Melbournes Water

Here is an article in Todays Age by Kenneth Davidson. Yet again our government is misrepresenting the facts to increase our water costs.
See Below.
Woof

Water policy direct from La La Land

Kenneth Davidson
March 13, 2008

Spurious Government projections point to a privatisation agenda.

THE Brumby Government's water policy is looking less and less sustainable every day. There are a range of options that are all cheaper and environmentally more sustainable than the Government's decision to build a $3.1 billion desalination plant at Wonthaggi, and the $1 billion north-south pipeline designed to divert water from the Goulburn reservoir to Melbourne Water.

The need to generate these additional supplies is based on water projections that are so flawed they border on the ludicrous, or the outright dishonest. The Government predicts a water supply crisis based on running a regression curve through the three drought years of 2004-2006, which shows the reservoirs that supply Melbourne drying up by 2010.

However, on the Government's own say so, the pipeline and the desalination plant will not begin delivering water until 2010 and 2011 respectively; but even if the plant is working by 2010 it wouldn't cover the shortfall projected by the Government.

Neil Rankin is the author of a recent and excellent supply/demand analysis of Melbourne's water until 2016. A science school teacher and member of the Kilcunda Your Water Your Say Action Group, Rankin writes that three years is far too short a period on which to base a long-term strategy, and would not be taken seriously by statisticians or scientific modellers. He might have added that when pap like the Government's predictions are used as the basis of policy to justify spending $4 billion dollars, one might have expected critical review by various government departments. But there hasn't been a word from the experts at Melbourne Water or the Department of Sustainability and Environment, from bureaucrats in the Department of Treasury and Finance, or from the Infrastructure Department. Clearly, the Victorian Government is in the middle of a dense forest in La La Land.

What this army of apologists for the financial engineers who have taken over the infrastructure priorities of this state — and are in the process of taking over the infrastructure priorities of the nation if the appointments to the national Infrastructure Board and the broadband inquiry are any guide — should have done is projected demand based on a 10-year rainfall regression that includes 2007 statistics.

It has taken a schoolteacher and a group of volunteers fighting to save their local environment to point out that the emperor of Spring Street and his retinue of advisers have no clothes on. In short, what this group has put together is a far more scientifically honest. and hence realistic, forecast, with 2007 levels of per capita consumption scaled for population increase and severe climate change. This shows that in 2016 the supply of water will be double the level of consumption.

Even if there was unrestricted consumption and a 25% increase in consumption above current levels, the excess of supply over consumption would still be about 60% in 2016.

The group that has put together these figures has been trying to see Water Minister Tim Holding for three weeks to discuss them. They want to see their analysis subjected to detailed examination and debate. They fear that if they send it to the minister it will be dismissed in a load of spin.

As readers of my recent columns discussing the alternatives to the desal plant and the north-south pipeline will appreciate, a lot of concerned people have been writing to Holding wanting to know why these alternatives have not been examined before the Government commits to what are arguably the worst alternatives available. Some of the ministerial replies have been passed on to me. They suggest the Government is determined to avoid sensible discussion of the alternatives.

The big question is: who prepared the shoddy projections on which the Government is basing its plans? It doesn't appear to be Melbourne Water. If Melbourne Water was involved then there is a complete disjuncture between the forecasts and Melbourne Water's operating and capital budget projections between 2008 and 2012.

The not-so-secret agenda of Labor governments across the country and the corporatised urban water authorities appears to be to find ways to increase the price of water as a prelude to setting up a water market leading to privatisation of water infrastructure.

The peak industry body is the Water Services Association of Australia. It is chaired by Dr Kerry Schott who has impeccable connections with Labor governments. She was appointed managing director of Sydney Water in 2006 from the position of deputy secretary of NSW Treasury. Before that she spent 15 years as an investment banker in the infrastructure area, including roles as managing director at Deutsche Bank and executive vice-president at Bankers Trust Australia.

If the Brumby Government really believed water was going to run out by 2010, rather than using the forecasts as an excuse to set up a couple of dodgy public-private partnerships that won't be ready in time, it would already have instituted a crash program in conservation, water harvesting, recycling, rolling out of rainwater tanks and maintaining draconian water restrictions to meet the crisis.

It isn't. Because it knows its projections don't hold water. It can't be long before voters know this too.

