almost 1,000 people attended the Community Water Meeting earlier today. (Some reports indicate even higher numbers.)

The photo of the hall stage showing the six empty chairs allocated to the Sewer Water Six speaks volumes (see - photo) - they couldn't even bother to attend and listen to the concerns of the community they are supposed to represent.

Congratulations to those who organised this event - the people of Toowoomba needed a meeting to express their concerns.

Mayor Thorley thinks nothing of jetting off around Australia, mostly at ratepayers' expense, to advertise for the recycled water companies at conferences but cannot find the time to attend a meeting in Toowoomba to hear the very real concerns of the community which elected her ...

Councillor Shelton - other cities not considering recycling plans ...

Letter to the Editor, the Chronicle:

27 May 2006

Other cities not considering recycling plans

CC says I am against water recycling (TC, 8/5).

This is not so. Everyone, including me, supports recycling sewage water.

Whether or not that water should be piped back through drinking taps is open to debate.

Indeed Premier Beattie seems to have doubts.

Last month's sudden announcement that he would spend $200-$300 million from the sale of Ergon and Energex building massive dams for everyone else in South East Queensland indicates he does not see a Toowoomba-style effluent recycling-for-drinking scheme as feasible.

Singapore is the only city in the world with a sewage recycling-for-drinking plant like toe one proposed for Toowoomba. But just 1% of their drinking water comes from this plant. Toowoomba is proposing a ratio of 25%.

Despite water crises in Sydney, Brisbane and Perth, none are considering recycling sewage water-for-drinking.

NSW Premier Morris Iemma recently rejected recycled effluent for drinking in Sydney citing "unresolved issues with health authorities".

Council's rapid rejection of other water supply options (including linking with Beattie's new dams) justifies a cautious approach.

Maybe Peter Beattie knows something about recycling-for-drinking that we don't.

Toowoomba people should consider this as council's one-sided $460,000 ratepayer-funded "yes" case rolls out.

LS
Toowoomba

Alternatives exist for water ...

Letter to the Editor, the Chronicle:

27 May 2006

Alternatives exist for water

The deception goes on as we now know that gas water is safe and yet the six pack in our council and our city engineer would have you believe it is dangerous.

The big news on the Dalby project to use gas water in the town supply blows that theory out of the water, so to speak.

Well done Warwick Geisel and his team.

Now the Toowoomba folk have to concentrate on voting no to the poo-rified water to be piped into Cooby Dam which is to be used as our drinking water.

Shame on the Thorley team as it is so un-Australian to stack the deck on the ordinary people as they intend to spend $460,000 on the campaign for the yes campaign and nil on the no case.

Huge amounts of money have been spent by the council to date to convince the ratepayers that there were "no other options" and there are.

We have dams being built by Premier Beattie to the east which makes a pipe from there viable, we have gas water to the west and farmers who want to exchange water too.

RM
Toowoomba

Consultancy 'conflict of interest' concerns Shelton ...

From the Chronicle:

27 May 2006

Consultancy 'conflict of interest' concerns Shelton

By Greg Berghofer

Anti-water recycling councillor Lyle Shelton is concerned at the payment of ratepayers' money in consultancies to the American-based form who is a likely tenderer for Toowoomba's sewage recycling plant.

The company CH2M Hill is the principal builder of the reverse osmosis plant in Singapore which is a model for Toowoomba's proposed treatment works.

Cr Shelton said CH2M Hill had been engaged by council to convince Toowoomba's public of the safety and necessity of drinking recycled sewage and likely to be a tenderer to build or project-manage construction of the city plant.

"I'm concerned we've paid a truckload to CH2M Hill, i.e. for the public information water book and in producing videos, and they're likely to be the only tenderer if it goes ahead," he said. "I think there are issues of conflict of interest."

Cr Shelton said no other company was likely to tender for a reverse osmosis plant but conceded few would have the expertise to build one.

"But that to me just underlines the fact that it gives a lie to the claim that it is routinely done everywhere."

Cr Shelton said the "No" campaign was up against a $400,000 ratepayer-funded campaign.

And that doesn't take into account wage bills of several senior staff and public relations staff who have been taken off line to work largely on the "Yes" campaign.


At the last Council Committee meetings, Councillor Shelton requested an update on the costs to date of the Water Futures project. This update is to be provided at the next Council Committee meetings.

Interestingly, the original CBHM Water contract to expand Wetalla treatment works contained an option enabling the Council to give the recycled sewage contract to CH2M Hill and its partners without going through an open tender process. Council subsequently had a change of heart and cancelled the option.

'No' case comes at no cost ...

From the Chronicle:

27 May 2006

'No' case comes at no cost

Both official sides of water recycling argument to be released on Monday

by Susan Searle

The 'No' case statement for the July 29 water recycling poll in Toowoomba was lodged yesterday at no cost to ratepayers.

Cr Graham Barron last night announced he and his two "renegade" colleagues charged with pushing the "No" vote - Crs Lyle Shelton and Keith Beer - would not claim any of the $5,000 allocated.

Both sides had their 1000-word statements of the case for and against the referendum question delivered to returning officer Graham Taylor by 5pm.

Toowoomba City Council, on a 6-3 vote, has come in for a lot of criticism for agreeing to spend $480,000 to promote the "yes" case only.

Proponents [sic] of the Water Futures project cried foul, declaring the one-sided campaign, now unfolding, was unfair.

Just $10,000 was set aside, $5,000 each, for the compilation of the mandatory 1,000-word "yes" and "No" statements which must be circulated to voters before the election [sic].

Last night, Cr Barron said he and Cr Shelton had spent two weeks doing extensive research on alternative options to promote the "No" case.

Cr Beer has just returned from the world McDonald's conference in the United States.

"In fairness to the ratepayers of the city, Lyle and I worked very hard on it, we got it put together and we won't be charging for it.

"We've got no intention of putting in a claim."

"We had tremendous community support," he said. And they are confident they can fend off the proposal to put recycled water in the potable water supply with 982 words.

But the "Yes" and No" statements will not be released until Monday.

Government funding for the $68 million project, both federal and State, hinges on community support for the project.

The Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary for Water, Malcolm Turnbull, ruled the best way to gauge that was to put it to the vote.

So council has budgeted $300,000 for the poll and returning officer Graham Taylor was appointed.

And come July 29, Toowoomba residents will be asked: Do you support the addition of purified water to Toowoomba's water supply via Cooby Dam as proposed by the Water Futures Toowoomba project?

Voting will be compulsory.

Qld Government - dams are the most economical source of bulk water in SE Qld ...

The Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water has just released a number of water related Information Sheets for South East Queensland, including one entitled "What about recycling and desalination?"

Source - DNRW Information Sheet - What about recycling and desalination?

Remember that, for some mysterious reason, the State government does not think Toowoomba is in South East Queensland.

The Information Sheet states:

"Desalination and water recycling are potentially longer-term water supply solutions. Technology is improving at a rapid rate. In the future, desalination may become economical and the recycling of water for potable purposes may be accepted by the community.

In the mean time, dams are still the most economical source of bulk water in south-east Queensland and recycling will generally be confined to industrial and other appropriate applications such as irrigation."


So, the State government believes that dams are still the most economical source of bulk water - it's just that Toowoomba can't have one.

And water recycling will generally be confined to industrial and irrigation applications - unless you're part of the great Thorley experiment in Toowoomba.

This is clearly ridiculous.

Vote NO and tell Premier Beattie that it is just not good enough to draw a circle around Toowoomba on a map and say "that's where we'll do the recycled water trials" ...

'Yes' unit says 'no' to talks ...

From the Chronicle:

27 May 2006

'Yes' unit says 'no' to talks

Citizens Against Drinking Sewage (CADS) co-ordinator Rosemary Morley has appealed to the mayor and he allies to change their minds about not attending today's public water meeting.

Opponents are outraged that no representatives from the "Yes" camp are attending Toowoomba's first public meeting on the subject since it was announced last year.

Mrs Morley organised the meeting after waiting months for Toowoomba City Council to act on the mayor's original promise to meet the people.

However, Mayor Dianne Thorley, Deputy Mayor Joe Ramia, all of the "Yes" councillors, chief engineer Kevin Flanagan, council's water expert Alan Kleinschmidt, Premier Peter Beattie and Member for Toowoomba North Kerry Shine have all indicated they are not able to attend today's meeting.

Mrs Morley said the meeting would have been a chance for both sides of the water debate to state their cases and answer questions.

But only representatives from the "No" case have indicated a willingness to attend and speak, including councillors Lyle Shelton, Graham Barron and Keith Beer.

Prominent anti-water recyclers Snow Manners, Clive Berghofer and Mrs Morley will also speak.

The meeting starts at 2pm at Harristown State High School.

Toowoomba Water Futures No case - out now ...

The formal max. 1000 word No case has been submitted to the Returning Officer.

Read it here: the NO case.

The Turnbull backup plan - Goulburn ...

See - Recycled water possible for Goulburn.

Also see - A $50,000 question: will dry city swallow effluent?

Premier Beattie opens Chinchilla gas project ...

From WIN News:

QLD GAS OPENING

Leap forward

Another leap forward for the power industry on the Western Downs, with the offical opening today of the Berwyndale Coal Seam Gas field.

Premier Peter Beattie today officially opening the Queensland Gas Company project, twenty kilometres east of Condamine. It can supply about a third of South East Queensland's energy needs. Half of the gas feeds the Roma to Brisbane pipeline, while the rest will be used at the Braemar Power Station.

The gas field is one of several planned for the region.

It's planned to recycle the water by product of production for use in the Chinchilla shire.

Source - WIN News - Qld Gas opening.

Community Water Meeting - why Thorley, Ramia, Flanagan and Kleinschmidt will be a no show ...

Regardless of what else they may want to do on a Saturday afternoon, you would think that Mayor Thorley, Deputy Mayor Ramia, Kevin Flanagan and Allan Kleinschmidt would spare a half hour of so to attend the Community Water Meeting planned for tomorrow afternoon.

What's the harm?

It would send the community the message that the Council is prepared to discuss its controversial Water Futures project and answer the community's questions.

But no, they won't come.

Why?

Perhaps because they may have to answer questions which do not allow them to follow their prepared script.

Questions like:

- why was it necessary to grant the Yes campaign $460,000 of ratepayers' money in funding but $0 for the No campaign?

- where is that DNR hydrology report which forms the basis for the Water Futures project and why, as a Council, have you never insisted on seeing it?

- why did Council refuse to release the NWC application until it was forced to do so under a Freedom of Information request?

- why is it that Toowoomba must drink recycled sewage while all towns surrounding Toowoomba as well as Brisbane and the Gold and Sunshine Coast will not?

- why should Toowoomba residents drink 25-29% recycled sewage when nowhere else in the world does?

- why doesn't the Council insist that the Beattie government allow Toowoomba access to water from their new dams?

- why has the Council continually refused to have the other water source options independently assessed?

- why does Mayor Thorley state that she will make no more public statements but still plans to speak at a conference on the Sunshine Coast next month?

- why does Kevin Flanagan keep misleading people regarding the gas water?

- what will happen with the RO waste stream once Acland Coal mine closes or earlier if they don't want to take the RO waste stream and can the Toowoomba community support the extra $70 million in cost overruns and debt?

- why is the Water Futures project not an "experiment" if even Premier Beattie refers to the "recycled water trials in Toowoomba"?

All legitimate questions.

As highlighted recently on the Water Recycling blog:

- the community is interested in being meaningfully involved in water reuse decisions.

- the community is interested in finding ways to ensure independent and secure water supplies for their communities.

Organising 90 minute sessions in parks and schools and trying to force people to drink recycled Singapore sewage (when Councillors themselves are reluctant to do so) is not going to gain people's trust. Nor will misleading news-advertorials inserted in the Chronicle which present a misleading view of public events.

Trust must be earned - it can't be bought with the ratepayers' own money wasted on silly slogans and television advertisements.

As also highlighted on the Water Recycling blog, trust has shown to be maximised when the following conditions are met:

- dialogue is sustained

- the community has independent sources of information, not linked to the sponsoring agency

- the community can ask questions

- the community is involved early

- information is available to everyone

- behaviour is non coercive. It is considered a reasoned and fair way to make a decision

- everyone’s opinion matters, and there is a willingness to listen to all views and expand the discussion if necessary

- citizens have some level of control in the process (such as by contributing to the agenda or ground rules).

When one looks at the way the Toowoomba City Council has conducted itself over the past 10 months, could anyone honestly say that any one of the points listed above has been achieved?

Mayor Thorley's "you can drink it or you can buy bottled water" approach to community engagement is a complete farce.

The community is not stupid. The Council treats us as such at their own peril ...

Community Water Meeting this Saturday ...

Dalby gas water gets State government funding ...

From WIN News:

25 May 2006

DALBY WATER FUNDS

Plan signed off

The State Government has signed off on a plan to turn wastewater from gas mining into a drinking supply for Dalby.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle announcing the state will contribute $3.3 million.

It's the final approval for the project, which last month received a promise of a similar amount from the Federal Government. The Dalby Town Council and Arrow Energy are also contributing.

Mayor Warwick Geisel says the recycling project will supply residents with water for the next twenty to thirty years.

Source - WIN News - Dalby Water Funds.

Premier Beattie ... "significant recycled water trials ...

... like that proposed for Toowoomba".

