recycled drinking water...........

Make no mistake, Toowoomba will never "run out of water"! There are many alternatives, including bore water. The great "recycled waste water" scam, put up by Mayor Thorley and a few of her toadies, at a cost to the Toowoomba ratepayer of almost $500,000.00 ( the "no" case received not one cent) was a blatant attempt to be the "first" in Australia.

The only other municipality in the world using Thorley's preferred system is Singapore, where 1%, yes one percent of waste water is recycled into the island city's water reticulation system. Thorley's model for Toowoomba was based on 25% recycling.

Politicians of all colors at local, state and federal levels over the last thirty years, spooked by what turned out to be an impotent "Green movement" should be held responsible for the water problems in this country.

Thank heavens common sense has prevailed in Toowoomba.

I think many people in the garden city need to get their head out of the sand. The thing is water recycling is already happening in SEQ, including Brisvegas. Do you honestly think that water from dams is piped straight to your tap without treatment?

Common sense is not that comon, particulalry in Toowoomba it seems.

We have just returned from Toowoomba just before the referendum and we were shocked by the number of "no" campaigners who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. As my wife is a senior engineering consultant in Water, we have a relatively good understanding of all the processes involved :-)

I was shocked to see that several of the "no" campaigners didn't even know how reverse osmosis works, considering they were promoting a "desal" option instead!!

As for funding both side of a campaign, who in their right mind would give money to their "opposition" to fund their campaign? And Clive didn't give one cent to the cause??

You are quite entitled to have an opinion on such an important matter, just don't misrepresent the truth. At the end of the day, Toowoomba has voted no.....good to see democracy in action.

Andrew

"As for funding both side of a campaign, who in their right mind would give money to their "opposition" to fund their campaign? And Clive didn't give one cent to the cause??"

If Thorley led a democratic council, of which three councilors were opposed to recycling sewerage, surely funding for the "no" case would have been automatic!

Of course Clive helped fund the no campaign, and why shouldn't he? As a former (and very popular) Mayor and State member he has every right to.

If this scheme had gone ahead, the Toowoomba city council would have been hit with a $150 million class action from irrigators downstream on Oakey creek who rely on the current outflow from Toowoomba. Thorley or whoever is Mayor would have been tied up in the law court for years. She knew that, but didn't factor that amount, plus legals, into her costings!

I'm not misrepresenting the truth, mate! I'm a local, with a vital interest in the outcome. Going by some of the opinions on this thread, recycling sewerage is no big deal. That's just fine! But be possessed of ALL the facts before you mouth off.

Toowoomba voted no to recycled sewerage because we were lied to, and it simply is NOT necessary! There are alternatives!

Don't accuse me of "mouthing off" and not knowing the facts. My statement was factual, and if you read it again, you will see that i did not represent any side of the issue.

To add heresay like class action threats into a campaign is silly to say the least......there is no requirement to provide treated effluent back into Gowrie Creek and ultimately the Murray Darling System. Water is not taken from the MDS, and is therefore not required to ultimately end up back in Gowrie Creek. How can one factor in a cost for legal proceedings into any cost BEFORE they have started legal action. Wouldn't this be considered some form of acceptance of guilt?

There was no requirement to provide funding to a no campaign as a "majority" of Council were in favour of it......therefore Council had no requirement to go this far. The reason for the referendum was that it was a requirement to gain NWI funding (1/3 Federal, 1/3 State, 1/3 LG cost sharing). As for your statement in regard to the Mayor, and a democratic council, correct me if am wrong.....isn't 3 No's and 6 Yes's a clear majority for Council to proceed with any decision made at a Council meeting.

Of course there are alternatives, and by necessity (to gain NWI and SG consideration of funding) TCC did have to consider these.

BTW it is not recycled sewerage! Obviously another person who doesn't understand the whole process involved in a WWTP. It is "recycled water" we are talking about here, obtained from treating "wastewater", which includes commercial/industrial wasterwater (where permitted) and "sewage" all collected through the "sewerage system".

The problem seems to be the lack of education in understanding the process (this is understandable, as an engineering/science is 3-4 years and even then it take several years of wastewater industry practice to fully appreciate this field). This is one of the main reasons why SEQ will have their referendum in 2008, to give people like yourself, more time to be educated in the process.

You can relax for now, as it will be some time before the issue floats to the surface again :-)

Andrew

"You can relax for now, as it will be some time before the issue floats to the surface again :-)" About the only thing I agree with you on!

I'm very relaxed! And delighted that the "no" case won the day with what in federal electin terms would be called a landslide.

And please be assured, the "threat of legal action" was certainly not heresay!