John Howard

John Howard has jumped out of his box. He has done it over seas and in what could only be called friendly company. I have been wondering where he went after he lost the last election and finally it was declared he had lost his seat too.
This is the man who was the miracle PM he had managed to survive for 11 years in the top job. Well when he came down he came crashing down. You would of thought he may of learnt a thing or two after his loss. But no, out he comes with support for his old policies and reasons for not saying SORRY to the Aboriginals. He still thinks signing Kyoto was a mistake.
Why we ever let this man run our country during such important times, I cannot understand. Even his own party is disowning him as fast as they can. He can't understand that either.
I'm sure that if he was to say the things he is saying in America over here, he would be roundly criticised.
Woof

Melbourne Grand Prix

If you say it fast enough it can sound like a male appendage. And that is what it is and always has been. We supposedly won it from Adelaide. Plonked it in a sensitive street-scape, infuriated the local population, including the business owners, who initially thought it was going to be a financial bonanza, only to find themselves locked in and the punters all left their area and partied elsewhere.

All in all it has cost the state of Victoria a bucket load of money. Now running at around 30 plus million a year. The attendances have dropped, but we are not allowed to know by how much cause the organiser can manipulate the figures. They even count all the drivers as attendees.

The main winner is Bernie Eccelstone, he amasses his fortune running the F1 circuit. He appears to be a very greedy man. This now reflects in the way the F1 circuit is run.

The Melbourne grand prix has to renew it's license by the year 2010, and to win a further term it needs to allow night racing. Which of course would further infuriate the local population.

I believe most Melbournians have had enough of this polluting rich mans hobby, and will lobby their government to not sign up for another 10 years. Lets hope so.
Here is an article on this subject.
Woof.

Sorry

13th February 2008. Today the Australian Parliament said SORRY to the STOLEN GENERATIONS. of Aborigines.
Well done, about bloody time. Hopefully now we can build on that appology and start the long road that will bring equality to all Australians.
Woof x
Rudd says Sorry.

Hark Ye Hark Ye Bloggers Unite

A message for all you bloggers who think they can write here is a message from Vi

It is all in a good cause, see below. So give it a go.

Woof

The delightful Sarah Peach has come up with a fab idea.

We are going to publish our own blog book of short stories! She's not doing it all alone, she's recruited myself, Ms Robinson, Ariel and Sarah from He loves me not.

Blogland is such a fantastic place, where we can write down things that have gone on with our lives, and find all these amazing people out there, who, like us, have a story to tell. And the beauty of blogging, is meeting others like ourselves, or even totally different but still connect and we've sort of created our own 'internet families'.

Sometimes I wish I could have my computer in bed with me to read the stories. But I'm afraid, I'd fall asleep drooling all over it, then blowing it up.

So it would be great to read it all in a book!

The only problem is, I'm gonna be reading all the stories before they go in the book! But hey, the rest of you will enjoy it I'm sure!

The title of the book is 'You're not the only one'. (Since you aren't, there are so many of us out there!)

We are inviting you to write a story to go into the book. It's quite broad, it can be from your children, relationships, illness, work, whatever. Or even how blogging has changed your life somehow, making you understand things about yourself that you didn't know before (cause, I reckon blogging is really apart of therapy!) We are looking for humourous, or moving, or inspirational. (or all of the above!)

Here are the guidelines....

• Submit stories that have not been published outside blogland. A piece from your own blog is fine, but nothing published previously in hard copy.



• Maximum words is 1500. The shorter, the better, as there will be more chance of it getting published.



• You must be a blogger and have a live blog. It's open to all countries.



• It must be about something you've been through personally. Amusing or serious, whatever style you like.



• You can submit in your blogname and remain anonymous if you like.



• If you intend to submit, then it would be great if you pimped this on your blog. The more coverage, the more submissions, the more chance of the book to sell.



• All entries are to be sent in to bloggersforcharity@yahoo.co.uk



• All entries must be in by the 29th February 2008.

Oh, and we aren't doing this to make money you know.

All this hard sweat and tears is for a reason. The charity we have chosen is War Child. It's an international charity, since it's going to be an international blog book. We are publishing through http://www.lulu.com/ . There is no upfront fee, but Lulu takes £4.70 per book sold if we make it no longer than 200 pages. We are pricing the book at £9 so £4.30 goes straight to charity.

Because we can't go anymore than 200 pages, not all submissions may be added. But give it your best shot! No bribing will be taken (unless, of course, one of you can magically bring my Chief back from the war to me!)

I'm really excited about this, and I hope you are too. Even if you aren't interested in submitting, it would be great if you could plug us on your blog, and pass the word.

Oh, and if you would like to use the 'war child' logo on my side bar, in your blog (or on a post yourself) please feel free to save it and use it.

In support of War Child, registered with the Charity Commission no. 1071659

Ancient Greeks

I believe that from way back the Ancient Greeks would of have thought about the cycle of nature and how we fit into it. Whether I am correct in that believe or not, it doesn't seem that strange that we put 2 and 2 together and made 4, and when it comes to what you sow you reap. Got the picture?

So it follows that if you start using something that you dig up from the ground you might work out over time, how it got there, and how you might replace it.