Comments by Premier "water water everywhere" Beattie in State parliament this morning when commenting on the forthcoming appearance this weekend of Senator Bob Brown for the Greens' organised dam protests:

"... he ought to be staying in Canberra and sending a clear message to the Commonwealth that they should be getting behind significant recycled water trials like that proposed for Toowoomba".

Source - State parliament Hansard - 25 May 2006.

So, even Premier Beattie now admits that the State government wants to conduct trials using Toowoomba residents.

If it looks and sounds like the Toowoomba community will be the State's lab rats ...

Shortly after the Council's Water Futures meeting for employees ...

It's not much fun being a Council employee right now. This one's for you ...

Councillor gags over bottled recycled water promotion ...

From ABC News (annotated):

25 May 2006

Councillor gags over bottled recycled water promotion

A critic of the Toowoomba water futures project in south-east Queensland says a plan to give away bottles of recycled sewage water to residents in the lead-up to the poll is a poor stunt.

Councillor Lyle Shelton says bottles of recycled effluent water from Singapore are being shipped in in a bid to secure votes at the July 29 poll.

He says residents should not be fooled by the promotion.

"Singapore is drinking one per cent recycled sewage water," he said.

"No amount of promotional bottles is going to change that fact and until other cities in the world adopt this at a rate that Toowoomba's looking at, we should take a cautious response like the Singapore people are taking a cautious response in a country that is not even a democracy."

Toowoomba Mayor Di Thorley says the bottles are not a promotional stunt.

She says they are being shipped in [at ratepayers' expense] to prove a point.

"Nobody is going to be able to quantify if people will change their mind. It is about them understanding that this water does not have an odour, is clear and is pure, remembering that this is 100 per cent recycled water," she said.

Source - ABC News - Councillor gags over bottled recycled water promotion.

Wasn't Mayor Thorley making no further comments during the referendum?

Wasn't she going to leave it to the "Kev and Al" show?

Seems she's unable to keep even that commitment.

Also seems the Mayor thinks that she will have to change people's minds. What happened to the 70% who supported her? That's enough to get the yes vote across the line. Is Council's polling telling them something different?

And she used the "pure" word - that's going to get you into trouble during the referendum period, Mayor Thorley.

It's interesting to watch the recycled sewage sippers - no-one really gulping it down. Not a lot of trust there. It is a stunt and it won't win people's trust. You simply can't undo the harm done over the past 10 months with a few sips of recycled Singapore sewage ...

Why the $460,000 yes campaign faces an uphill battle ...

One of the difficulties with the Mayor's $460,000 ratepayer-funded advertising spree is the time which would be required to convince a majority of Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage.

This assumes one can change people's minds - there are certainly large numbers in Toowoomba whom you will never convince to drink recycled sewage.

For the past 10 months, Toowoomba people have been subjected to lies and deception by the Toowoomba City Council on a level rarely seen in Australian politics.

And for what purpose?

To try to "educate" the people that they should be drinking recycled sewage.

Every study to date shows that an overwhelming majority of people do not currently want to drink recycled sewage. This includes the most recent polling done in Toowoomba.

The Mayor now proposes to embark on a relentless advertising campaign for the next 8 weeks, spending $460,000 of ratepayers' money to try to achieve what she has been unable to achieve in the past 10 months - to convince Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage.

It seems highly likely that this campaign will fail. You simply can't buy trust.

It also seems that the Mayor is very much afraid of this - needing to grant the Yes campaign $460,000 of ratepayers' funds while allowing $0.00 for the No campaign.

Even last week, she was up to her old tricks - trying to limit the number of how to vote cards which could be issued. Given that no election process in Australia seeks to impose such limits, this is once again extraordinary behaviour.

Toowoomba people are not stupid - they can see through these tactics.

The other difficulty the recycled sewage industry faces with the referendum is that this will be an opportunity for anyone with a grievance against the Mayor or the Council to express their disapproval through a No vote.

When the Mayor or Deputy Mayor abuses or threatens someone, do they really think these people will vote Yes?

Do they think those offended by the parking changes will vote Yes?

What about those who think the Mayor's obelisks were a waste of money?

Rightly or wrongly, voters will use the referendum to express their distrust and disapproval of the Mayor and the Council.

The $460,000 ratepayer funded advertising campaign has offended many people.

Many people are also outraged that the Council has continually lied to them.

These people are unlikely to vote Yes.

The recycled sewage industry should perhaps have done some homework before choosing Mayor Thorley as their spokesperson ...

Make sure you register ...

Flanagan queried on misleading comments ...

At the Council Committee meetings last week, Councillor Shelton queried the comments made by the Director of Engineering Services, Kevin Flanagan, at a Water Solutions Workshop held at Highfields on 13 May 2006.

Mr Flanagan now states that the gas water 'probably' includes organic contaminants and 'may' include radioactive contaminants but that with treatment any radioactive contaminants would be removed.

Source - Council Committee meeting minutes - 16-17 May 2006.

That statement is somewhat different from the impression given to the audience at the Highfields meeting.

One of the Council's often used scare tactics in relation to the gas water has been to state that it contains contaminants which will remain in the water.

However, given that reverse osmosis will be used to clean the water for Chinchilla and Dalby - the same RO process that would be used for the Water Futures project - why is it that the gas water is unsafe but the recycled sewage is apparently perfectly safe?

More misleading tactics courtesy of the Toowoomba City Council.

Mr Flanagan will need to watch himself. The clock is ticking down to the formal start of the referendum period and every statement he makes during this period will be examined to determine if it is materially false or misleading.

Looks like he will be choosing his words more carefully for a couple of months ...

Should the lab rats vote?

Commerce Queensland slams Toowoomba City Council ...

From WIN News:

Commerce Queensland slams Toowoomba City Council

Following their launch of the yes campaign, Commerce Queensland has today slammed Toowoomba City Council for washing their hands of any further water alternatives.

But the Mayor has hit back saying it's now time for the community to be provided with more education, which councillors can't do on their own.

Source - WIN News - Commerce Qld slams TCC.


Note - not more 'information' but more 'education'.

Meanwhile, Mayor Thorley skips off to yet another conference ...

The Thorley view of democracy ...

An interesting Letter to the Editor, the Chronicle published today:

Words make blood boil

DEMOCRACY. What democracy? Cr Thorley and your cohorts? Obviously you do not understand the meaning. The arrogance! You will fund the Yes case with my money to support your case, but refuse to allow me to use my money to support an opposing opinion.

There is a difference between bias and prejudice. Bias towards a way of thinking occurs when a person is presented with both sides of an argument. Prejudice occurs when only one side of an argument is presented.

Whether the decision to recycled is right or not, you and your cohorts are denying me my rights as an individual and a ratepayer.

The No side is entitled to have equal finance and equal representation to put its case forward to the citizens of Toowoomba.

