Tomorrow a truck will deliver to Goulburn enough for every household in the Goulburn district.

Later this month every household in Toowoomba and surrounding shires will receive a copy.

Before March 17 nearly one million households in south east Queensland will receive a copy.

You may not agree with the content but that doesn't matter. Someone has to debate it.

We are really tired of conflicting advice. Sort it out between yourselves.

Let's get the whole safety / technology / guidelines / human error issue debated nationally and internationally by experts before we move on to the social, economic and environmental and water privatisation issues surrounding potable reuse.

You should have left Toowoomba out of it, shouldn't you?

(bX-vjhbsj means hit refreshh a couple of times - ask blogspot why - seems like every few months on most blogs)

Source  http://www.waterfutures.blogspot.com/

Mayor Thorley's project has gone from being a $68 million pipe dream to a $198 million nightmare.

From WIN News last evening:

Councillors to put forward motion

1 February 2007

In a major announcement tonight, Toowoomba councillors will put forward a motion to reinstate the water recycling project rejected in the Water Futures referendum.

This is despite recommendations from the city's Water Taskforce, that support the State Government pledge for a Wivenhoe pipeline.

See - WIN News - Thorley attempts resurrection of biblical proportions.

Just when you thought you had seen it all in the world of Toowoomba local government politics, there's one more surprise.

Mayor Thorley has decided to override the vote of 62% of Toowoomba's voters to try to force her ill-conceived and ill-fated recycled water plant back on Toowoomba.

Not to mention forcing it back onto neighbouring shires which take water from Toowoomba.

Forget that the project would most likely have bankrupted the city.

Forget that the State government says it's dead as a dodo.

This is Thorley world - where reality and her perspective on it seldom meet.

We all know that she still controls the Council chamber and can pass any resolution she wants.

But imagine the public outcry if she decides to pass a resolution to try to revive the recycled water project.

Now she has $22 million in the budget for Water Futures related spending. But, with State government funding off the table and Federal funding unlikely in the wake of the July 2006 referendum, it looks like Mayor Thorley will have to look elsewhere for funding - perhaps CH2M Hill would like to pony up the difference.

And what a difference it will be.

Mayor Thorley's main claim on why Water Futures should proceed is that it is the cheapest option.

But is it (and was it ever the cheapest)?

In the Council's NWC funding application, the cost was ball parked at $68 million (assuming no evaporation ponds were required).

No-one has ever confirmed these numbers. In the Parsons Brinkerhoff review of several water source options, they ASSUMED the Council's numbers were accurate and just added 10% on top.

So no-one has ever independently verified the cost of the recycled water plant proposal.

Mayor Thorley says $68 million (or $73 million with 10% loaded on top).

What might others say?

Let's see:

Assuming the numbers ARE accurate (big assumption!) and no evaporation ponds are required (also big assumption!), figure cost increases of around 20% per annum since the Water Futures numbers were ballparked.

(In the current construction and commodities boom, this is not unrealistic. Premier Beattie admitted to the Federal government in his recent request for $400 million for his recycled water project that he had NO idea what it would end up costing).

So that's just under $98 million (20% p.a. compounded).

Doesn't look so cheap anymore. And costs continue to increase (as Premier Beattie is finding out).

But wait, there's more.

We've assumed that the $68 million cost estimate was accurate. Most likely it was not. Mayor Thorley and Mr Flanagan were at pains to ensure that these costs were never independently verified. Why? What were they hiding?

And then there's the RO waste stream. Acland Coal may want something but have never committed to taking the RO waste stream. Any consultant preparing cost estimates would never assume they would. The evaporation pond cost was estimated at $70 million. Apply the 20% per annum cost increase and that comes to just over $100 million.

So Mayor Thorley's project has gone from being a $68 million pipe dream to a $198 million nightmare.

But wait, there's more.

Where will the money come from?

An amount of $22 million has been reserved in the Council budget for Water Futures related projects. So let's assume she gets her hands on that amount.

That leaves $76 million (without evaporation ponds) and $176 million (with evaporation ponds) to be found somewhere.

