by Ecky » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:11 pm
by Booney » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:24 pm
by JK » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:39 pm
by Pseudo » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:22 pm
by Dissident » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:38 pm
Pseudo wrote:A work acquaintance of mine is involved in "irrigation engineering", for want of a better term, among other things. Earlier this year I heard him deliver a talk in which he suggested that only 10% of water consumption was due to residential usage. Industry accounted for 20 or 30% (I forget which) and agriculture for the rest.
I don't doubt that home water savings are important, but they are a drop in the ocean (or the reservoir in this case) compared to other potential savings.
by Dissident » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:41 pm
Ecky wrote:Can anyone find any flaws in this argument? I was browsing through SA Water's website (http://www.sawater.com.au) and was actually quite surprised what conclusions I reached when combining their facts together...
I have come to the conclusion that these water restrictions must be a political thing to win the "green" vote. The amount of water that they plan to save is so insignificant that it is a complete joke.
On average ~50% of Greater Adelaide's water is from reservoirs, ~50% is from the Murray
On average only 0.36% of water diverted from the Murray goes to Adelaide. The vast majority is used for irrigation upstream. Even if we didn't rely at all on reservoirs (i.e. it basically never rained here), this fraction would still be less than 1%.
45% of Adelaide water use is by Residential users
40% of residential use is for gardens and other outside use.
The water restrictions aim to reduce this 40% by some small fraction....
Hence these restrictions aim to cut back about 0.065% of the water used from the Murray to some smaller fraction (0.05% at the very least say, being very generous)
The same impact could be made by reducing the amount of water used by irrigation by some miniscule percentage (well under 1% - don't know exactly as exact figures aren't given on the website).
So surely resources should be spent on improving irrigation practices, rather than bothering little old Adelaide on how its residents should use their water
by Ecky » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:44 pm
by TroyGFC » Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:20 pm
by Ecky » Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:28 pm
TroyGFC wrote:At work they are legally allowed to fill up and drain 6 massive vessles (the size of a swimming pools each) every week, not to forget other water tanks around the factory.
by mal » Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:45 pm
by Squawk » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:59 pm
by Dutchy » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:04 am
Squawk wrote:Definitely political spin. They probably save more money with less pumping from the Murray - ie electricity costs.
Here's my analogy. Every time a house is built or sold, hard wired smoke detectors must be installed. How many people have had inspections and how many have been fined for non-compliance? ZERO.
Why not just make the same conditions requiring rainwater tanks or 5-star taps and the like for houses whenever a new place is built or an old place is sold?
The govt don't want to take on big business as they rely on employment growth and are essentially a left wing liberal govt pandering to business where they can. It's easier to ask the masses to use their sprinklers less than it is to ask the big users to cut back. The irony is that there is already a model in place that allows large electricity consumers to get cheaper contracts if they agree to having their supply limited on high-demand days. The same principle could be applied to big water users in dry months.
by Ecky » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:08 am
Dutchy wrote:
already done...every new house needs to put in a rainwater tank
by Ian » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:14 am
Constance_Perm wrote:Im not ultra clued up on this issue so Im sure I will be corrected, but my understanding is that the major drain on the Murray comes from the Rice and Cotton farmers in Vic and NSW, so I guess our local government don't have the jurisdiction to directly stop or reduce the amount thats being taken ... Perhaps lobbying to the Fed's will one day result in it being addressed? (I for one won't be holding my breath though)
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |