sorry, only just say you looking for me on the other thread.

I’m afraid my reply here is going to be a bit of a squib. Recalling the dark dim past of when I commented here on recylced water, at the time I was working in the thick of that policy area. I’ve since shifted jobs & policy areas completely (from env’l policy with a focus on water to now working in multicultural affairs) and it’s making it a bit hard for me to remember. Crucially, I’m no longer getting the information streams relevant to this area that I was, and the science and evidence is pretty dynamic for recycled water.

So FWIW, my personal position on recycled water is that it’s a good thing *if* we can focus not only on having ‘cleaning systems’ for it that are capable of handling the vast, diverse and increasingly un-studied and sophisticated substances that make their way into the water cycle courtesy of us; *and* we also focus on commensurately reducing those wastes & byproducts.

Basically humans now produce about 100,000 chemicals that haven’t been tested individually for their impacts, nor in combination to ascertain what they do long-term to our health and environmental health. Where that intersects with recycling water is being able to design methods that can adequately remove them all from the water stream. A good example that comes to mind right now is that the EU is in the process of banning / phasing out yet another range of chemicals because they are endocrine disruptors and/or also cause gender distortions (or more accurately sex distortions- ie I don’t think male fish start thinking they are a woman, I think they change sex!). Many of these chemicals have been considered benign, and therefore aren’t necessarily examined as markers for the success of water cleaning systems etc. for recycling. So you have a nexus between what we regard as toxic and therefore screen for (in both senses), what is toxic but we don’t screen for, and whether our water cleaning systems can adequately cope.

If you go to systems that utterly ‘clean’ recycled water to try & remove everything, well you’ll be left with basically distilled water, which means you remove a valuable source of micronutrients including minerals that people need for their health (remember why we added flouride to water); and adding them back in afterwards is expensive and well, silly.

IMHO, if we want to be able to recycle water, which would be a good aim, we need to radically clean up our polluting and wasteful ways, that are heavily reliant on using our water cycle as a waste sink. One possible solution might be household level recycling systems (drink your own poo!), but that means trusting householders to maintain them – a favourite nightmare of public health officials – and also doesn’t preclude the things we eat & excrete that aren’t particulalry good for you either & may prove challenging to remove at a cost-effective level.

Disclaimer: this ain’t my field no more.

I’d be hesitant to predict any sort of Labor wins north of Noosa…(because of ..(eg) the lack of a noticable reaction from Brisbane (about) water problems in Cloncurry, where they’ve basically run out)

Oh ye of little faith in pork barrelling before an election … the goodness of heart, generosity of spirit, and selflessness of service on the part of the Queensland branch of the ALP Government: All you had to do was ask, clearly Anna reads LP, and right on cue She:

.. announced Sunwater would build the pipeline at a cost of $42.5 million. The 38-kilometre pipeline will pump up to 1500 megalitres of water from Ernest Henry Mine to (Cloncurry) town storage annually…. It will be up and running between July and September next year.

In the meantime water will be hauled in for $400,000 a month. There’s an encumbent Labor Member, she inherited an extremely safe seat, and knows how to work the electoral room after doing three terms in local council before being Tony McGrady’s electoral officer. McGrady must have set some sort of record for being on the democracratic representative payroll, from 1973 to 2006 in way role or another, so Ms Kiernan has learnt from a parish pump expert, even including a stint as a Mt Isa mines, now Xstrata, PR officer. MInd you the the Mt Isa lead-poisoned families vs Xstrata court case, which may expose a coverup, with council an state gov’t complicity, could test Betty’s PR skills, but she’s got herslf on the “Living with Lead” PR damage control comittee executive, along with reps from all the other likely careless-of-duty culprits, the mine, the council, qld health, and the epa. It appears the problem was known about from back in the 80′s, and got sat on.

I wouldn’t p*** on the bugger if he was on fire – saving it for the lemon tree. It’s a drought, you know.

The CM scribblers (Craig Johnstone, Robert MacDonald and Steven Wardill) adopted an annoying and I think quite reprehensible sneering tone. They don’t appear to understand that before the State Government took a hand the provision of water was a local government responsibility. After giving the thing a shake, planning infrastructure out to 2050, finding and committing $9 billion dollars for the necessary urgent works and then bringing the projects in on time and on budget deserves no credit, it seems. The latter is just something that happened.

Setting up the Qld Water Commission was also, I think, a good initiative. I’m also of the opinion that they do a good job, and that includes Elizabeth Nosworthy as chair.

Anyway this is what I think happened.

In 2007 the QWS suggested 40% as the trigger point before adding PRW (purified recycled water) to the dams. But recently they have been talking about the notion of operating the facility full time. It is more efficient that way and you retain the skills and protocols rather than having to crank them up from time to time.

Meanwhile there was some negative stirring in the media, firstly I think from a professor who was substantively a town planner, and then some worrying stuff from a microbiologist who in truth probably didn’t know much about water purification. Surveys showed declining popular support, from 70% down to 56% and there hadn’t even been a decent scare campaign yet.

Paul Williams (Griffith) reckons that Bligh wanted the trigger reduced to 30%, which would take the issue out of play for a late 2009 election. She didn’t get it, he reckons because the QWS decided to show some balls in the face of Springborg’s criticism that they lacked independence.

The QWS haven’t given a reason, but I guess they compromised on their preferred position because they lacked political support and were doing their own polling of public views.

I’ve been reading their Draft SEQ Water Strategy, downloadable from here. Frankly, the amounts to be gained from PRW are far from trivial (more in the first instance than from Traveston Stage 1) and it’s cheaper than either desalination or tankwater.

Another advantage is that it is environmentally friendly. The tons of phosphorous put into Moreton Bay are quite significant and, btw, the world is running out of phosphorus from traditional sources for making things like fertilizer.

So the less crap we put in the Bay the better. I’m grateful that QWS has for now held the line and demonstrated why some things should not be decided by politicians.

Recycled water is first treated in Advanced Water Treatment Plants where purification processes include micro-filtration, reverse osmosis, advanced oxidation and ultraviolet disinfection. The reservoir or aquifer then acts as an environmental buffer during the time water is stored, allowing natural mixing and treatment processes to continue.

mitchell, I can’t find myriad’s comment either, but the above quote is from the National Water Commission’s Recycled Water Fact Sheet.

The issued a Media statement today urging consideration of recycled water, no doubt in response to the kerfuffle in Qld.

There is more information on their site especially the material prepared by Jenifer Simpson.

The NWC make the point that downstream communities draw on the effluent of upstream communities all over the world. On local radio here yesterday Dr Karl said it was perfectly OK and said that recycled water is better than rainwater, citing for example acid content found in rain in the US and Europe.

Penny Wong announced today that there will be $20 million for a new water-recycling research centre in Brisbane (prospective host institutions have until February to apply). An opportunity to get rid of the remaining bugs, so to speak?

Of course, if they come cap in hand with a wad of dough, then all bets are off, but I’d be very surprised if the three Labor seats up here would be considered safe at the moment. If they’re going out early then they’d better be cashed up to appeal to the mindset of the local knuckle scrapers.