Skip to content Skip to main navigation

The river is flowing, and so we are pumping it, for the very first time. [Since the 60s]

By johnboy 2 May 2007 32

Our Brave Leader has announced that after the recent rain the Murrumbidgee River is flowing so very well that the ACT can afford to start sucking excess water out of it for use in place of our own dwindling reserves having finally completed the infrastructure to do so.

Mr. Stanhope assures us that more details of the scheme can be found on the Actew website although on a casual glance I can’t seem to find it.

I’d certainly be interested to know how we’re compensating downstream users of the river for the 75 megalitres we’ll be drawing each day while the flows stay good.

In other bad news the catchment appears to be doing even worse than last year.

UPDATED: The Canberra Times is hysterical despite this plan having been on the table for years they’re screaming about recycled water:

“A heated debate has erupted in recent months over a proposal to put recycled sewage into Canberra’s water supply via a massive new treatment plant. Critics have said there are serious health risks associated with drinking recycled sewage.

But the ACT Government has snuck under the radar, pumping the controversial product into Canberra’s kitchens and bathrooms this week.”

I can’t say I’ve noticed any problem with my water.

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
32 Responses to
The river is flowing, and so we are pumping it, for the very first time. [Since the 60s]
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
seepi 10:01 am 07 May 07

A story in the Age today about recycled water gone wrong – Werribee farmers lose 1 million on lettuce that shriveled up after recycled water was used.

And they want us to drink the stuff…

Pandy 11:25 pm 05 May 07

I would smash your fracking face in Vic, if I knew where you lived.

Vic Bitterman 9:33 pm 05 May 07

I am glad you people are stopping using water.

You should see how green my gardens are!!!!!! LOL

Water restrictions : not for me!

seepi 8:55 pm 04 May 07

You may get a shock if water goes to a rationed amouint per house. Currently there would be a lot of people not using their full amount. You might find that if water is divided per capita that you get allocated less than you are already using.

Be careful what you wish for.

Pandy 7:25 pm 04 May 07

Santa, what part of they have been caught using their in-ground sprinkler don’t you understand?

Also jemmy, if I dob you in the arguement WILL be between you and ACTEW as you so desire. See I just made your day!

S4anta 11:58 am 04 May 07

if thats your stance, please by all means spend your afternoons wandering around creating havoc. However, if may proffer one suggestion… prior to attempting to shame your neighbour, check what they are up to with their water. Many an idiot has made a complaint about the fact that our property is revelling in these conditions, whilst their own is up the pooper.
I laugh at them, pass on contact detials so they can contract myself to show them what to do to acheive this, cheaply, for an obescene amount of money.
Go Fogmaster2000, I say

barking toad 10:40 am 04 May 07

What? You can’t water your lawn?

Well come to me and I’ll sell you some water waste off-sets.

Works the same as paying me for off-setting your carbon footprint and me promising to plant a tree at some stage.

I store water waste offsets by pissing on the garden instead of in the bog. The saved flush is what I’ll sell you so you can water your lawn.

Of course ,if demand is great I may need to specify payment in Melbourne Bitter rather than cash to ensure the constant supply of offsets.

jemmy 9:53 am 04 May 07

Apparently I’m going to make myself really unpopular by arguing with everybody.

The govt has made these rules in a effort to save water. No, they haven’t. That’s my *whole* point. They have made these rules in an effort to be seen to be doing something. The rules don’t save water. If they did, my neighbour could not water his lawn, but he could wash his car on his lawn, because it uses less water. The rules are govt spin and I’m not going to put up with it.

You may not agree with them, but you have to abide by them anyway No, I don’t. I can do civil disobedience to try and shame the govt into imposing genuine, real water-saving restrictions. The argument is between me and the govt and not some busybody.

sort of ‘wel everyone else does it’ effect I totally agree, which is why I don’t flaunt it for everyone to see.

Just a reminder: I’m perfectly happy to have an argument with ACTew, I just don’t think other people also have the right to tell me what to do.

Public admin here is appalling. Any dept that comes up with a rule that says you can’t use 100l to wash your car on the lawn, but you can put 500l on the lawn directly, is a stupid dept that doesn’t deserve respect.

This all started when I realised just how incompetent the public administration is, and that there is no voice for the public! That’s why I got so upset with the quality of ABC radio — no voice, no decent talkback, no hard interviews.

As far as I can find, this site is the *only* avenue for public debate on policy. Thank you johnboy, although you may be regretting it right now.

Anyway, I suspect there are two opposing points of view here that won’t see eye-to-eye, so I promise not to say anymore on this subject. And don’t get me going on the management of the road system!!

seepi 8:58 am 04 May 07

The govt has made these rules in a effort to save water.

You may not agree with them, but you have to abide by them anyway, same as not littering, dogs onleads etc etc.

Not obeying won’t make anyone think ‘gee i bet he uses less water than me’ it will just make them start watering too – a sort of ‘wel everyone else does it’ effect.

jemmy 8:25 am 04 May 07

I’ll confine myself to two comments.

You are confusing the need for us to restrict our water usage with the silly, arbitrary restrictions that the govt has placed on how we use our allocation. I repeat: I use less water than my legal neighbour. We do need to have a restricted allocation, but how I use MY allocation is NOT anyone’s business. Just because the govt says it is so, does not make it true.

I don’t abuse the system. I don’t take long baths, or do any silly spiteful thing; I genuinely save as much water as I can. My suggestions for signs were humourous with the intent of annoying the morally superior.

Can’t you see how patronising your attitude is? That’s the beef I have with the whole dob-in-your-neighbour approach. It’s a form of arrogance, an assumption that the neighbour knows better. It’s also cowardly. If you have a beef with the neighbour, tell them, but pls don’t fill in an anonymous form on a govt website.

Pandy 7:13 am 04 May 07

Water abuse is my business. If 10% of housholds water their lawn illegally, that will lead to significant megalitres of water usage a day.

Targets are being set for water usage per day so as to stretch out the water supply. Every day we are reminded how how water usage has exceeded targets. sure businesses are at fault too. But I have seen plenty of businesses reducing water consumption: turning off urinal, not washing their trucks etc.

If a few greedy bastards abuse the system then they are being un-Australian by not thinking that they are part of a greater community.

Sure, have your long and frequent baths and bucket the water outside if you feel spiteful and want to be seen as having psycopathic tendecies: But I doubt you will be doing it for long. I am sure your neighbours will love you for it.

Danman 7:10 am 04 May 07

Maybe we shoudl get signs for our green lawns that say “Mind your on firetrucking business”

I for one will be hose watering my lawn soon – but which jo blogs walking down the street will know its greywater when I have a 20 m hose going to the tank in the back yard?

Just a bunch of nosy do gooder mofos.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site