You and your cohorts have shown total disrespect to the democratic process. You have shown total disrespect to me as an individual and a ratepayer by denying me my right to make a choice based on having both sides of the argument.

You should hang your heads in shame! In my opinion, you are unworthy to bear office because of your tactics. I shall remember you all come election time.

MW
Toowoomba


So, that would be another No vote.

It's funny how the Toowoomba City Council was presented with the perfect opportunity to show to the community that it was balanced in its approach to the referendum - grant equal funding to both the Yes and No cases and use a balanced referendum question.

However, with that obvious choice staring them in the face, Mayor Thorley and the other members of the 'sewer water six' chose the opposite course and merely alienated more voters.

(You could almost hear the recycled water companies cringe when that decision was made.)

And every time voters see an ad on TV as part of Mayor Thorley's $460,000 ratepayer-funded Yes campaign, they'll be reminded that it is their rates money which is being spent to 'educate' them.

Talk about giving a free kick to the opposition ...

Mayor Thorley - no more public comments ...

... but scheduled to speak at Sunshine Coast conference in June 2006.

Mayor Thorley has stated that she will make no further comments on water issues during the referendum period.

However, both she and Kevin Flanagan are scheduled to present papers at the Sustainable Water in the Urban Environment II conference on Monday 19 June 2006 at the University of the Sunshine Coast:

1.45-2.15pm - Kevin Flanagan - 'Water Supply Options for Toowoomba'.

2.15-2.45pm - Di Thorley - 'Being a leader is not always easy - a review of Toowoomba's water planning experience (and a peek into the future)'.

Source - Conference Program.

Mayor Thorley's attendance at this conference shows she has lied to the Toowoomba public once again. It also reaffirms her arrogance at not addressing the Toowoomba community's concerns ...

Referendum regulation ...

... tabled in State parliament this morning.

Read the Explanatory Memorandum.

Mayor Thorley will speak in Brisbane but not to the Toowoomba community ...

On 10 May 2006, Mayor Thorley was scheduled to talk about recycled water at Griffith University in Brisbane. Accompanying her was Alan Kleinschmidt.

Griffith University EcoCentre
Water: The Last Drop……

Wednesday 10th May [2006]

Presented by a panel with a wide range of expertise on water issues, the forum will address your questions about water recycling and the challenges surrounding this topic. The panel members include Mayor of Toowoomba and Manager Laboratory Services of Toowoomba City Council, Brisbane Water Manager and experts from Griffith University.

Source - Griffith University Ecocentre Calendar - 10 May 2006.

Once again, Mayor Thorley has exhibited her arrogance and contempt of the Toowoomba community by preferring to discuss water issues with people in other cities while ignoring requests for her to speak to the community in Toowoomba ...

Commerce Qld - Toowoomba City Council ...

... shuts shop on water shortage.

Strong comments from business representative group Commerce Qld on Mayor Thorley's latest tactics to force Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage.

Toowoomba City Council shuts shop on water shortage

Toowoomba City Council is attempting to wash its hands of water shortage issues, announcing the launch of the ‘yes’ campaign will be the last the community will hear from Council on the matter.

Commerce Queensland South West Regional Chairman, Ken Murphy, expressed his disbelief that Mayor Thorley could remove the responsibility for planning for the future of the city and investigating alternative water sources from Council.

"This is the most important matter currently on the agenda in Toowoomba and the surrounding region," Mr Murphy said.

"I’m shocked our Mayor wants to remain silent on the subject. This is simply not good enough."

Mr Murphy said Councillor Thorley had handed the issue to engineers and scientists, claiming politics have hijacked it.

"It is too important to be just passed over to the paid help," Mr Murphy said.

"This issue became political when the second term Thorley administration failed to plan for Toowoomba’s future; when Thorley’s Council voted to spend $460,000 of Ratepayers money promoting only the ‘yes’ case; and when Thorley’s Council refused to properly investigate viable alternatives."

Toowoomba residents are now being railroaded into a ‘yes’ decision on the Water Futures project, with the Council pushing the case for recycled water and dismissing other options in the lead up to the July Referendum.

"There are several viable alternatives which must take priority over the controversial Recycled Sewerage Water project," Mr Murphy said.

"Commerce Queensland calls on the Mayor to personally explain to the community why Council is jeopardising the City’s reputation and risking the region’s future when there are so many alternatives."

Why is it Dalby Town Council can bring 2,250MGL of water to Dalby for $10M, yet Toowoomba claims bringing 5,000MGL to Toowoomba will cost $150M? Further to this, a national engineering firm has costed the water swap alternative at less than half Toowoomba City’s exaggerated price.

In addition, the State Government has announced two new dams and associated water infrastructure to provide 235,000MGL. Toowoomba needs just 2 per cent of this amount.

Source - Commerce Qld Press Release - Toowoomba City Council shuts shop on water shortage - 22 May 2006.

Comments in State Parliament (MP Horan) - 9 May 2006 ...

Comments by MP Horan (Member for Toowoomba South) on the Toowoomba Water Futures project (emphasis added):

Mr Horan: The other thing that really annoyed me when I heard all these announcements was the plight of Toowoomba. Because the Premier is facing criticism for having done nothing for eight years and being anti-dams, all of a sudden the government goes to this big proposal which will affect so many people and one of the best farming areas of Queensland. As I said, it is going to cost about $2.5 [b]illion for resumptions for the dams, the pipelines, the pump stations, the lift gear and so forth in order to ship that water down towards Lake Wivenhoe and the Brisbane system.

When it came to Toowoomba, which sits on top of the range and only needs 5,000 megalitres a year extra on top of what we have now, and looking at the supplementary systems that could provide that to Toowoomba plus some growth, the Beattie government has said no to every single option. It has said no, no, no to everything that has come up, whether it is the 30,000 megalitres sustainable yield for Norwin underground suppliers; whether it is a system of managed weirs to catch the stormwater on Gowrie Creek at the back of the bacon factory where there are steep banks and a very short pump to Cooby Dam; whether it has been using the recycled water of Toowoomba for industrial purposes, parkland and sports field irrigation; whether it has been to use a smidgin of water from the Wivenhoe system or catchment and transferring that water from Wivenhoe to Cressbrook Dam where the infrastructure is already in existence to take it to Toowoomba; whether it is taking it along the existing pipeline that goes to Gatton and then on to Withcott and increasing the diameter of those pipes at the foot of the range and lifting it up to the existing reservoir at Picnic Point – that is treated water that goes through Gatton – or whether it be by putting the Emu Creek Dam in place, which is in the catchment of the Wivenhoe, so that Toowoomba can have some water out of that dam and the balance could go down to the Wivenhoe.

