A sane water plan?

I was referring to selling the rights to the water. the commodity itself is still the same. perhaps i didnt make that clear.

Jazz: not quite, fungibility means that one example of the commodity can be substituted for another (eg crude oil is the canonical example of a fungible commodity, because one barrel is exchangeable for another).

The concept you describe sounds more like tradeability.

This just all sounds so manageable to me.

Any most here complain about the inept current government

well what you save with your gray water (funded perhaps by this scheme) can go towards building your super with water bonds paid for by the high users.

Even if we do look at this sort of solution, we should still encourage the use of grey water on gardens, and other water saving measures (which we currently enforce through water restrictions).

It sounds like a good idea although water should be allocated to households on a per capita basis. This would give families a fair deal compared to singles who may waste their share on long showers or expansive lawns.

why stop with this sort of system for water? Lets use it for education, health, electricity.

I have no kids and i keep fit so i haven’t seen the inside of a hospital in 15 years. Where is my check?

My neighbours think I have some elaborate water collection and distribution system to keep my lawn green.

Actually they’re right, I have Googong Dam, pipes, pumps, a tap and a garden hose.

Same here, and placate my neighbours who are continually having conniptions when I water my lawn now.

None of this is going to help until we get a handle on businesses that use water.

If water was to cost a few bucks a month I’d just pay it so I can have a green lawn.

But do you get the money in this case? I read the article as meaning I couldn’t sell my ‘rewards’ to my neighbours.

Regardless, it’s really a back door into bringing in tradeable water rights for urban users. It’s ok for the ACT, because we all draw our water from the same series of catchments.

kinda, It actually means that the commodity is exhangeable or may be substitued for something of equal value and quality.

But in a nutshell, you can sell it.

means you can sell it.

“Fungible” – to become mouldy 😉

what is fungible?

Water bonds are both fungible and valuable.

My reading of it was that low users got ‘rewards’, like frequent flyer points. The rewards didn’t appear to be redeemable for cash, but required actually buying something else, or they could be donated tos chools/charities or sold, but not to individuals.

If low water users are a spartan lot, it is possible they aren’t going to get into a scheme that aims to increase total spending. Eentually, schools will all have all the tanks they need. maybe that’s when the scheme becomes self-funding – when the donee market is saturated.

Good point. They would probably have to revamp the ACT’s entire pricing scheme to make it work (i.e. make it compulsory for everybody to be involved).

I like the idea, but asking the Federals for $8 million is an awful lot of money. I think the ACT Government and ACTEW should chip-in at least half.

So, it’s optional? You could decide not to join the scheme, pay the normal price for water, and put your own sign on the lawn that says “bug me all you like, i chose greed”?

Clever.

I wouldn’t be so sure Thumper, Turnbull goes for this sort of stuff.

I can see this as being workable.

He does have a lot of jibbering over on that blog of his.