APPENDIX 8: NOTE OF THE VISIT TO AUSTRALIA
1. The Sub-Committee visited Australia from Monday
30 January until Saturday 4 February. Members present were Lord
Broers, Lord Howie of Troon, Lord Mitchell, Lord Oxburgh
and the Earl of Selborne (Chairman). In attendance were Tom Wilson
(Clerk) and Professor Richard Ashley (Specialist Adviser).
Monday 30 January
Tour of Western Treatment Plant, Werribee
2. The first engagement was with Melbourne Water
at the Western Treatment Plant in Werribee, where the Committee
was given a tour and a presentation. Melbourne Water is a state-owned
company, run as a corporation, which is responsible for looking
after the dams, the major supply pipes and the water treatment
process. The company treats 94 percent of Melbourne's sewage in
two large treatment plants and also manages rivers, creeks and
major drainage systems in greater Melbourne. The "retail"
companies, also state-owned, purchase water from Melbourne Water
and are responsible for supplying this water—as well as
sewerage services—to their customers.
3. The tour was conducted by Brad McLean and Peter
Scott of Melbourne Water, who explained that Werribee treated
52 to 53 per cent of Melbourne's wastewater, equating to a flow
of around 480 megalitres per day. The plant was spread over an
enormous site of 11,000 hectares, with the wastewater passing
through a succession of stabilisation ponds and undergoing activated
sludge treatment. As part of this process, methane was collected
from the anaerobic section of the first pond and used to generate
power on-site, with the result that the plant was getting close
to being energy neutral. A further initiative was the re-use of
"Class A" water—treated effluent that had been
further treated by chlorine and ultraviolet—which was used
for the irrigation of food crops in the surrounding areas.
4. The tour was followed by presentations from Professor
Malcolm Chaikin and Professor Michel Lefebvre of the University
of New South Wales, who believed that desalination needed to play
an important role in addressing the demand-supply imbalance in
cities in future. However, Professor Chaikin noted that there
were significant problems with current desalination technology—the
high energy requirements, the environmental impacts and the cost—and
he felt that Sydney should delay their proposals in this area
for the moment. In the meantime, his studies were concerned with
the process of osmotic distillation, which might provide a lower
energy method of removing salt from water. Professor Lefebvre
concluded the session by explaining how the principles of fractal
geometry can be applied to membrane technology and the process
of osmotic distillation.
Presentations from Melbourne Water and VicUrban
5. Later in the day, the Committee was given presentations
by senior figures from both Melbourne Water and VicUrban, the
Victorian Government's urban development agency.
6. Howard Rose, Manager of Corporate Strategy at
Melbourne Water, started by explaining that because of state ownership
the Minister for Water was responsible for setting the company's
policy and legal framework, as well as obligations on conservation
and recycling. Financial performance was monitored by Victoria's
Treasurer [Treasury Minister], with the company having to pay
a dividend to the state each year. In terms of regulation, prices
and consumer service were overseen by the Essential Services Commission,
the environment by the Environmental Protection Agency, and water
quality by the Department of Human Services.
7. Bruce Rhodes, Manager of Urban Water Planning
at Melbourne Water, gave the Committee a more in-depth look at
some of Melbourne's key supply and demand issues. Of the water
used across Victoria, 77 percent was used for irrigation (supplied
from separate reservoirs), 8 percent for urban and industrial
purposes in Melbourne, 9 percent for non-metropolitan urban and
industrial purposes, and 6 percent for rural purposes. Within
Melbourne itself, 62 percent of the water was used for residential
supply, of which 47 percent went to taps, showers and toilets.
The remainder was used in the garden, in clothes washers and for
other purposes.
8. Turning to Melbourne Water's catchments, it was
noted that 80 percent of water was supplied from 140,000 hectares
of land specifically set aside for water supply, with the remaining
20 percent coming from unprotected areas. The protected areas
were designated as national park and were free from human habitation,
farming and industry, resulting in a very high quality of water.
The reservoirs could hold 1.7 million megalitres, but there had
been a below average inflow since 1997. Accordingly, the Drought
Response Framework—providing for increasingly severe water
restrictions—had been implemented alongside a high-level
communications campaign to promote water conservation amongst
the public. The latter consisted of distributing brochures and
booklets, running a comprehensive website—with information
on reservoir levels, water conservation, educational initiatives
and so forth—and disseminating daily water storage information
through the media and various other means. As a result of the
restrictions and communications campaign, water use during the
summer had dropped significantly.