Bear in mind that the Wivenhoe Dam was built for two purposes: the [first] was a flood buffer for Brisbane and the second was to provide extra storage. The Wivenhoe Dam filled to the top will hold 2.2 million megalitres. It is only filed to one million megalitres. It is only filled to 48 per cent of its capacity. The balance is a vacuum that is kept there to protect Brisbane from any future floods of the ilk of the 1974 flood. If a dam was built on Emu Creek and if the government was so concerned not to lift Wivenhoe a little bit – and that would be a cheap way of holding extra water when it does rain – Emu Creek would hold 130,000 megalitres. It could be shared between Brisbane and Toowoomba, and that 130,000 megalitres would be additional to the one million megalitres that is held in Wivenhoe because that is the maximum they let it hold. That certainly was an option for us at Toowoomba.

The other option, of course, has been the coal seam methane water, which is progressing well for Chinchilla and Dalby. Both of those towns are going to take in the order of 1,000 megalitres of water. I have had a look at those mining operations. There is massive potential through that area and further out probably for hundreds of years. They bring the gas up. It is 50 per cent gas and 50 per cent water. It has what could be described as a relatively low salt content varying, depending on the particular well from 800 to 3,000 parts per million. The water is quite suitable for cows, trees and certain crops. With reverse osmosis they are going to use 1,000 megalitres at Chinchilla and a similar amount at Dalby. That water could certainly be pumped across to Oakey, for example, which takes a large amount of water from Toowoomba – and ultimately to Toowoomba. Instead our city is torn apart and ripped asunder by referendum and the debate about recycled water and whether it should go into the drinking supply. No-one else around Australia wants to do it. On the radio yesterday morning Premier Iemma said no to a recycled system they are introducing in the north-western suburbs of Sydney. It was a quite emphatic no. Because of health issues they will not be putting that into the drinking supply. Premier Beattie has said on TV here in Queensland that Brisbane will not be drinking recycled water. Just this morning we saw the minister sidestep the question when he was asked whether he agreed with Brisbane drinking recycled water or whether he agreed with the comments of Premier Iemma. He dodged the question. Normally he speaks for the full three minutes. I think he spoke about 15 seconds on that one and sat down.

That is the situation in which we are in Toowoomba. We see the government prepared to spend $2.5 billion and more on a sudden fix because it sees political problems. It absolutely deserts Toowoomba on the top of the range and leaves us to recycle the water into the drinking system – and all this to ensure that Brisbane does not have to do the same.

Source - Qld Parliamnent Hansard - 9 May 2006.

Comments in State Parliament (MP Hobbs) - 9 May 2006 ...

Comments by MP Hobbs (Shadow Minister for Local Government) on the Toowoomba Water Futures project (emphasis added):

Mr Hobbs: ... It's a crazy proposal. There are plenty of opportunities to use that water for other purposes. We accept that there is a water shortage in Toowoomba. But that town uses bores to water its parks and gardens. When we asked the mayor, 'Are you going to use those bores that water the parks and gardens for your town's water supply?', she said, 'No'. We asked, 'Why on earth not? Why would you not use that and use the recycled water for your parks and gardens as a first option?' She said, 'No we are not going to do that.' That is ridiculous. The whole thing is crazy.

...

Basically, Morris Iemma's view was that New South Wales was not going to have sewage recycled for drinking purposes because there has not been enough research undertaken into the matter. I think a lot more work needs to be done in relation to water development.

Source - Qld Parliament Hansard - 9 May 2006.

Comments in State Parliament (MP Hopper) - 9 May 2006 ...

Comments by MP Hopper (Member for Darling Downs) on the Toowoomba Water Futures project (emphasis added):

Mr Hopper: We have often heard the mayor of Toowoomba, Di Thorley, speak about Toowoomba being a city on top of a hill. That makes it very hard for that city to get water. We all know what is happening with the federal minister [sic], Malcolm Turnbull, announcing that there will be a vote on whether Toowoomba City Council will recycle water. I think the wording of the question that the people will vote on is extremely unfair. However, the majority of the council voted for that wording. I know that the council is going to put a lot of money into the campaign for the 'yes' vote. It is all right to recycle water, but you need water to recycle water. You cannot continually recycle water until you get more water. I believe the mayor has simply not looked at a lot of the other options as to where Toowoomba can get water.

I refer to the coal seam gas water that is used by gas drilling companies. For those members who do not realise this, I point out that when those companies drill down and hit gas in the Great Artesian Basin, the water comes to the surface with the gas. All that those companies want is the gas; the water is a by-product. There are companies out there with fine mist sprays that are evaporating thousands and thousands of megalitres of water into the air. That is a rape of the environment.

...

As I said earlier, I know that the mayor [Thorley] is not very interested in this coal seam gas water. Once I heard her say that it was too hard to clean the water. Only last week Dalby received an announcement from the federal government that it will put in a $10 million desalination plant and pipeline out to Arrow Energy, which is a coal seam gas company that is going to pump water up that will be sent to Dalby and put through a reverse osmosis plant. I know that some people think that Dalby is drinking Toowoomba's waste water through the Oakey Creek system. Dalby has a number of bores. Salty water is pumped out of this coal seam. It is put through a reverse osmosis plant which puts the salt into storage tanks. There will be a problem with the salt that we take out of the water. However, I know that the mayor [of Dalby] and the [Dalby] council are addressing that issue. The point I am making is that this water can be recycled.

Thousands of megalitres of water is being taken out of the ground by the Queensland Gas Company. Origin Energy has conducted drilling in that area and has found major strikes of water. Some of that water from those strikes is potable. It will be interesting to see if they check the wells that they will take the water from. The money that Toowoomba is going to put into this recycled toilet to tap - whatever you want to call it - drinking water would pay for the construction of that pipeline to Toowoomba. I think we should put pressure on those major companies that are drilling in that area.

I have talked to the Deputy Leader of the National Party, Jeff Seeney, about Emu Creek, which is located just north of Toowoomba, I would like to see a dam built on Emu Creek. It is a wonderful catchment. We have had from this government the wonderful proposal to build a dam at Gympie. If a dam was built on Emu Creek, it would involve resuming about four farms at the most. Some of that is absolutely mongrel country, but it would catch a great flow of water. That dam could be a fourth water supply for Toowoomba.

Source - Qld Parliament Hansard - 9 May 2006.

Think Fresh ...

and vote NO.

Vote for:

... a fresh review of water source options.

... a fresh approach to community consultation.

... a fresh Council.


Cost of Council's "think fresh" ad campaign: $460,000.
Cost of the fresh alternative - $0.
The look on Mayor Thorley's face - priceless!

Jondaryan shire - purple pipe go ahead ...

From WIN News:

PURPLE PIPE GO AHEAD
Water strategy

The Jondaryan shire council say it's implementing a water strategy that will help secure their water future for the next fifty to one hundred years.