Now Toowoomba City Council has around $50 million in debt on its balance sheet (2005 figures). So that would mean more than doubling the city's debt to $126 million (without evaporation ponds) and more than quadrupling the debt to $226 million (with evaporation ponds).

Where will the funds come from?

Normally the Council borrows its funds from the Qld Investment Corp (QIC) at reasonable interest rates.

But if the State government says NO to Mayor Thorley reviving her recycled water project, it seems unlikely that QIC will provide funding.

It also seems unlikely that the Federal government will provide funding given the July 2006 poll result and the failure to comply with the other conditions set out in its conditional funding approval.

So that means outside funding (beginning to sound like the Khemlani Federal Labor loans affair of the 1970s isn't it?).

Meanwhile the clock is ticking on the next Council election, 62% of Toowoomba voters disagree with her and the irrigators who will lose their water under her scheme become madder than all heck.

And just how silly is Mayor Thorley going to look when her Water Futures project is properly costed and found to be far more expensive than she claims?

Get the picture ...

Minister ANNA BLIGH told Mayor Thorley that a Separate water treatment plant for Toowoomba unlikely

Tuesday, 30 January 2007. 11:44 (AEST) ABC Online

http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/qld/toowoomba/200701/s1836211.htm

Separate water treatment plant for Toowoomba unlikely

The Queensland Government says it is unlikely a separate treatment plant will be built to provide Toowoomba with its own recycled drinking water.

The Government will add recycled water to Wivenhoe Dam late next year, and Toowoomba will be connected to the dam as part of the south-east water grid.

Residents last year rejected a council plan to add recycled water to the city's own dams.

Infrastructure Minister Anna Bligh says it is unlikely that plan will be resurrected.

"The decision in relation to Toowoomba isn't just about costs, it's about long-term water security," she said.

"If you're connected to the Wivenhoe-Somerset system, then your water supplies are guaranteed into the future as part of the water grid.

"That was really the major thinking behind our decision in relation to Toowoomba."

Water from sewage not safe enough Professor Don Bursill said there were too many risks attached to the practice for it to be introduced here.

THE Adelaide scientist who developed Australia's drinking water guidelines says he would not drink recycled sewage and would not back its use.

The former SA Water chief scientist, who in 2004 oversaw a review of national drinking water guidelines and who was last week recognised in the Australia Day honours for his contribution to water quality research, says the technology that would make recycled sewage suitable for drinking already exists, but he is not confident we have the back-up systems to ensure it stays safe.

"You can turn anything wet into drinking water if you have enough money," he said yesterday. "To really ensure it is safe would cost a tremendous amount. This is one bloke who isn't going to drink it."

Professor Bursill, who in retirement is the chairman of the Torrens Taskforce charged with solving chronic water quality problems in the urban river, says while it is possible to produce safe drinking water from waste water, present systems are not adequate to cover the risk of bacterial contamination.

"The risk is orders of magnitude higher than when dealing with conventional sources," he said.

He says we should buy more River Murray water from the eastern states, and keep recycled water for irrigation and industrial use.

Adelaide already recycles just over 20 per cent of its treated effluent. Major uses include irrigation on the northern Adelaide Plain and on vineyards near Willunga.

Queensland's Premier Peter Beattie yesterday said his hand was forced on recycled drinking water because Brisbane's Wivenhoe Dam was now at 20 per cent capacity.

THE Adelaide scientist who developed Australia's drinking water guidelines says he would not drink recycled sewage and would not back its use.

Please mummy tell Mr Peter Beattie that drinking sewerage water will make me sick and I might die.

Please mummy tell Mr Peter Beattie that drinking sewerage water will make me sick and I might die. Even if I go to hospital I won’t be able to get away from the bad water cause when I shower it will get in my body by skin absortsion.

The boss of Queensalnd has no right to shorten my life. Iam only 5year old my name is Jay I live in Brisbane but  I’am frightened I wont get to 10

 

Peter Beattie Hilter Style Tactics

05:49, 2007-Jan-28 .. 0 comments .. Link

 Beattie signals you will be soon drinking from water that oringinally flushed number 2's

Peter Beattie doesn't care about asking you the people what you want by ordering the drinking of recycled sewage effluent for the people of Brisbane & south east Queensland Peter Beattie's my way, you have no choice is nothing less than the same as Adolf HILTER  actions.