9. The second presentation came from Barton Williams
and Simon Hilbert of VicUrban, the Victorian Government's urban
development agency. VicUrban was responsible for developing rural
and metropolitan projects throughout Victoria, focusing on community,
affordability, sustainability and commercial success (the body
is required to make a profit). The sustainability objective was
underpinned by a Sustainability Charter.
10. VicUrban had worked on water sensitive urban
design for over 15 years, using collected stormwater as an amenity
in developments such as Lynbrook and the Docklands, and working
towards demand reduction through efficient water use and the utilisation
of alternative water supplies. The current flagship project, Aurora,
a community of around 25,000 people in 8,500 homes on a 622 hectare
site, would aim to minimise demand for potable water through water
re-use and a fit-for-purpose water use strategy.
11. Specifically, it was intended to treat wastewater
on-site and re-use it for car washing, garden watering and toilet
flushing. In addition, stormwater would be treated through swales,
rain gardens and bio-remediation ponds before being discharged
into receiving waters. The use of roofwater for domestic hot water
supply had also been encouraged. There were potential health issues
relating to the latter, but these could probably be addressed
if the water was heated to the regulation minimum of 60 degrees
Celsius.
12. In general, however, there were several challenges
and obstacles facing the spread of water sensitive urban design
which needed to be addressed. At an economic level, there were
few financial incentives for developers and the costs of supply
and installation of the necessary infrastructure could not always
be recovered through the sale price. Moreover, local authorities
could be reluctant to carry out the required infrastructure maintenance,
predominantly through a lack of understanding of the benefits
and potential costs involved. At a regulatory level, there was
a perceived lack of information from the Environment Protection
Authority and local councils about the requirements for water
sensitive urban design elements, for example the required water
quality standards for different uses. Finally, there were potential
problems with ensuring public acceptance of water re-use due to
the fear of adverse health impacts.
Tuesday 31 January
Tour of Council House 2 and meeting with Lord
Mayor
13. In the morning the Committee was given a tour
of Council House 2 (CH2), a new development by the City of Melbourne
to provide the Council with additional office space. As the Lord
Mayor explained later (see below), CH2 is intended to be a benchmark
building reflecting the City of Melbourne's determination to achieve
environmentally sustainable growth.
14. The tour was conducted by Peter Cooper of NuSource
Water, which designed the wastewater treatment and sewer mining
facility in the basement. The facility would take the building's
wastewater and treat it to a "Class A" standard, before
recycling it for toilet flushing, cooling devices, irrigation
around the building and other purposes around the City. To augment
the amount of water available, it was intended to take raw sewage
from the mains sewer that runs past the building and subject it
to the same treatment process. It was suggested that up to 100,000
litres of Class A water could be produced each day. The cost of
the process was estimated at A$1.57 per cubic metre of water treated,
comparing favourably to the A$1.86 per cubic metre (a combined
water and sewerage price) with Melbourne Water. However, it was
not entirely clear to the Committee exactly which costs and externalities
were factored in to these figures, nor how the energy use needs
could be reconciled in terms of life cycle analysis.
15. The treatment process itself had no biological
component and operated within a sealed unit, ensuring that there
were no odour problems. The solids would be removed by screening
and returned to the mains sewer, with the remaining wastewater
passing through ultra-filtration ceramic membranes. Ceramic membranes
were being used in spite of the extra expense because they could
deal more effectively with contaminants and be cleaned easily
with hot water. Finally, the treated water would go through a
reverse osmosis process. The facility could be switched off during
holiday periods.
16. Following a look around the other parts of the
building, the Committee was greeted by the Lord Mayor of the City
of Melbourne, John So, at the Town Hall. He explained his determination
to promote sustainable growth within the City, referring both
to CH2 and to other initiatives such as the installation of a
solar panel system over Victoria Market. There was also huge potential
to export environmentally sustainable technologies to Asia. The
Chief Executive of the Council added that CH2 was intended to
demonstrate to the building industry that environmentally sustainable
design is practicable. He also noted that consideration was being
given to using sewer mining to provide all of the water needed
to irrigate the City's parks and gardens.