A recent resident survey confirming a purple pipe, dual reticulation system is the most favoured option for the Jondaryan area.

Source - WIN News - Purple pipe go ahead.


Jondaryan shire has pre-empted Toowoomba's referendum on putting recycled sewage into the drinking water supply by advocating the dual pipe approach - to enable recycled sewage to be used for non-potable uses.

If Toowoomba proceeds with the Mayor's controversial recycled sewage project, expect any future growth to occur in the region surrounding Toowoomba - Jondaryan shire, the sections of Crows Nest shire which will not use the recycled sewage for drinking purposes and Cambooya Shire ...

Minister Palaszczuk - Toowoomba can get water from Traveston Dam ...

In State Parliament on 11 May 2006, the following comments were made in the context of discussion on why Toowoomba City Council elected not to become part of the new Water Commission:

Mr Seeney: ... When we look at the planning responsibility of this commission to deal with the water issue, it is obvious that some of the most likely scenarios for the solution that will eventually be found for the Toowoomba water supply situation will be to access some of the extra water storage or extra water opportunities that overlap the region covered by the Water Commission.

Mr Palaszczuk: From the Traveston Dam.

...

Mr Seeney: Yes, I know. The minister said, for the benefit of members who did not hear it, that Toowoomba could get water from Traveston Dam. I think the people of Toowoomba will be waiting a heck of a long time to get water from the Traveston Dam. I think there are a number of opportunities to build some water infrastructure in the area that is covered by the Water Commission - water infrastructure which can be delivered, unlike the absurd proposals put forward by the government, without any backing or any basis, that will allow water to be made available to the people of Toowoomba.

Source: Qld Parliament Hansard - 11 May 2006 - page 1743.


Now, if Toowoomba will be able to access water from Traveston Dam, as Minister Palaszczuk has stated, why is there any need to proceed with Mayor Thorley's controversial recycled sewage project?

The State Opposition opposes the construction of Traveston Dam, believing there are better locations. However, it is interesting that the Qld government is now saying that Toowoomba can source its water from one of the new dams ...

Why are other regions in Qld required to develop a regional approach ...

... while Toowoomba is allowed to go it alone?

From ABC News:

Councils urged to form water strategy

22 May 2006

The region's water body wants Townsville and Thuringowa councils to form a regional water strategy to win federal funding for their water recycling projects.

The councils are struggling to get funding to start up multi-million dollar effluent treatment plants to sell recycled water to industry.

NQ Water's chief executive, Ken Diehm, says the solution may be to sell the plants to NQ Water to develop.

He says if the cities do not act quickly, the state water commission will take control.

Mr Diehm says if NQ Water buys the water treatment plants from the councils, it would have a better chance of getting the projects developed.

"One of the complications that we currently have is both the state and federal governments' extreme reluctance to provide grants and subsidies for water and sewerage projects in this region until a regional water supply strategy has been developed," he said.

"So to be able to develop this strategy, there's a real benefit in terms of access to other forms of government funding and subsidies."

Source - ABC News - Councils urged to form water strategy.

Qld Coalition water policy ...

Read it here:

Source - Qld Coalition water policy.

Also - read the related Courier Mail article - Reward the water wise.

Stanthorpe looks to dams rather than recycled sewage ...

From ABC News:

Council doesn't want to lose dam funds to other proposals

22 May 2006

Stanthorpe Council says it would be disappointed if possible funding for a dam in its shire is swallowed up by two proposed storages in south-east Queensland.

The council has identified two possible sites for a dam that would provide water for the Granite Belt town.

The State Government plans to build one dam near Gympie and a second at either Rathdownie or Wyaralong.

Mayor Glen Rogers says it intends to approach the State Government for assistance when the council's proposal is completed.

"We'd certainly be very disappointed along with quite a number of other councillors west of the range if all of this money is being spent east of the range because we've got water issues west of the range," he said.

"Yes, it would concern us if, for example, we were to miss out on some of the assistance we would require because that money has gone to those new dams."

Source - ABC News - Council doesn't want to lose dam funds to other proposals.

Coming soon ...

4350water blog goes into Referendum mode ...

Mayor Thorley launches $460,000 Yes campaign ...

From WIN News:

Yes Campaign Launch

Council launches Water Futures "yes" campaign.

Toowoomba City Council has launched its "yes" campaign, two days after announcing a date for the referendum on the Water Futures Project.

A water taste testing day will be held, along with a number of community forums, to not only inform residents of the project, but also the current water situation.

See - $460,000 Yes campaign launched.

Let the propaganda war commence ...

Toowoomba referendum Regulation ...

... to be tabled in State parliament on 23 May 2006.

May be some interesting questions raised ...

Commerce Qld questions safety of recycled water ...

Latest press release by Commerce Qld.

See - Commerce Queensland calls for investigation into safety of drinking recycled water - 10 May 2006.

Commerce Qld calls for review of water supply options ...

Press release by Commerce Qld.

See - Review of water supply options required - 4 May 2006.

Purple pipes for recycled water in Jondaryan Shire ...

Jondaryan Shire press release:

Purple pipes for recycled water in Jondaryan Shire

15 May 2006

Purple pipes for Jondaryan Shire

Jondaryan Shire will provide treated recycled waste water for outside and non-drinking uses following a decision to introduce purple pipes into new housing estates.

The move is seen as an important contribution to making more efficient use of water supplies in the region.

Council at last Tuesday’s general meeting (May 9) decided to work with a local developer to install a dual reticulation system in a new 158 lot development at Boundary and Shoesmith Roads in Westbrook.

The system will comprise purple pipes for recycled water and conventional pipes for the drinking supply.

"This was an opportunity too good to miss to begin installation of dual reticulation systems in Jondaryan Shire. The longer we leave it, the more expensive it is to go back and lay purple pipes in existing developments," Mayor Peter Taylor said.

"All water currently supplied to households and industry is treated to drinking standard, but less than 15% is used for drinking or food processing. The supply of treated recycled water in purple pipes for non-drinking uses by residents will make an important contribution to ensuring long term sustainability of the region’s water reserves."

"With the costs of drinking water ever increasing, as well as the obvious shortage of the resource, it makes financial and environmental sense to have the 85% of our water supplies used for flushing toilets, watering gardens, mixing concrete and the like supplied in a separate pipe. This allows recycled water to be used without any of the fears some have in the community about drinking it."

The mayor said the installation of the purple pipes would be occurring ahead of the supply of recycled water which requires an upgrade to water treatment plants. However, there were considerable savings to council and developers in the laying of both sets of pipes together when trenches were dug for new estates and as houses are built and internal plumbing can easily be fitted.

"This was the approach taken by Gold Coast City Council in new estates in Pimpama, inspected by Jondaryan councillors in February, he said.