Carbon is an amazing element. It effectively absorbs the sunlight and we get to release it either within a few years or as in the case of Oil, Coal, and Gas millions of years later. We have been pulling Carbon out of the ground for at least a hundred years, and long before that, we cut down trees to burn. We must of known early on how these deposits of Carbon had been saved for our use. We may not of known how to replace them exactly as they are found, but we could work out how to save something similar. Trees are an obvious choice, however now we are really wanting to replenish our used energy store, we are going directly to the sorce i.e. solar.

If we had used the principle of what you sow you reap, we should of been finding ways of replenishing our energy use for the last 50 years. I wonder how many other things we are missing out on, just because we can't think out side the consumption box.

Woof.

Port Phillip Bay

Melbourne is situated within a bay Called Port Phillip Bay . It has become a place where Melbournians swim, fish and play water sports. The Yarra river runs into the bay and when Melbourne was being established in the latter part of the 19th century a port was established on the river and fed by ships coming through Port Phillip bay. It has been described as a 19th or twentieth century port, but not suitable for the 21st century and beyond.

There are alternative places that could serve Melbourne and Victoria as a deep-water port. One being Western Port bay which is a deep water bay. Which is literally just around the corner. [See Port Phillip Bay link above] It has towns along the foreshore that could be developed into port cities. In fact a proposal to make Hastings a port was floated back in the 1960s.

As it is, we are just about to embark on a billion dollar dredging exercise, to create a deep water shipping channel for the new generation container ships. Even with a number of environmental impact studies and Federal Government approval, there is a ground swell of opposition.

The Premier [Mr Brumby] supports the recommendations, but I think he is missing the point. That being, that Port Phillip bay is used in a very different way to a century ago. The people of Melbourne don't want their bay side polluted by dredging up a 100 years of toxic waste and sludge. Even the main users of the Port of Melbourne [shipping companies] are not unanimous in their support for the billion dollar dredging.

I think, yet again, it is a case of the experts told them so, so therefore we will do as they say.

There are many ways to skin a cat, and putting a deep water port in a deep water bay may be the best way to go. As long as we insist on using heavy rail to cart the containers to distribution points around Victoria it should work well.

So honk your ships horn if you think we should send a message to Mr Brumby.

Oh and by the way, I have read that our former Federal treasurer Peter Costello, who jumped after the last general election. Has been offered an eight figure annual income to work for the Macquarie bank. I wonder, if his often kind support for their take over plans has anything to do with that. A bit like the former Premier of NSW Bob Carr getting a decent wedge from Mac Bank when he retired from politics.
Woof.

Back on your Bike

A new year and at last I'm climbing out of my holiday/xmas/hot summer hibernation.

Over the xmas hols the state government here in Victoria decided to ban Bicycles on trains during the morning rush hour period. This is despite the relevant transport minister being supposedly in favour of bikes as a means of transport.
Of late the public transport system is being used more, due in part to a hike in petrol costs and also the greater awareness of Global warming. This has meant that the railway carriages have been full in the mornings as commuters get to work. Some travellers want to use public transport in conjunction with their bikes. So here is the rub, busy train, person gets on with bike, potential for conflict.
The transport minister had a couple of options, one was to restrict the carrying of bikes on trains. The other was to make arrangements for an extra carriage during the morning rush hour to accommodate the extra patronage, including people with bikes.
He chose the first, I don't know why, perhaps cause the government no longer run the railways and their contracts with the private operator is locked into so many carriages. Who knows? All I can say is there will be many more commuters with their varying needs in the not so distant future. The government should look forward with enlightenment not put their collective head in the sand and behave like they have.
Woof.

Water in Victoria

Below is an Article from The Age newspaper today outlining the problem with the current water plan.

Woof.

Utilities are wasting our precious water

ACCORDING to conventional wisdom, Victoria's government-owned or regulated institutions are frantically conserving water for a growing economy in a record drought.

The canard concludes that we need a $3.1 billion desalination plant.

In reality, Victorians are saving lots of water but the responsible utilities waste it faster.

The desalination plant is intended to serve Melbourne but its Wonthaggi location demands an extraordinary 85-kilometre pumping system to deliver the water.

The plant will consume enough electricity to run a town and produce an estimated 1 million tonnes of atmospheric carbon each year. It will be greenwashed by robbing every iota of wind energy now produced in Victoria.

The desalination plant is designed to produce 150 gigalitres — 150 billion litres — of drinking water each year. It will extract about 400 gigalitres of sea water and return about 250 gigalitres in a plume of concentrated brine. Each day the plant will also produce about three semi-trailer loads of contaminated salt for burial.

Consumers will foot the bill, but the plant's public institutional proponents are not compelled to reciprocate with innovation or accountability. Discarded water volumes could potentially double planned water augmentation without going near a desalination plant.

