Remove this Banner Ad

Water Conservation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fossie 32
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Fossie 32

Fossie 32

Community Leader
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2025 Song Contest Winner - 5+ Rounds 30k Posts Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2024 Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2024 Veteran Sweet F.A Sikh Volunteers Charity Match Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2023
Joined
Oct 6, 2002
Posts
32,134
Reaction score
27,191
Location
1300GODOGS
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Melbourne..VICTORY, Leeds
Why don't the govt charge more per litre used? [And less for access fees etc]. Surely that would help conserve water and be a fairer system?

Afraid of backlash from industry?
 
I refuse to save water when so much of it is wasted by business, the govt and Melbourne Water.

FFS just last week it was reported than Melbourne Water lost 30 billion litres in the latest in their long list of **** ups.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/down-the-gurgler/story-e6frf7jo-1225786418597

I'm supposed to take a 2 minute ****ing shower and let my garden wither and die whilst they incompetently manage what water we have left.

Methinks not.
 
Plenty here - http://www.lakeargyle.com.au/statistics

According to the Diamond mine site -

Argyle's environmental management programme includes a range of projects to prevent, minimise, mitigate or remediate environmental impacts. The program encompasses functions such as:
  • Conservation of natural resources to promote efficient use of water and energy.
Is it true they use the same amount of water in a week cleaning diamonds as the population of Sydney uses for drinking?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Kim Hagdorn said:
I try to save water but it's ridiculous when you see councils having their sprinklers blazing when it's raining :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Maybe there could be a system where councils, water boards etc have to pay for what they use too.
 
Fossie 32 said:
Why don't the govt charge more per litre used? [And less for access fees etc]. Surely that would help conserve water and be a fairer system?

Afraid of backlash from industry?
Click to expand...

Agree. The last bill I got was the final straw. They can get stuffed, Im watering when I feel like it.

260 dollar water bill with just over 70 in water use.

Top incentive.
 
Forget about saving water.

They should stop importing people in to such a fragile biosystem.

The problem is economic, not environmental.
 
theGimp said:
Agree. The last bill I got was the final straw. They can get stuffed, Im watering when I feel like it.

260 dollar water bill with just over 70 in water use.

Top incentive.
Click to expand...

You will be paying for the air you breathe soon enough.

What will you do then? Whinge about the bill?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

We're on a planet that is what? 70% water? Water supply should never be a problem.

Build a heap of desalination plants and charge water appropriately.

How about - your first x litres (based on your household size) is included in your council rates. Over that you pay for desalinated water at the market rate.

It quite simple really.
 
Desalination isn't without its problems though. Pumping highly concentrated, high temperature saline back into the ocean is effectively pumping toxic waste into the oceans, it can cause a lot of environmental problems. And then there's the enrgy problems too, until we start generting huge quantities of clean energy then these desal plants are have a huge carbon footprint. I'm not against desal as a concept but the current plans do seem to be being pushed through with foolhardy haste.
 
bit_pattern said:
Desalination isn't without its problems though. Pumping highly concentrated, high temperature saline back into the ocean is effectively pumping toxic waste into the oceans, it can cause a lot of environmental problems. And then there's the enrgy problems too, until we start generting huge quantities of clean energy then these desal plants are have a huge carbon footprint. I'm not against desal as a concept but the current plans do seem to be being pushed through with foolhardy haste.
Click to expand...

Build reactors with them so they can churn out fresh water at will, pump some back to the cities and some into the center of the continent and grow a forrest in the desert.
 
Fossie 32 said:
Why don't the govt charge more per litre used? [And less for access fees etc]. Surely that would help conserve water and be a fairer system?

Afraid of backlash from industry?
Click to expand...

And backlash for agriculture; primarily the cotton, citrus, wine, meat and dairy industry and any other produce we aren't geographically suited be cultivating on mass.
 
I daresay the problem is that water isn't appropriately priced. The problem exists in epidemic proportions in the US, which at least in general has a lot more water, but it is ridiculously cheap. People don't simply don't pay a 'market' price for water, especially in arid areas like Arizona and California. If they did, I don't think we'd see the proliferation of golf courses and green lawns in the middle of the desert like have sprung up lately.

Meanwhile, those aquifers are just drying up with not enough water to replenish them, and the less said about the Colorado River, the better.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Yeah, the SW is going to be utterly ****ed within 50 years. Definitely the most vulnerable region in the States to the ravages of climate change.
 
Water should definitely be more expensive. Regardless of sprinkler bans etc. if it costs 50c to run your garden hose for an hour then people aren't going to realistically value water as a resource.

What staggers me is Perth (the poster city for urban sprawl - big blocks, single storey 4 x 2's etc.) receives plenty of rainfall (on average around 150mm more per year than Melbourne) and more sunshine than most places on the planet and yet there are no requirements for new dwellings to have solar panels or water tanks...
 
likka said:
I refuse to save water when so much of it is wasted by business, the govt and Melbourne Water.
Click to expand...

Worked at a Nickel smelter for a while where they installed a waterless urinal, it had a note on it boasting that this saves x amount a water a year and is good for the environment. Some smart ass wrote underneath 'why don't we all go down to the flash furnace and take a piss then?'.

He seriously had a point though, they would waste enough water in one day to supply at least a 1000 toilets for a year.
 
Imagine how much water they could tap into on earth with that money spent on the moon. Idiots.
 
Yup, coal smelters....mmmm. Desalination is good for us :D

Would love to see new housing developments etc forced to be more environmentally friendly (solar panels, water tanks, insulation etc) but can't see it happening with the urban planners wanting to cram more people in as little space as possible with the new development.

As for charging for water usage, imagine the outcry from the voters if Kevin of Double Bay with a pool, spa & can afford to water his garden 3hrs a night whilst Bogan Westie of Blacktown can't afford to water his once a week (you get the drift).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom