PM considers funding for Qld waste water pipe

Queensland has asked for money for water recycling infrastructure. (File photo) (ABC TV)

I have been watching this story and wondering when the Queensland Government would get around to the paperwork.
In the past few days here in QLD, Australia, we have huge tracts of land in the West and North that have been in drought for up to 10 years (Thanks to global warming and climate change)? that are now under water! Many flooded areas have not even had rain!
Secondly the Federal Government is going to take over management of the whole Murray Darling river basin. This watershed covers about 2/3 of all the Eastern states, and drains from as far north as Central QLD all the way through to South Australia. (Everything west of the Great Dividing Range!!) There are huge envioronmental problems in the South, and wastage of water , but it has been a political minefield due to the involvement of 6 different states and territories.
Thirdly, The Queensland State government had abandoned a referendum about whether re-cycled water should be used in drinking supplies. With the entire SE corner of the state within 12-18 months of running out of water, and opinion Polls (Supposedly) running 75% in favor, they are just going to do it.

So the polititions in our end of the world must be in election mode... I don't care, at least they are MOVING!

The following is from ABC On-Line (Again!!)

The Prime Minister's office says the Queensland Government's request for $408 million to help fund a waste water pipeline will be given "due consideration".

The 200-kilometre pipeline will take recycled water from Brisbane to Wivenhoe Dam and power stations.

For months, the State Government has been criticising the Commonwealth for failing to provide any money for the project.

But incoming federal Environment and Water Minister Malcolm Turnbull has blamed Queensland for the delay, saying it has not provided the necessary paperwork.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister has confirmed a 52-page application for funding has now been received and is being examined.

Fluoridation

Meanwhile, Queensland Premier Peter Beattie says fluoridation has not been considered in the State Government's water plans for the south-east of the state.

The Government is building a dam, a desalination plant and pipelines to link-up communities in the south-east to one big water grid.

Residents will be forced to accept recycled drinking supplies if there is no major rain, with treated waste water to start flowing into the region's dams at the end of next year.

But Mr Beattie says there are no plans at this stage to go beyond the incentives the Government offers to councils to voluntarily fluoridate water.

"We've been encouraging councils and at this moment that's our policy," he said.

"There's no change unless all the councils come to us and ask for fluoridation, we'd leave it as it is.

"We're not going to mandate it as part of this recycled drinking water program."

Mr Beattie says the drought is so bad that there is no choice but to introduce recycled water. [File photo]

Last Update: Sunday, January 28, 2007. 10:26pm (AEDT)

Mr Beattie says the drought is so bad that there is no choice but to introduce recycled water. [File photo] (ABC TV )

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie says other Australian cities will one day follow his state's lead and drink recycled water.

Mr Beattie had promised to give south-east Queenslanders a vote on adding recycled water to drinking supplies as normal practice.

They were heading to the polls in March but Mr Beattie has now scrapped the $10 million plebiscite.

He says the drought is so bad, there is no other choice.

"We're not God, we couldn't make it rain," he said.

New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma and South Australian Premier Mike Rann today ruled out the use of recycled effluent in homes for the immediate future.

But Mr Beattie says he believes other cities will face the same predicament.

"People are going to have to make the same decision in Sydney and Melbourne, whether they like it or not," he said.

Recycled water will not be available in Queensland until late 2008, when a pipeline is built.

State Opposition Leader Bruce Flegg says the race is now on "as to whether we run out of water first or they get the infrastructure built first".

Dr Flegg says it is shaping up as a photo finish

Water restrictions to remain despite recycled supplies

ABC ONLINE - Last Update: Monday, January 29, 2007. 9:04am (AEDT)

The Queensland Government has warned water restrictions in the south-east of the state could be in place for another 10 years, even with the introduction of recycled supplies.

With the plebiscite on recycled drinking water scrapped and if current low rainfall trends continue, the Government will start pumping recycled water into the region's dams late next year.

The Opposition says the plebiscite was a farce and it is pleased it has been abandoned, as are many mayors.

Greg Hoffman from the Local Government Association says polls were showing 75 per cent of residents were planning to vote yes anyway.

"The plebiscite would have been redundant really," he said.

Even when the recycled water comes on line, Infrastructure Minister Anna Bligh warns that does not necessarily mean restrictions can be lifted.

"[There] could possibly be emergency circumstances for some five or six years after we start putting this water into the dam," she said.

Ms Bligh says without decent rain, it could take 10 years before the dams are back up to 40 per cent capacity.

Treatment process 'rigorous'

Meanwhile, Premier Peter Beattie has warned against any "scare-mongering" over recycled water, insisting it is safe to drink.

Mr Beattie says recycled water poses no health risks and is consumed in cities like London and Washington.

Ms Bligh says the treatment process is rigorous.

"The technology that will be used to treat this water is a combination of what's called microfiltration and ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis," she said.

"The water will go through six or seven steps of treatment before it goes into the dam and then, like all the other water in the dam, will go through further treatment before it comes through our taps."

Also, the State Opposition is predicting the race to introduce recycled water before drinking supplies run out will go down to the wire.

Liberal leader Bruce Flegg says it is a precarious situation.

"We have here a race that's coming down the line as a photo finish as to whether we run out of water or get some piece of infrastructure finished on time," he said.

But Ms Bligh says construction is moving as quickly as possible.

Food exports

Farmers have rejected suggestions that using recycled water could harm south-east Queensland's food export industry.

Developer and former Toowoomba mayor Clive Berghofer says Japanese buyers will not import product that has been washed in recycled water.

Mark Panitz, from the peak horticulture group Growcom, has dismissed the argument and says the claims are not helpful.

"Some particular buyers may be sensitive, but that's why food safety systems are in place, so we can guarantee our consumers and our buyers - wherever they are around the world - that our product is really pure and very safe," he said.

States called on to act on water recycling

This is the first of a series of post I intend to do regarding the effects of global warming on our little corner of the world. I will look at the impact on the Ozone layer and the hole to our south, the potential of rising sea levels, (which will effect many other nations far more, as I sit on top of a mountain range...) politics, and temperature and rainfall patterns. This was in todays news, and I thought was a good trigger to start. I have about 6 done, but am still working on the first couple.

Watch this space...

Last Update: Tuesday, January 2, 2007. 2:29pm (AEDT)

Weather: 2006 was the 3rd driest year for Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane (file photo). (ABC TV )

The Federal Government has used the latest climate figures to reiterate calls for state governments to act on water recycling.

Preliminary figures from the Bureau of Meteorology's national climate report show 2006 was Australia's 9th warmest year on record.

The parliamentary secretary for the environment, Greg Hunt, says the figures also show there was above average rainfall overall, but not in the biggest cities.

"It's been the third driest year in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane - the south-east catchments," he said.

"So that's quite significant. It's consistent with the bureau's long-term trend that there will be more rain in the north, but less rain in the south and south-east."

Mr Hunt says that has implications for state governments.

"There's no longer any acceptance of dumping recyclable water off our coast," he said.

"National recycling schemes, major recycling schemes in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria are a priority for industry and agriculture, there's just no question about that."

The full report is due for release tomorrow.

Psychology of food, ... Well DUH

I found this post by Sandra Kiume, and I hsd to share it with you. What a facsinating description of what we all knew. Still we now know it is true...

Though many people are concerned about overeating and obesity, usually it’s in the context of intentional bingeing and grazing. The Cornell University Food and Brand Lab, however, studies the unintentional overeating that contributes to obesity.

Often it’s about perception, and marketers who exploit those psychological mechanisms. For example, people eat more of and report more satisfaction with menu items that have long descriptions instead of simple names (chocolate cake vs. a name like Belgian extra dark chocolate mousse layer cake).

There’s the club store curse, which leads to overeating when food is stockpiled. Also, large package sizes increase consumption by an average 22%, while large movie popcorn buckets led people to eat 45% more even when the popcorn was 10-days-old stale.

A visual illusion (vertical-horizontal illusion) causes people to pour more liquid into a short wide glass than a tall thin one - something to remember at your New Years Eve party.

Of course, while unknowing overeating can have negative effects, the same principles can be applied to increase consumption of healthier foods.

Nuclear debate

Wel I will admit I cannot see a lot of viable alternatives to nuclear power in the context of greenhouse emmissions over time, But it is interesting that this whole debate is raging in public at the exact same time that the parliament is in a protracted and controversial debate on allowing embryonic cloning...

The following excerpts are quoted from the (Australian) ABC from Mon 6th Nov.

To start with the PM supported Nuclear power as "an option...

The Prime Minister says nuclear power production must be an option in Australia and it would be foolish to ignore the option with the country's vast reserves of uranium....

"Nuclear power is potentially the cleanest and greenest of them all," he said.

"We would be foolish from a national interest point of view, with our vast reserves of uranium, to say that we are not going to consider nuclear power - not even going to look at it, we are going to say no to it before the debate even starts.

"One of the options that has got to be on the table is nuclear power, I believe that the world's attitudes toward nuclear power is changing and I believe that Australian attitudes towards nuclear power are changing."

This follows the release of a report commissioned by them, and controversially staffed by pro-nuclear supporters and scientists. It was led by the man who ran Telstra (The national phone company) while the share price freefell to a fraction of their value as the government started to privitise it...

A review by the Federal Government's nuclear energy task force has found a nuclear power industry could be commercially viable within 15 years.
The Federal Government says it believes the 15-year time frame is realistic.

A report by the Federal Government's nuclear energy task force has found that within 15 years a nuclear power industry in Australia could be commercially viable.

The task force is headed by former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski and it is due to hand the draft report to the Government in a fortnight.

The report also suggests that when more countries invest in nuclear technology it will become cheaper.

Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says the report shows that nuclear power is viable and should be carefully considered in Australia.

Mr Macfarlane says he agrees with the 15-year time frame suggested in the report.

"Fifteen-year time frame is realistic, you could see the beginning of construction of the first nuclear power station in Australia within the next decade and coming on-line and producing electricity on a constant basis within five years after that," he said.

"What we are seeing though is more and more evidence both here in Australia and also internationally through the International Energy Agency that nuclear power will be a price competitive option for Australia to consider in the years ahead," he said.

The review has also found that the cost of nuclear power will drop dramatically when more countries invest in nuclear technology and the price of fossil fuels goes up.

Th PM even touched on that bogeyman of the Kyoto protocol. Interesting take!

[He] ...will not be pressured into making changes that would place Australia at an economic and competitive disadvantage..."Australia is different from Europe, it is different from America, it is different from Asia," he said.

And then...

"In many respects the whole debate surrounding the Kyoto Protocol is being driven out of Europe rather than out of countries whose economic circumstances are similar to our own."

But there are always at least three sides, with one being the truth. This is another.

But a spokeswoman for the Wilderness Society is calling on the Government to rule out using nuclear power and instead investigate other options for generating baseload electricity - like the use of natural gas.

Queensland Conservation Council spokesman Toby Hutcheon does not believe Australia will have a nuclear power industry by 2021.

Furthur arguments include the fact that nations like the UK and USA still have a 20+ Year lead time. I wonder if this is a new "green' Howard government, a smokescreen for something else, or a real attempt to both secure future "Clean" power and improve the balance of trade by suplying enriched products to consumers overseas...

I will come back to this in a month or so to see where it has gone!

Australian issues: A quick primer.

It is very interesting that Australia has been in the grips of a prolonged drought for 7 years now. Finally the politicians have realized we have a problem! Why? Because several major cities and towns are now on severe water restrictions. Toowoomba recently proposed the building of a world best practice re-cycling plant to return up to 25% of the waste water to one of the cities dams. The federal government in their wisdom decided it was a wonderful idea, but to look like they where concerned about community feelings they had a referendum. And got rolled!
Now we have a city with no water, in fact it is illegal to use water outside of the house now! Brisbane down the hill a bit, the capital of the state, the gold and sunshine coasts, (well over half the state population) are all on very strict limitations.
Add to that the fact that Australia, has failed to sign the much vaunted Kyoto protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emmissions, (although we produce less than 1%), and now we have a huge fight brewing over the governments floating the possibility of nuclear power. As a nation Australia has about 1/3 of all the worlds known uranium resources. The argument goes that if we sell it for producing power, (and we do), then we should value add and keep some money. If you are going to enrich it why not use it, and reduce our current reliance on coal!
There are many other projects to use solar, wind and water, but all are decades away from even marginal economic viability. The other issues include our reliance on digging finite resources out of the ground to pay for our standard of living. As Australia will receive both the first major, and worse effects of global warming, largely due to ice melt and climate change, this is an issue I watch fairly closely, and will continue to monitor. In the coming week our PM has called a water summit, which will be an interesting sight, as we have one party in nation government and another in all but one state! The possibility of constructive outcomes is therefore somewhat negated by political imperatives... Oh well. The more things change...

P.S. There are no citations or references in this post, as it is merely a state-of-play in my mind. As i delve into the issues I will supply supporting and corroborating evidence. One of my pet peeves in the WWW is the number of unsupported opinions...

Daily Reader and Surfin links

Well away we go. I am surfing through my Google reader backlog, which is in the hundreds today. I will also later post some interesting illusions. This will be a good idea to get some interest going early on.

The first site I visited today was from a Google alert, and I found Bruce's Blog, which contained this little gem.

So what do you have to do to find happiness?

Are we wired up to be cheerful, or are some of us destined to languish in abject misery? Dorothy Wade reports on the new science of feeling good... But ordinary people believe they are happier than average (an obvious impossibility) and that they'll be even happier in 10 years' time. If true, it would be good news because research shows that happier people are healthier, more successful, harder-working, caring and more socially engaged. Misery makes people self-obsessed and inactive.

The article from the Sunday Times newspaper in the UK asks some interesting questions, Albeit with a lack of supporting evidence. Dorothy has interviewed some eminent experts, and waded through epiphany's, nimbus clouds in the soul and 5-year old inspirations to follow the story of what it means to be happy, and the scientific theories behind modern research in explaining it, all the way from the Pleistocene period! This well written and entertaining article goes on to pull together the "pieces of the jigsaw" to develop a stunning conclusion.

It's difficult to resist the logic of the happiness doctors. Stay in your Eeyore-ish bubble of existentialist angst and have a life that's short, sickly, friendless and self-obsessed. Or find a way to get happy, and long life, good health, job satisfaction and social success will be yours. You'd better start writing that gratitude letter now.

But best of all is this little gem.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN

Men often complain about their wives' volatility. Now research confirms that women really are both happier and sadder. Positive and negative emotions are not polar opposites — you can have both in your life. Women experience more of all emotions except anger. First it was found that women experience twice as much depression as men. Next, researchers found that women report more positive emotion than men, more frequently and more intensely. It all points to men and women having a different emotional make-up. Cognitive psychologists say that men and women have different skills related to sending and receiving emotion. Women are expressive; men conceal or control their emotions. Women convey emotion through facial expression and communication; men express emotion through aggressive or distracting behavior. Does the difference lie in biology, social roles or just women's willingness to report emotion? That's up for debate.

Gotta love it. Anyway, I enjoyed having it all "summarized and structured". It makes you think a little...