An idea to end the water problem (1 Viewer)

[ccc123]

If it weren't for the stupid FUCKING IDIOTS whom stand and water their grass in the middle of the fucking day, we would NEVER run out of water.

Nah, the water shortage actually has very little to do with residential water use: industry are by far the biggest consumers. Its the governments fault that we have a water shortage: our population has been rapidly increasing for many years now, and Warragamba wasn't built to supply water to anywhere near as many people as there is now residing in Sydney. The government should have planned to build another dam years ago: if the population is increasing, water consumption will inevitably increase also- it takes pure common sense to figure that out: a quality which the government sadly lacks.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Dramatically enfoced water RESTRICTIONS.
My idea simply goes as follows: Each household is assigned a certain ammount of water that they are allowed to use (water is given equally and according to needs, priviledge can not buy benefits/exemptions). Once you exceed your limit water is CUT OFF. yes, that's right, no water for j00!

You can't cut off peoples water. You do know that people die if they don't drink water right?

 

[Ingoesout]

You can't cut off peoples water. You do know that people die if they don't drink water right?

Actually people can live without water for a fair few days if they're still eating fruits etc.. it's not advisable but it's possible. Anyway that's not the point, each household would get a reasonable ammount of water, but if they choose to wash the dirt off the side of their house with a high pressure hose just for the fucking sake of it then they will run out of water, and sucks to them.
If they're reasonable and know how to ration water, use it when it's necessary then there will be no problem.
It might force people to get creative. Who knows.

Anyway it's not going to happen (im sure it's some violation of our human rights/ rights to decadence..whatever) But what SHOULD happen is large industrial companies be forced to recycle water when appropriate (e.g. cooling applications) Oh, and rice farming, rice farming is not crucial to our economy, cut it!

 

[iamsickofyear12]

We shouldn't have to ration water. The government should build a desalination plant and nuclear power plants or whatever it has to do to supply enough water for everyone.

 

[HotShot]

We shouldn't have to ration water. The government should build a desalination plant and nuclear power plants or whatever it has to do to supply enough water for everyone.

Desalination is way too expensive and inefficent for Australia.

The best way is for Recycling Plant - but these bastard are too scared of it for some reason? They think that recycled is dirty? I mean wtf what do you think you are drinking now? Its been recycled anyway!.

 

[Ingoesout]

We shouldn't have to ration water. The government should build a desalination plant and nuclear power plants or whatever it has to do to supply enough water for everyone.

yeah i don't toally disagree, i would never elect in a gov't that was going to ration water..

but $$$$$$$$$$ ???

(slightly unrelated) Ok, my brain refuses to co-operate, does anyone recall some country that has a 6L/day limit? And a ration card? And those who can't afford the card have to go to a 6L/day controlled dripping pipe? Have i gone nuts?

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Desalination is way too expensive and inefficent for Australia.

'Expensive' and 'too expensive' do not mean the same thing.

 

[menelaus]

has anyone watched politics in the pub on tvs? the other week i saw a professor who was saying that recycled water in singapore is so clean that they clean the tiny parts that make up mobile phones with it (and since this water needs to be as clean as possible so nothing gets stuck in the chips...) then whats wrong with drinking it? even so, why not use recycled water for toilets, indistrial purposes and even farming?

also, ahs anyone else heard of cloud seeding? the qld govt is researching this concept that would make it possible to control where rain fell.

 

[wuddie]

i think we should have a x amount per person limit in the residential households system in water, because way too many people (such as my next door) are wasting water on washing their cars and their massive gardens. commercial establishment should apply a special quota from the government. once the residential or commercial building reaches the limit, they will have to pay double or trible the rate for any excess amount.

what do you reckon? it is pretty simple.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Why aren't people allowed to have gardens? It should be our right in a free country to maintain a garden on one's property.