Will this be a holocaust of people dying from infections bourne from virus's in the sewer water he want's to pump into Brisbane's and south east Queensland water supply, truely toilet to tap water with no 100 % guarantee of safe water?

If you don't want to drink it go buy bottled water Mayor says www.thorley.blogspot.com

09:10, 2006-Dec-10 .. 1 comments .. Link

Click on to go www.thorley.blogspot.com  thorleys web site if you don't want to drink it go buy bottled water. What she is talking about is drinking from a sewerage treatment plant source. That's right the source of water to be recycled is not from a bore or river or dam but from a sewerage treatment plant that's the primary initial source they want to filter from a very unclean source to start from full of dangerous viruses toxins chemicals and god knows what else. WHY can't they recycled from a cleaner water source with less risk?? no brains you think?

Listen to the threat yourself from a public offical the deputy Mayor of Toowoomba Joe Ramia

05:03, 2006-Dec-9 .. 4 comments .. Link

here is the full threat from Joe Ramia double click on yellow words to listen to Ramia's abuse and threats. (500kb mp3)  to a Toowoomba resident made on white ribbon day voilence and abuse against women this recording was left on Mrs Rosemary Morley answering machine by Deputy mayor Joe Ramia. DO you think this behaviour is ok by a elected official please coment YES or NO

Peter Beattie wants you to drink from this source SEWER EFFLUENT

09:30, 2006-Dec-9 .. 1 comments .. Link

Brisbane and South East Queensland are being told to drink water sourced from recyled sewer effluent.

Premier Peter Beattie says he will conduct a Poll on 17th March 2007.

What he and the government are not telling you is the RISK of virus's over 100,000 of them not being exracted/filtered out of the Reverse Omosis and Ultra Violate process. In fact unknown organic substances and virus's still get through and end up in your drinking water.

Toowoomba Mayor Di Thorley states her council has no accountability on accurate costs.

09:14, 2006-Dec-9 .. 1 comments .. Link

From the Toowoomba Chronicle page 9 December 6 2006

Mayor Thorley said in Council Chambers "If you've come to council to see accurate costs, you've come to the wrong place, Cr Manners," to which Cr Manners replied "Isuggest it's time for change"

Their eyes met with in a fixed stare, with a silent pause. "Don't you think?" Cr Manners added.

Bloggers comment: Gee I wonder if this costing applied to the water futures prices they "The yes Case" put forward?

COLD STARES EXCHANGED full story Toowoomba Chronicle page 9 December 6 2006

Cold stare s were exchanged between Toowoomba Mayor Dianne Thorley and newcomer Snow Manners across the council table yesterday. The issue was a concrete slab to be laid as a permenent stage in the Queens park amphitheatre.

Innitally, Cr Sue Englart grappled with the proposed size of 26 meters long 14 meters deep by 750mm high, which would be capable of withstanding loads of up to 20 tonnes.

The Australian Gospel Music Festival (AGMF) offered to pay $5000 a year to the council as long as the group could use the amphitheatre as it's main stage. While Cr Thorley raised concerns about existin drainage problems in the amphitheatre, and the effects the concrete slab would have, Cr Manners homed in on the accuracy of the costs $200,000 (plus or minus 25%) Cr Thorley defended the staff estimate, saying it had to be accurate when considering it's inclusion in the 10 year Capital works plan. The 10 year plan has been likened to bloodletting as councillor's battle to juggle the budget and still ensure pet projects remain on the council radar as future works. "If you've come to council to see accurate costs, you've come to the wrong place, Cr Manners," the mayor said to which Cr Manners replied "I suggest it's time for change"he retorted. Their eyes met with in a fixed stare, with a silent pause. "Don't you think?" Cr Manners added. There wasn't a reply. The issue was deferred.

 

{ Last Page } { Page 1 of 9 } { Next Page }