What do we think about roadside water usage signage?

If my maths are correct, it is 16 days consumption. OK, not earth shattering, but I bet the powers that be would be crowing if that amount arrived in the dams from rainfall.

Pesty said :

Thanks cranky, totally beggars belief! 40% How dare they!

It’s only a teensy little storage.

Hard to find cotton not grown under irrigation also, and incidentally, Aussie cotton is a world leader in terms of chemical use (or lack thereof).

Australia is the driest continent on earth as we are often told, but that’s because there are large sections of it which are desert. Most parts of the Murray-Darling basin have rainfall deemed sufficient for agriculture in most other areas of the planet.

China builds huge disasters like the Three Gorges Dam to supply their agriculture. We take the high moral ground in our environmental awareness, but let’s not forget that if we abondon agriculture in Australia, water from dams like that will supply our $10.00 flannies (FROM LOWES!!)

cranky said :

Pesty,
Sundays CT, page 8.

July 17, 2008 – Cotter Dam level 51.6%
July 17, 2007 – Cotter Dam level 90.4%

“….ACTEW explaining this was due to water being released for fish studies to be conducted”.

This conduct is not helpful when we are being ‘persuaded’ (think roadside signs) to save a precious commodity.

Thanks cranky, totally beggars belief! 40% How dare they!

imhotep said :

It should be pointed out though, that cotton not grown here will be substituted by cotton (and food) grown in places like China. Now there’s a real environmental disaster.

Hard to find another continent with less fresh water than Australia though.

Is the ‘overconsumption in the cities’ fairly laid at the feet of private residences/personal use?

I believe the populace in general has probably restricted their water use. Personally, no town water on the garden, and thought constantly applied to indoors use.

Water restricting shower heads, dual fush toilets and compliance with the water restrictions MUST be having a considerable impact on consumption.

If not domestic, where is it going?

johnboy said :

“And once the agricultural users can start paying real money for water we might see an end to environmental disasters like cotton and rice growing.”

It should be pointed out though, that cotton not grown here will be substituted by cotton (and food) grown in places like China. Now there’s a real environmental disaster.

The real problem is overconsumption in the cities. Sure, farmers can improve their game, but the rest of us will have to address our consumption levels, and the prices we pay.

Pesty,
Sundays CT, page 8.

July 17, 2008 – Cotter Dam level 51.6%
July 17, 2007 – Cotter Dam level 90.4%

“….ACTEW explaining this was due to water being released for fish studies to be conducted”.

This conduct is not helpful when we are being ‘persuaded’ (think roadside signs) to save a precious commodity.

We already stop massive amounts of water all the way down the system.

And once the agricultural users can start paying real money for water we might see an end to environmental disasters like cotton and rice growing.

cities’

Got the ACT Government’s pamphlet about new water storage – I know it’s not on the scale of Cubbie (or is it?) but what will happen to the downstream environment if we manage to stop up this massive amount of water? It looks as though the federal govt and the states have agreed that they will save the citie’ water supply no matter how wasteful, and the rural parts can suck up the dust.

cranky said :

Slightly related. I was a bit annoyed to see that the Cotter Dam has had 40% of its storage released recently to enable a ‘fish study’.

Why do we build dams?

You gotta be kidding! That,if true is scandalous! You sure?

cranky said :

Slightly related. I was a bit annoyed to see that the Cotter Dam has had 40% of its storage released recently to enable a ‘fish study’.

Why do we build dams?

what, to study how a massive torrent of water will force them out of our waterways? Fish on the banks, in trees, not in the creeks or rivers. great.

at least we have a forward thinking utility, but where will the water come from?

Cotter’s a tiny storage though (until they finish building the new wall).

Slightly related. I was a bit annoyed to see that the Cotter Dam has had 40% of its storage released recently to enable a ‘fish study’.

Why do we build dams?

Unless they’re a commenter here it’s OK.

Beserk Warrior said :

At least they have SOME semblance of having a practical purpose, albeit a very minor one.

On the other hand, the “Welcome to Ngunnawal country” signs (among others) to me are cringeworthy token gestures, completely meaningless and represent a blatant waste of taxpayer money. No doubt they are the handywork of some lefty scumbag pube who wears corduroy to work.

I don,t think you’re meant to say that?

I’m sure there’s a certain type of low-life who’ll try and make sure they’re getting every bit of “their share”

Fortunately they’re rarer than they like to think when trying to justify it to themselves.

common knowledge that water restrictions actually encourage people to use more water

no-one has challenged this; surely it is spurious in extremis. the captain noted that unrestricted useage was 300 millilitres (joking!) a day, compared to 147 with restrictions. how does this stackup against bugalugs’ spurious claim?

At least they have SOME semblance of having a practical purpose, albeit a very minor one.

On the other hand, the “Welcome to Ngunnawal country” signs (among others) to me are cringeworthy token gestures, completely meaningless and represent a blatant waste of taxpayer money. No doubt they are the handywork of some lefty scumbag pube who wears corduroy to work.

By some acute coincidence, every time I have gone past one it has been raining. Go figure that one out.

What is painstakingly obvious is that they are spending a lot of money to cover up the fact that the ACT is pretty well waterlogged and somebody somewhere has made a lot of money from protecting this fact.

I had the dubious honour of answering a telephone poll the other night regarding my opinion of drinking recycled effluent, but without a commesurate question regarding my opinion on drinking recycled lake burley griffin instead. I know which I’d prefer, similarly I can figure which one I’m going to get without claiming to be a rocket scientist.

Someone… Somewhere… Money… investigative journalist anybody… Bueller… Bueller…

Growling Ferret said :

Because road signs stick to road messages elsewhere.

Better than roadside advertising, they don’t create accidents, and remind the happy citizens of the ACT and surrounding areas of their civil duty to reduce consumption

Why are they better than roadsice advertising? If it is because they don’t create accidents, what evidence do you have for the assertion that they are less accident causing than advertising of commercial products?

The ACT is littered with far too many roadside signs as it is, let alone these electronic ones with road-irrelevant messages (and yes, I saw the World Youth Day ones down the coast too. How was that relevant to my drive to Bateman’s Bay, 6 weeks before the event??) Too much visual clutter and distraction. Ditch them, or use them only for important traffic information.

I think that the “half of all usage is on the gardens” was probably written about unrestricted water usage. I don’t think that the restrictions have really resulted in people having less/shorter showers, fewer glasses of water or washing less clothes. The majority of savings have been in the garden.

I’d take that to imply that 100ML per day is around the minimum winter water consumption for Canberra. The previously unrestricted summer usage was up around 300ML per day, whilst the target on Stage 3 for summer is about 147ML or so.

*note* that one every day, that is

> Well, I note the Parkway sign every day, and I’m afraid I have to disagree (and yes, I am aware that it is yesterday’s use. (sheesh!)

Me too (not that one every day), our memories differ obviously.

& just checking. 🙂

& yes, signs showing storage of 80% or more would be great!

justbands said :

again, I don’t believe that’s true. Remeber that it’s reporting the previous days usage. I’ve seen it change from 120 for a warmer, clear day to 85 for a wet, rainy day.

Well, I note the Parkway sign every day, and I’m afraid I have to disagree (and yes, I am aware that it is yesterday’s use. (sheesh!)

Anyway, hopefully it’ll keep raining so the signs can tell us something more cheerful.

Don’t forget weekends are high consumption due to many people doing the weeks washing! regardless of the weather too, as people use tumble driers. I wonder if the electricity consumption on a wet weekend rockets? maybe we should have road signs…….

Because road signs stick to road messages elsewhere.

Just like the road signs promoting World Youth Day I saw down the coast in the months leading up to the event…

As for my opinion on them, I don’t mind them. Better than roadside advertising, they don’t create accidents, and remind the happy citizens of the ACT and surrounding areas of their civil duty to reduce consumption

tylersmayhem said :

I would possibly find the signs of value if I actually knew what it all means. Makes it harder whoile travelling at 80km/hr. Can someone clue me in?

lol

> yet we usually see only a (relatively) small difference between rainy and dry days.

& again, I don’t believe that’s true. Remeber that it’s reporting the previous days usage. I’ve seen it change from 120 for a warmer, clear day to 85 for a wet, rainy day.

It is more efficient to water gardens when it is raining.

justbands said :

I’m not so sure about that. I’ve seen lower than target usage displayed for rainy days on the signs regularly.

Yes, sometimes it is lower than target, but not usually by much. My point is that they claim that the majority of domestic water use is on gardens, yet we usually see only a (relatively) small difference between rainy and dry days.

Surely, if gardens were the major culprit, we would see use drop by a large percentage, which it doesn’t.

I would possibly find the signs of value if I actually knew what it all means. Makes it harder whoile travelling at 80km/hr. Can someone clue me in?

> yet on rainy days the posted use is usually around the same amount as the target (c. 90-100 ML).

I’m not so sure about that. I’ve seen lower than target usage displayed for rainy days on the signs regularly.

I think they’re fine. I couldn’t imagine why anyone would have a problem with them.

According to the ACT government*, the largest domestic use of water is on gardens, yet on rainy days the posted use is usually around the same amount as the target (c. 90-100 ML).

Does the ACT government seriously believe that people water their gardens in the rain?

Or could they (gasp) be wrong about the amount of water the population actually need?

*http://www.environmentcommissioner.act.gov.au/soe/2000_act_report/indicators/wateruse

I don’t mind them, then again, I still grin at ‘drive n text UB next”

Pesty said :

oddball508 said :

Why not make it a bit more compedative. Canberra seems to love the North vs South. so why not calculate each areas water allocation and then show their daily percentage of use for that allocation. Maybe a bit of competition will result in the required cutting down of use.

Rediculous! All the southsiders will be sneaking around the northside burbs turning on every tap in sight the moment the sun goes down! Thats if they can budge them of course, as the north siders have certainly not used them in yonks!

careful! the water police will hear you….

crazyfish said :

When I first saw these signs I thought it was one very good idea in terms of raising peoples awareness around water conservation. I look for them every day on my way home and find it interesting to mentaly correlate the weather, day of the week etc with the previous days usage. I certainly don’t see it as propoganda!

This has to be sarcastic…then again it is RiotACT.

oddball508 said :

Why not make it a bit more compedative. Canberra seems to love the North vs South. so why not calculate each areas water allocation and then show their daily percentage of use for that allocation. Maybe a bit of competition will result in the required cutting down of use.

Rediculous! All the southsiders will be sneaking around the northside burbs turning on every tap in sight the moment the sun goes down! Thats if they can budge them of course, as the north siders have certainly not used them in yonks!

No need for us to wait for the other recalitrant states to get on board, we can do it now, if the government were serious (which it isn’t).

Good on you Ralph!

I’m sure you were pleased to see the SEC curtail naked short selling! Capitalists are happy when the regaulation is done to help them

I agree though it should be priced appropriately but that means a fully integrated and priced national water grid

Just more attempts from the green movement to curtail our freedoms.

Price it appropriately and let people judge themselves how they conserve water.

Yes indeed, striking.

Feel free to make a positive contribution.

But striking?

I suppose you have been taking on the world from Geroa/Gerringong, so these signs must seem a little small town to you

bugalugs said :

Striking – wow, road signs!

Because road signs stick to road messages elsewhere.

Hence my point about what other worthy messages could be displayed in this fashion.

Why not make it a bit more compedative. Canberra seems to love the North vs South. so why not calculate each areas water allocation and then show their daily percentage of use for that allocation. Maybe a bit of competition will result in the required cutting down of use.

Additionally………

What a small world Johnboy must live in – “One of the more striking things about moving back to Canberra”

Striking – wow, road signs!

well it is common knowledge that water restrictions actually encourage people to use more water however I don’t see an alternative.

Seriously some people are deluded – I think social engineering is only attempted in dictatorships.

The closest we have come to social engineering in Australia is the “white australia policy”

I see them as similar to high visibility policing. If the public has proof of the pudding, they will stay in their sleeping bags taking heroin, or playing WoW as the tag line suggests.

Exactly crazyfish!

I also find it interesting how weekend usage always spikes as well the very warm days of summer etc.

bugalugs said :

I’m wondering why anyone in their right mind would consider it propaganda?

I can’t see how it is promoting a message one way or another?

Here is a better idea – Let’s not have any water restrictions or community notifIcation until the day we run out of water

Or how about this backwards goverment realises that more people = need for more water capacity.

I like the signs being there, but I do take the numbers displayed with a pinch of salt. Whilst I can understand that the target will drop in winter months, the ‘yesterday’ number seems random. Sometimes it will change from day to day, sometimes not. A part of me thinks that if they state the usage as being ‘just over’ the target, people will conserve water more. If we were consistently hitting the target or below, people would be more inclined to ‘waste’ water.

It may well be less about informing people, and more about social engineering.

When I first saw these signs I thought it was one very good idea in terms of raising peoples awareness around water conservation. I look for them every day on my way home and find it interesting to mentaly correlate the weather, day of the week etc with the previous days usage. I certainly don’t see it as propoganda!

I’m wondering why anyone in their right mind would consider it propaganda?

I can’t see how it is promoting a message one way or another?

Here is a better idea – Let’s not have any water restrictions or community notifIcation until the day we run out of water