Jondaryan Shire requires rainwater tanks to be installed in new developments and is considering a rebate scheme for existing householders to install tanks.

It is also working towards the reintroduction of bore water if this becomes necessary, has applied for an artesian license and is discussing with larger industry users water reuse and the availability of their own bore supplies.

"I will continue to push for the formation of a regional water body supported by the newly formed State Water Commission so that all councils can help one another find the best solution to the immediate and longer term water shortages," Mayor Taylor said.

See - Jondaryan moves ahead with recycled sewage for non-potable use.

Yet another blog blasts Mayor Thorley ...

Another blog against Mayor Thorley's controversial recycled sewage project goes online - here.

It gives some indication of the level of discontent in the Toowoomba community that individuals are taking the time to voice their opinion online about the Mayor and her project.

Whether you agree with their arguments or not, one thing for sure is that they will be voting No on polling day ...

Game on ...

... for the Referendum showdown on recycled sewage for drinking.

The date for the Referendum has now been set - Saturday 29 July 2006.

See - Toowoomba City Council press release.

Expect Mayor Thorley to now commence spending $460,000 of ratepayers' money to try to convince Toowoomba residents to drink recycled sewage ...

Councillor Shelton - why I don't support Water Futures ...

Read Councillor Shelton's email to Stuart Khan and his response - here.

Councillor Shelton sets out the main reasons he does not support the Mayor's controversial recycled sewage project.

It makes interesting reading - all the more interesting because he was privy to all the Council meetings and is aware of the Mayor's shenanigans behind the scenes ...

Goulburn's views ...

... on the need for community acceptance of recycled sewage schemes.

See - Recycling plan will depend on residents.

Mayor Thorley - will she or won't she ...

There is a Community Water Meeting scheduled for Saturday 27 May.

It will be held at Harristown High School Hall at 2.00 pm.

It has been organised by CADS so that the community can have their say on using recycled sewage for drinking purposes.

Everyone is welcome to attend and have their say.

Mayor Thorley & all the Toowoomba City Council Councillors have been invited to attend as have other politicians.

The $460,000 question is whether Mayor Thorley will attend, address the audience and listen to the community's concerns.

This is an ideal opportunity for Mayor Thorley to face the community.

The Mayor has often spoken of the need for "political courage". Too often, she has travelled interstate and held discussions about her controversial recycled sewage project.

She now has the opportunity to tell the community the truth about the Water Futures project.

But does she have the courage to face the community she has ignored for the past 10 months and explain in her own words why the Toowoomba community needs to drink recycled sewage?

Will she or won't she ...

Fears won't wash - but honesty and transparency is needed ...

Comments in today's Courier Mail by Dr Stuart Khan from the Centre for Water and Waste Technology, University of New South Wales.

See - the opposing view.

Read the full article.

One of his comments is particularly relevant to Toowoomba:

"The single lingering impediment to recycled water may be our reluctance to overcome our deep-set fears.

This will require a degree of trust from the community towards scientists, regulators and public officials.

Trust is something that cannot be purchased, but must be earned. The means to earning trust involve honesty, transparency and a sincere opportunity to take part in decision-making."

Most people would agree that there is little or no trust in the Toowoomba City Council. The Council has been less than honest and transparent in its push to introduce the Mayor's controversial recycled sewage project. Toowoomba residents have been offered no opportunity to take part in decision making which will affect their future ...

State government regulation for the Referendum ...

Read the Local Government (Toowoomba Water Futures Poll) Regulation 2006 on the Qld Government's legislation website.

Taken for fools on effluent ...

From the Courier Mail:

'Taken for fools' on effluent

by Amanda Gearing

16 May 2006

Toowoomba residents are being treated like fools on the hill by Premier Peter Beattie because he is giving them no option but to drink recycled effluent while coastal residents get new dams, a Toowoomba city councillor says.

Outspoken councillor Lyle Shelton said: "If Peter Beattie will drink recycled sewage water at his Brisbane home, I'll happily drink it at my place."

Cr Shelton was one of three local councillors who withdrew their support for Mayor Dianne Thorley's controversial world-first scheme to add 5000Ml per year of recycled effluent, to make up a quarter of the city's drinking water.

Local Federal Member for Groom Ian Macfarlane and local state members Mike Horan, Stuart Copeland and Ray Hopper also withdrew support for the sewage-to-tap recycling proposal.

Opponents claim cheaper, safer options are being ignored including an offer of 10,000Ml/year from gasfields west of the city and 28,000Ml/year of drinking-quality bore water currently being used for irrigating cotton crops.

Toowoomba is part of the Condamine catchment, which uses 280,000Ml of surface and underground water a year for agriculture and town supplies.

Toowoomba city uses 15,000Ml of water a year, almost all from the neighbouring Moreton catchment where its two major dams are situated.

But Mr Beattie has backed Toowoomba City Council's recycling proposal as the first experiment in Australia to return recycled sewage into drinking water supplies which could be extended around the state.

In a letter to Cr Thorley, Mr Beattie said: "The results of this innovative pilot program will allow for the evaluation of indirect water recycling as an alternative water supply option throughout Queensland."

Cr Shelton said Mr Beattie was avoiding recycling sewage water for drinking in Brisbane and was proposing new dams despite strong community opposition.

"Maybe he knows something about the safety of recycled sewage for drinking that is being hidden from Toowoomba people," Cr Shelton said.

Cr Shelton said NSW Premier Morris Iemma had rejected recycled water for Sydney over unresolved health issues.

"We are being treated like fools up here on the hill."

See - the fools on the hill.


Any response, Mr Beattie ...

Mayor Thorley - do we have any more of our committees ...

... which will agree with me?

At the Toowoomba City Council Committee meetings scheduled this week, the Council will shock and amaze the entire Toowoomba population by announcing that Council's own Environmental Advisory Committee (headed by Councillor Englart and the members of which are selected by Council) has advised that it supports (no, strongly supports) the Water Futures project on environmental grounds.

The EAC believes, following presentations by Council employees, that:

1. The Water Futures project means that creeks will not be altered to build dams.

2. Recycling sewage is an efficient re-use of this resource.

3. Water Futures will reduce the salt load currently discharged into Gowrie Creek.

4. Water Futures will reduce greenhouse gases caused by pumping water long distances.

See - Council Committee meeting agenda - 16-17 May 2006.

Points 1-3 are equally satisfied by using the recycled sewage for non-potable uses.

It is worth noting that Council has still not confirmed that Acland Coal will take the RO waste stream. Expect $70 million in cost overruns (and 68 hectares of contaminated salt) if they don't.

Point 4 over-simplifies the issue. It ignores the greenhouse gases emitted by the Water Futures project.

Perhaps the EAC should also consider the following proposition:

It seems highly likely that a direct consequence of the introduction of recycled sewage into Toowoomba's water supply will be a dramatic increase in the consumption of bottled water.

