Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Business

Australia's tier 4 data centre. Micron21 mission critical hosting services.

Highest water prices, lowest water use

By johnboy - 30 November 2010 27

The Canberra Times has the thrilling news that Canberra has the most expensive water in the nation by some margin.

Oddly enough we also have the lowest water use.

Who’d have thought that would work?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
27 Responses to
Highest water prices, lowest water use
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
essfer 10:54 am 01 Dec 10

The gummints (federal and local) cannot serve us effectively while they are conflicted by the need to secure revenue and/or votes. It’s the same problem that exists with affordability of housing and banning cigarettes.

The majority of environmental action taken by “the man” is a token gesture, and as long as big business and industry form a large part of the voting spectrum I doubt this will change.

Stupid band-aid solutions serve little purpose in the real world, but the actions that could make a real difference would either risk their support from an important segment of the voting population, or would limit spending on important things like health care, education, housing and policing.

Or more importantly on things like travel, conferences, public art, QLD grass, or the innumerable other places that our tax dollars ACTUALLY get wasted.

shadow boxer 8:22 am 01 Dec 10

Correct, there is no economic reason that electricity prices needed to triple, it is not costing more to produce, it is simply a tax grab camouflaged as green-ness.

Even if it did it would make far more sense to take the subsidies currently being provided to the rich greenies of O’connor and Lyneham and give them to first home buyers as part of the first home buyers grant provided they are spent on solar.

this would give our young people a bit more of a kick start in life and stop the carbon problem getting any worse as 90% of new homes would then be built with solar power.

No votes in that approach though.

georgesgenitals 7:21 am 01 Dec 10

breda said :

Slugging the poor as a sacrifice on the altar of ‘green-ness’ just highlights that the majority of Green voters are comparatively wealthy inner city dwellers (or affluent Canberrans) who think that social justice means increasing the pain for those who don’t comply with their agenda.

+ 6 billion.

breda 9:05 pm 30 Nov 10

“Everyone knows that a plastic bag takes 6 billion years to become a flower, but there are people who still choose it as it is the cheaper option. If you take away the price benefit of using the ‘irresponsible’ product then many will convert.”

Hilarious! 6 billion years to become a flower! Oh, my sides.

The use of the word ‘convert’ is very revealing.

Slugging the poor as a sacrifice on the altar of ‘green-ness’ just highlights that the majority of Green voters are comparatively wealthy inner city dwellers (or affluent Canberrans) who think that social justice means increasing the pain for those who don’t comply with their agenda.

Barney Trouble 8:38 pm 30 Nov 10

I’m glad the Victorian election has shown the first signs of a backlash against this overbearing Greens movement as people finally start to realise their policies will simply strip away the standard of living of hard working Australians that have been providing the taxes for the unemployment benefits half of their supporters are on and subsidising the wasteful green schemes such as the solar schemes that the other half of their supporters are rich enough to afford.

Instead of at least maintaining playing fields and public areas during the last bout of water restrictions, we now have to spend millions getting them repaired, now the inevitable rain falls have returned.

I would love to know the logic behind making a family of 4 or 5 have to see a lovely lawn die off so their kids can’t play on it and electricity costs rise due to no more cooling from it, yet some obnoxious prick, who will walk past and give you death stares because you are trying to at least keep your plants alive, can go home and stand in their shower for an hour.

Usermane 5:07 pm 30 Nov 10

All this and the Greens still can’t get over our “huge water wastage problem” and the feds still want to cut Canberra’s water allocation so that more of our water can flow out to sea.

shadow boxer 3:47 pm 30 Nov 10

I agree the majority want to be responsible, and as a father of four these increases tax me at a rate of 3-4 times the childless Dickson couple. But that’s my decision and my problem.

The technology for most of these solutions is close and the drive to market should be driven by those that can afford it, forcing a single mother working a 30-40k job to pay twice as much for electricity because she can’t afford solar or rents or three times as much for water because she can’t afford a tank, is mean and selfish.

By all means encourage the rich to change, perhaps in the same way we encourage the taking out of private health insurance, but at the end of the day if you don’t have an economic and viable solution to the status quo, and the issue is so important, then we should find or develop one before we march off into an ecological nirvana and leave a trail of downtrodden poor behind us. (Sorry a bit melodramatic but I kind of liked it).

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site