 

[wuddie]

not during a water crisis we don't. everyone has to make sacrifices. we can live without the gardens, but the farmers in the outback can't. if we don't do something to stop the wastage of water on our 'precious' gardens, what are our farmers going to live on?

be considerate mate.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

The farmers could try getting another job.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

not during a water crisis we don't. everyone has to make sacrifices. we can live without the gardens, but the farmers in the outback can't. if we don't do something to stop the wastage of water on our 'precious' gardens, what are our farmers going to live on?

be considerate mate.

Most farmers in the outback rely on water from the sky, not from our dam. We have restrictions in case we run out not so we can give more to them.

Either way it is poor planning and the more we use the less we have in reserve and the more pressure it puts on the government to solve the problem. Indefinite water restrictions is not the answer.

 

[brightsea]

It's not feasible to ration water for Sydney's population. How is a "reasonable amount" of water decided? Yuppies will use less than a five person family, some what is reasonable for the yuppies, isn't for families with children. And if you set the amount high for families, the yuppies will still be able to take 20 minute showers and wash their car - not entirely fair.

So if you're going to ration water or raise the price after a certain amount, you've got to profile each house about how many people are living in it, a fact which can change often and is easy rorted. It would end up being like those Centrelink ads, "You must inform Sydney Water if you're living circumstances change otherwise you may be forced to give back the water you have consumed."

Originally posted by ccc123
The government should have planned to build another dam years ago: if the population is increasing, water consumption will inevitably increase also...

It doesn't matter how many dams the government builds, if we've got no water to put in them.

 

[withoutaface]

I said based on the amount of water the people in their household would need, meaning a 2 person household would get about twice as much as a one person household. The idea is to stop "yuppies" from filling their pools and watering their gardens with everyone else's drinking water.

 

[*Minka*]

Wasn't there a city up in Queensland that voted No to recycled drinking water because they thought it was 'Gross'. ?

 

[wuddie]

well those queenslanders are just fked in the head, i am more worried about us (nsw).

so what is wrong with the desalination plant?

i am all against drawing from underground water, it raises the water table and it will be a disaster in the long term.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

It doesn't matter how many dams the government builds, if we've got no water to put in them.

Do people actually think when they say this?

So we should be able to knock down all the dams we currently have and it won't make any difference, right?

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

yeah i don't toally disagree, i would never elect in a gov't that was going to ration water..

but $$$$$$$$$$ ???

(slightly unrelated) Ok, my brain refuses to co-operate, does anyone recall some country that has a 6L/day limit? And a ration card? And those who can't afford the card have to go to a 6L/day controlled dripping pipe? Have i gone nuts?

I've heard of that. Its used in Kenya. the rich cane have pipes into their houses, everyone else takes a bucket to this pipe thing and it very slowly trickles the water out...and they get one bucket a day for drinking, cleaning, washing their clothes...

Anyway, recycling's the way to go. The town in Australia that rejected the proposal...well I think we shouldn't even have a vote about it. Just put it in.

Maybe, if people can't handle that, give a certain amount of drinking water per person per day from the dams, and use recycled water for everything else. Farming, washing and showers, pools, everything.

 

[pseudonym]

Also the fault of the government. It is their responsibility to convince all the morons out there that think chernobyl as soon as nuclear power is mentioned and start building the things. We need desalination plants and we need nuclear power. There is no water problem.

You are so dead set on nuclear power aren't you?
Don't dismiss history, five-mile island, chernobyl, etc. Nuclear power plants are just too dangerous, accidents will happen, do not think we have transcended this. Especially since the nuclear plants would be operated by private companies. How can you trust a company, that is out there to maximise profits and cut corners, with the handling of volatile radioactive materials?
What about the waste products? History tells us that no place stays too politically stable for long, and the waste takes thousands of years or more to become safe. We can't guarantee that any place on earth would be appropriate to use as a dumping ground, we can't guarantee that there won't be leakages. And it is selfish of you to burden posterity with the heavy responsibility of looking after our mess: that's the kind of society we are today isn't it?
I vote they put the nuclear plant in your suburb, keep it away from mine.