For example, 116 gigalitres of drinking water is used to cool Latrobe Valley electricity generators each year, when sea water or air coolers could provide alternative solutions.

The Melbourne Water Corporation sends almost 300 gigalitres of partially treated waste water into Bass Strait each year even though the water could be recycled for Melbourne's industry belts. Discarding this treated water is akin to sending all of Melbourne's bottles, cans, papers and cardboard to landfill instead of recycling them.

It is thinking that belongs to the era when the Yarra was a sewer and the Maribyrnong River flowed red beyond the meatworks.

In Melbourne, rainfall run-off is channelled straight into the Yarra and Port Phillip Bay, wasting more than 200 gigalitres each year.

Melbourne's water retailers rigorously enforce household water restrictions, yet the water companies themselves are losing nearly 50 gigalitres of drinking water each year. Last year, Yarra Valley Water lost about 22 gigalitres but still advertises itself in a monopoly market.

In Bendigo, the state education office recently wasted 2½ million litres of water from a leaking pipe. This equalled nearly 10% of daily water consumption for Bendigo and surrounding townships.

Meanwhile, ordinary consumers shower with buckets while their gardens wilt and water prices rise.

An elderly Sydney gardener is alleged to have been killed recently in the first case of "water rage". Shocking, but hardly surprising, because the tension is all being focused on consumers.

Some influential water industry leaders are now predicting that the proposed desalination plant and the new Goulburn Valley pipeline will leave Melbourne awash with expensive drinking water.

Even Victoria's utilities regulator has flagged the potential glut. The Essential Services Commission recently questioned a proposal to introduce a "fourth tier" pricing escalation, saying "such a strong disincentive to use water may be questioned".

The desalination plant will be built as a public-private partnership and its owners will pay about a third more interest on their loans compared with government borrowings. The cost of operation and investment return could reach $500 million a year, in a contract that would typically bind taxpayers for 30 years or more.

Such contracts usually operate on a take-or-pay basis. The owners might even demand compensation if water consumption is reduced by government strategies, and this will see new and spurious justifications for buying water.

Desalination costs will rise as arid nations compete for expertise, and as Victoria fights a bidding war with the oil kingdoms of the Middle East. Foreign water corporations will be drooling at the prospect.

The desalination decision was made by former State Government leaders apparently seduced by big spending rather than big thinking around demand management.

Ironically, Australians are highly amenable to the cultural shifts demanded by the climate crisis. A recent Lowy Institute survey showed that 92% of Australians want to see the climate change tackled seriously and almost 70% of Australians are accepting of the necessary investment. If provided with knowledge rather than propaganda, Victorians are capable of embracing a strategy that better captures rainfall, reduces squandering by utilities and provides industry with an option to use recycled water.

In the interim, Victorians should take a leisurely drive to Wonthaggi and prepare for the delight of a lifetime as they crest the gentle hill at Kilcunda. Here, the drab grazing land gives way to a seascape that is simply glorious. From 2009 that scene will be violated by bulldozers building a de facto carbon factory.

It is an ecological blasphemy that will plague us for a lifetime.

Tony Cutcliffe is a director of policy forum and consultancy The Eureka Project.

Economists

Economists have a lot to answer for. Over the past decade here in Australia, our governments of both persuasions have tried to sell off everything that was owned by the people. They have also encouraged the population 'To Go For Growth' As the Liberal party ran as one of it's election slogans said.

The answer to the economists dream is to have a bigger population, consuming more products, while travelling as many kilometres as humanly possible on or in whatever carbon guzzling machine is most appropriate.

Now as we are being told by scientist from around the world in one large collective voice we have to become green and lean. Buy local is the new slogan, we have known this for ever and a day. Not economists they have asked us to buy global. Allow Brazilian farmers to sell us their orange juice, no matter that it puts our farmers out of business, if they can't compete then they shouldn't be in the market place.

In fact the whole emphasis has been to consume more of just about everything, except maybe water and that is because we have had a drought for 10 years. I'm sure it was the economists that told the state governments that it didn't matter that they would have to double the price of water, building a desalination plant [the biggest in the Southern Hemisphere] was an economic miracle. Because governments tend to believe 'Experts' and 'Experts' have said build it.

We need to clean out this current mob of economists and money men. They will be the ruination of us all. Even Carbon is worth trading in. Don't for a minute think it will make an once of difference to our carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It will become another piece of paper to trade and make wealthy financiers wealthier.

I wonder which economist told the airlines of the world it makes economic sense to fly twice as many flights around the world some at such low costs per passenger it wouldn't even cover the pilots drinks tab. I read recently that a flight from Australia to Europe is equal in carbon consumption to an average Australian household for two and half years.

Scientist will finally win these debates about carbon and renewable energy. But not before a handful of economists will cost as billions in lost opportunities to be Lean and Green.
Woof.