Stupid is as stupid does , would seem that the No voters of Toowoomba cant even get a simlpe fact into there tiny brains ,where does your sewage water go right now ? downstream and the people of Dalby ect drink it ,,,ohhh my festival of flowers is TOO important to conserve water or to use recycled ,,wait when YOU are totaly out and have to rely on the stinking bore ,no visitors then .

=="About the only thing I agree with you on! "==

So you don't agree on:

- Why the referendum was required
- The lovely stuff is NOT called sewerage
- A 6-3 vote is a majority
- there is no requirement to provide effluent back into Gowrie Creek
- to gain NWI and SG consideration of funding) TCC did have to consider these (alternatives)

Don't ya just love debates.....brings out the best and worst in people :-) I understand your reasoning even though i don't agree with some of them personally. Let's just hope it rains over cooby and perso/cressbrook catchments sometime real soon to quell more than just the need for water ;-)

Alloy c/t, your comments seem to me to be from someone who is not either a local or someone without intimate knowledge of the processes being debated. No voters are not stupid.......i believe some have been misinformed or weren't fully aware of the processes involved to make an educated decision. The campaign by the Council was not an education based process, rather it was seen as a threat to those who are not necessarily involved in the water industry and delivering such an essential service.

The fact is that the "no" campaign was successful on the day (or was it that the "yes" campaign was unsuccessful :-)) no matter what people believe in.

A note for all those children out there: "If you want to persue a career after school, it may be smart to choose an profession in the water industry. Water Engineers/specialists are highly sort after and will be for some time" :-)

Andrew

Traveller

You are a complete unmitagated liar viz:

"The only other municipality in the world using Thorley's preferred system is Singapore, where 1%, yes one percent of waste water is recycled into the island city's water reticulation system. Thorley's model for Toowoomba was based on 25% recycling. "

Whwn we were in England in 1997 there was an article in one of London's papers describing the water treatment syatem. The statement was made that London's water is recycled on average 7 1/2 times. The rest of Europe also runs on recycled water. Anyone who has has been to Europe has either drunk or cleaned their teeth in recycled water.

You dangerous uneducated types are going to cost this country heaps.

PeterD

And a very good evening to you too, unmitigated ......!
You're entitled to your opinion. I'm sticking with mine!
And so are over 61.5% of my fellow "dangerously uneducated" Toowoomba ratepayers.
By all means slurp on what you will, mate. Just don't presume to tell us what to do. We've already decided!

Agree with you there Mike...to a point. It seems we accept failure of the system and don't get to concerned about raw sewage in the waterways. The analogy I'd like to use is at the moment we treat (parden the pun) our sewage system like a car - just an inconvenience if it breaks down.....maybe its time to treat it as though its a plane....

In one of his books. Tim Flannery called Australian cities transfer stations transfering our nutrients from our already depleated land to the sea. From what I have seen of this country so far, I can't argue with that. We have to get a bit smarter soon.

Cheers Andrew

Mike

When a sewerage system breaks down they know it has done so but have to keep pumping. If a recycling system breaks down they also will know – so they will simply pump the output to where the old sewerage system was pumping to – result – we still have pottable water.

PeterD

Fair comment and i agree.

Dave.

Thank GOD someone has bought this up.... ALL THE WATER ON THE PLANET IS RECYCLED.....Where do these people think water comes from? Made at a factory somewhere?
Ask the people who live in Adelaide, Woomera etc where do they get their water from?
I think the people of Goulburn would kill at the moment to get their waste water recycled instead of having to go without a decent shower or having to limit their consumption to 25 liters each a day...
Naaaaaaaa some ill informed voters in Toowoomba. The "no jobby lobby" held the day & the consequences will now be on their heads. Watch them scream like stuck pigs when the water rates rise $20 a week....

Two heads might be what got those Queensland Kangaroo's splattered. Too bust looking at each other to watch the road!!

Geoff.

Try, "Too busy looking at each other"

Geoff.

Muzz,
For several decades, Toowoomba's treated effluent has been and still is used by irrigators, and it is what assures them of a reliable, consistent water supply...
This was one of the issues in the re-cycling debate...

The water is already being re-cycled, and as it should be!!

Good to hear that. Here in Perth, as most other places, it is a man made resorce which is not only wasted, but pumped into the ocean.

Also here in perth, there are several pumping stations along the Swan river. If there is a blackout and the pumping station stops, the overflow goes straight into the river!! This is RAW sewerage !!!

Anyhow, at least yours is being used for something other than adding more nutrients and polutants into the ocean and waterways.

And not only that - Co-cola were bottling it and selling it at inflated prices.