How environmentally friendly is that?

In contrast to tap water, which is distributed through an energy-efficient infrastructure, transporting bottled water long distances involves burning vast quantities of fossil fuels. Nearly a quarter of all bottled water crossed national borders to reach consumers, transported by train, boat or truck. In 2004 for example, Nord Water of Finland bottled and shipped 1.4 million bottles of Finnish water 4,300 kilometers (2,700 miles) from its bottling plant in Helsinki to Saudi Arabia.

Fossil fuels are also used in the packaging of water. The most used plastic for making water bottles is polythene terephthalate (PTE), which is derived from crude oil. Making bottles to meet America’s demand for bottled water requires more than 1.5 million barrels of oil annually, enough to fuel some 100,000 US cars for a year Worldwide, some 2.7 million tonnes of plastic are used to bottle water each year.

After the water has been consumed, the plastic bottle must be disposed of. According to the Container Recycling Institute, 86% of plastic water bottles used in the United States become garbage or litter. Incinerating used bottles produces toxic waste such as chlorine gas and ash containing heavy metals. Buried plastic bottles can take up to 1,000 years to biodegrade. Almost 40% of the PET bottles that were deposited for recycling in the United States in 2004 were actually exported, sometimes to as far away as China – adding to the resources used by this product.

See - Hope Toowoomba environmental newsletter - April 2006.

Perhaps the EAC should have considered this before saying the Water Futures project will be a friend to the environment.

It's interesting that the Council has become quite secretive about the current membership of the EAC (appointed by the Council), stripping out all reference to the EAC on its revamped website.

Some of the EAC members were members of the now defunct Water Futures advisory panel.

Members of the EAC comprise:

- Environmental Groups (4)
- Community (2)
- Business (2)
- Education (2)
- Students (2)
- Councillors (2)
- Council Staff member (1)
- Secondary Students (2)

You can see a photo of some of the 2005 members here - 2005 EAC happy snap.

So, is this really an independent body saying the Mayor's controversial recycled sewage project is environmentally friendly or is it a Council appointed committee bowing to the wishes of Mayor Thorley?

Would any committee member be reappointed if they disagreed with the Mayor?

Just a thought ...

The things I'll do to get my project in ...

Thorley Water - the new taste for Toowoomba ...

Comments by Melbourne Water on potable reuse ....

Comments by Melbourne Water:

March 2006

"No single technology is foolproof, and potable reuse is not a silver bullet. It should be considered alongside other water conservation measures and alternative sources."

"New compounds are being invented and discovered every day and understanding the health implications of thousands of chemicals and emerging pathogens is an enormous and ongoing scientific challenge."

"Communities tend to turn to potable reuse only after other options for securing drinking water supplies have been exhausted."

"This is not the case for Melbourne", says Melita Stevens, Manager of Water Quality Research for Melbourne Water.

"There are many other things we would do before we would consider putting recycled effluent back into the supply," she says. "We don’t need now, or in the short or medium term, to turn to potable reuse."

"Melbourne draws most of its exceptionally high quality water from protected, forested catchments. Mixing this water with reclaimed, treated effluent would negate the purpose of having protected catchments."

See - The Source, Melbourne Water - March 2006.

Flanagan gets it wrong ...

As reported in today's Chronicle, Council's director of engineering services, Kevin Flanagan, claims that MP Macfarlane has "misinterpreted council's submission to the Federal Government for funding for Water Futures". Seems Mr Flanagan believes that any claims that Council would extend testing of the recycled sewage by three to five years came from MP Macfarlane's so-called "misinterpretation".

But is he right?

Here are some comments from the Chronicle on 4 October 2005:

"In a bid to ease community concern over the safety of drinking water that began its life as effluent, Member for Groom Ian Macfarlane and Mayor Dianne Thorley have jointly announced that the CSIRO will independently test the water for three to five years before bringing it on line for consumption."

"Cr Thorley yesterday sighed when asked if she was disappointed about the delayed timeline.

"Yep," she admitted, but added that if testing were needed to "get the project up", she fully supported it. "

So, rather than being a "misinterpretation" of the NWC application, it was actually an agreement between Mayor Thorley and MP Macfarlane.

Mr Flanagan should get his fact straight before talking to reporters.


Excerpt from the Chronicle - 13 May 2006:

13 May 2006

Timeframe for water testing up to 2 years

Toowoomba Council’s director of engineering services has moved to clarify the period of testing of water produced at the proposed sewage recycling plant.

Engineer Kevin Flanagan said it was always planned under Water Futures to test the water produced by the plant for a period of 12 to 24 months before allowing people to drink it but that it was possible that period could be extended.

Claims that the testing period would be extended for a period from three to five years arose after Member for Groom Ian Macfarlane’s misinterpreted council's submission to the Federal Government for funding for Water Futures.

“Our proposal, backed up by the CSIRO, is that we have 12 to 24 months’ testing which, from now, is three to five years time,” Mr Flanagan said.

Mr Macfarlane had no power to add time to the testing period.


And here is what was said before MP Macfarlane realised that much of what the Council had told him was incorrect:

Excerpt from the Chronicle - 4 October 2005:

Extra testing puts recycled water schedule back years

4 October 2005

NO-ONE will be drinking recycled wastewater until at least 2011 or 2012, three years after first proposed under Toowoomba City Councilís Water Futures project.

In a bid to ease community concern over the safety of drinking water that began its life as effluent, Member for Groom Ian Macfarlane and Mayor Dianne Thorley have jointly announced that the CSIRO will independently test the water for three to five years before bringing it on line for consumption.

This new element of the project was devised after prominent members of the community, including the Toowoomba Chamber of Commerce and Industry and developer Clive Berghofer, rang Mr Macfarlane and voiced their concerns about the perception that Toowoomba people would be guinea pigs for the nation.

Mr Macfarlane said that under the revised project, the recycled water would be pumped into Cooby Dam and tested by the CSIRO for at least three years, preferably five, before it was declared safe enough to be added to the regular water supply.

In the meantime, Toowoomba people would drink supplemented bore water from the Toowoomba basalts and Clarence-Moreton Basin.

Mr Macfarlane said the CSIRO recommended the extra testing as a way to garner community support by proving the safety of the water.

But he denied it was a "backflip".

"It needs to be proven here," Mr Macfarlane told media in his office yesterday. "The CSIRO wants to see it work and they'll test it three to five years before anyone has to drink it."

...

Cr Thorley yesterday sighed when asked if she was disappointed about the delayed timeline.
"Yep," she admitted, but added that if testing were needed to "get the project up", she fully supported it.

However, she said she thought it unlikely that people who had already made up their minds against the project would be swayed by any amount of research and testing.

See - 3-5 years testing agreed by Council.