PeterD

==Where does the sewage plant from Crows Nest go?==

The wastewater treatment plant discharge is described on the Shire's website:

=================================================
The majority of properties throughout the Shire use septic systems or self contained treatment systems. In Town of Crows Nest, septic tanks are connected to a Common Effluent Drainage (C.E.D.) system that collects the greywater and septic tank effluent from each property and is pumped to a treatment facility. After a period of processing through aerobic lagoons, the water is used for the irrigation of the Crows Nest Golf Course.

The Highfields Waste Water Treatment Plant was constructed in Browne Road, Highfields in 1999. It provides for new urban residential development in the north west section of Highfields up to a population of 2,500. The plant has the potential for expansion to allow for a future population of 10,000. Effluent from this treatment plant is re-used for irrigation of agricultural land.
=================================================

Not many new treatment plant discharge into waterways these days as EPA regulations etc make it more economical to irrigate golf courses, race courses, agricultural land etc. Also, effluent discharge needs to have a perennial watercourse available to ensure that it meets all requirements.

Andrew

The Queensland electorate resoundingly rejected daylight saving because we don't need it!

Toowoomba ratepayers resoundingly rejected recycled sewerage because we don't need it!

Toowoomba's Mayor Thorley confirmed this morning on local ABC radio that "Toowoomba will be sustained on bore water into the future"! Pity she hadn't admitted this a few months ago and saved ratepayers half a mill and an unnecessary, divisive campaign.

Spare us the patronizing tripe about faded curtains!

Excuss my ignorance but where is all this bore water going to come from? most of the bore's already in use are shallow for surface water that relies on rainfall, the other bore's are drilled into the artesian basin where Toowoomba had to receive special permission to access as taking water from the basin is strictly goverened, due to the fact that it is running dry, farmers are not even allowed to drill more wells to access this water, so what gives Toowoomba the right to use this resorce? Will they just keep drillng, and pumping water from bores till there is none left?

I still don't see the analogy between daylight savings and water reuse! Daylight savings would affect the whole state with communities affected differently (some communities were highly supported of the idea, some communities just hated it). Water reuse in Toowoomba would only affect a localised area, as it didn't even get much of a mention up in north Qld (except the statements in regard to burdekin dam).

It is not recycled sewerage, it is not even recycled sewage....it is recycled water :-)

Andrew

Had no idea that comments from a resident (albeit obviously poorly educated compared to some) of the city of Toowoomba, who happened to vote no along with 61.5% of his fellow residents, could generate such derision! Smacks of that old "sore loser" syndrome.

Get over it!

I have!

The connection to daylight savings is that back in the daylight savings introduction phase, a story went around Qld that DS would result in your curtains fading. I think fear of recycled water is oin about the same par. We are all going to have to get used to it. Too many people and not enough reliable water for the population centres. Why are non Qlders interested? Toowomba is seen as a decision we are all (outside of Tassie) going to have to make. Underground water is not a long term option. Water pressure is falling significantly across the basins.
Look at Alice Springs. Yep they have great underground water, but it costs a rapidly rising packet to pump it up. Each year the extra depth raises the cost exponentially. AS is only viable because there is natural gas down the road to run the power station that pumps up the water. In about 10 years, that gas is due to run out. I wonder what it will cost the rest of Australia to keep AS viable? Or if the rest of Australia is prepared to pay the price. But does AS have water restrictions of any kind? Nope.
I think Toowoomba's Mayor should be congratulated and a lot of other towns will be going down the same track.

=="Smacks of that old "sore loser" syndrome"==

I'm not sure where that statement is derived from.......In no way have i slammed the "no" vote and their desire to look at alternatives. In fact i have stated that it is great to see democracy in action with regards to this referendum.......in the end the Council's campaign was not upheld.

Get over the name calling attitude, as i have always tried to convey the facts i know, without assumptions thrown into the conversation. I would hope you could return the courtesy.

Andrew

There now Andrew, don't be so precious. Who said I was referring to you? There are plenty of other contributions to this thread.

And i thought we were all alone in this thread :-)

At the end of the day, there was no real winner.......just a messy debate that will take some time to analyse. Time restraints aside, it would have been good to see a similar referendum after more time for educating householders, a well-conducted public consultation process, numerous more reports including EIS's, feasibility, cost-benefit statements, etc etc. However the process was somewhat rushed, and has made a lot of people mad, others confused, whilst there are a large number of the City who now have a better understanding of what happens to water and its' current treatment processes.......i would say that this is a good thing in itself. Water reduction strategies are one of the best ways for all consumers to guarantee water supply into the future. IMO, $500000 is a relative cheap way to further reduce the consumption of this essential commodity. Complacency/naiveness is part of our society and it is becoming harder to convince mass communities to change their beliefs which have been formed and passed down through generations.

Cheers :-)

Andrew

Robert

If a recycling system breaks down the operators know – so they will simply pump the output to where the old sewerage system was pumping to – result – we still have potable water.

PeterD