Tour of Docklands
17. The Committee proceeded to the Melbourne Docklands,
where VicUrban is working on regenerating the area with the intention
of creating a home for 20,000 people and a workplace for 30,000.
The area is a municipality in its own right and VicUrban currently
controls all development as well as the parks and the roads. Mark
Haycox, an urban designer with VicUrban, welcomed the Committee
and conducted a tour around the outside of the 64,000m³ National
Australia Bank and the surrounding Docklands Park.
18. Using the National Australia Bank building as
an example, Mr Haycox explained that all roofwater was channelled
through an attractive bio-swale system before being piped to the
wetlands in Docklands Park for further treatment prior to storage.
Similarly, stormwater landing on the streets was captured and
drained to the trees at the side of the road, which acted as "mini
bio-filters" by removing the nitrogen and phosphorus, before
being piped to the wetlands and thence to underground storage.
The treated stormwater in the storage areas was then used for
irrigation of the parks in the precinct. Up to 10 million litres
of stormwater was treated each year, with each storage area holding
up to 550,000 litres at any one time. The park itself was an attractive
space, with the wetlands and urban art providing features of interest
and a public amenity.
Seminar at Monash University
19. In the afternoon, the Committee took part in
a discussion session with a group of academics from Monash University
at the Clayton Campus. The Monash attendees were: Dr Grace Mitchell,
Dr Tim Fletcher and Dr Ana Deletic of the Institute for Sustainable
Water Resources; Dr Rebekah Brown of the School of Geography and
Environmental Science; and Dr Bob Birrell of the Centre for Population
and Urban Research.
20. The Monash representatives started by praising
Australia's Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) Programme, an initiative
funded by the federal government to bring together researchers
and research users. The programme, which included a number of
CRCs dedicated to water, had provided solid financial incentives
for industry and the universities to work together, and had stimulated
collaboration between the universities themselves. The industry
was very much signed up to this kind of collaboration, not least
because of the long-term drought problems.
21. By contrast, it was noted that it was difficult
for British universities to work with the UK water industry, which
tended to focus disproportionately on certain issues such as leakage
at the expense of more visionary research. Part of the reason
for this was that efficiencies resulting from innovation by water
companies were effectively "taken away" by Ofwat at
each five-yearly period review. Thus there was little for companies
to gain, and much for them to lose, by investing in new technologies
which were not guaranteed to succeed.
22. A practical example of where Australia's positive
attitude to innovation had reaped benefits was the Lynbrook development,
constructed in the mid-1990s. This development had included an
innovative form of stormwater management, not dissimilar to that
seen at the Docklands site, whereby stormwater was collected,
filtered through wetlands and collected in a lake that provided
a pleasant amenity for residents. Crucially, Melbourne Water had
underwritten the economic risk of this innovation, pledging to
replumb the whole area if it did not work. However, the scheme
had proved economically beneficial for Melbourne Water which,
along with the positive impact on house prices of a view over
water, had generated momentum for the construction of more such
developments.
23. On the issue of demand management, it was felt
that there had been less incentive for UK water companies to cut
demand since privatisation. By contrast, a business case for cutting
water demand had been identified in Australia and the government,
regulators, academia, industry and the public were all signed
up to it. This attitude manifested itself in many different ways:
for example, billboards around Melbourne alerted people to reservoir
levels; the Deputy Premier of Victoria had become a champion of
water issues; and the media was very much involved in the drive
to heighten awareness of the problems presented by the ongoing
drought.
24. These initiatives had combined effectively with
the psychological impact of some restrictions on water use and
the use of rising block tariffs, whereby households were charged
a progressively higher unit cost for the water they used above
a certain threshold. Because of this combination of factors, water
saving devices had become very popular amongst the public. Devices
such as water butts were thought to be almost "fashionable".
There was also praise for the new Water Efficiency Labelling and
Standards (WELS) Scheme, under which water-using appliances and
fittings would carry a "star" rating indicating their
comparative water efficiency alongside an estimate of their water
consumption. The UK could learn lessons on all of these issues.
25. Finally, the issue of desalination was discussed.
Although low-energy desalination would be desirable if it could
be achieved, there was a general feeling that stormwater and wastewater
were arguably easier to treat than salt water. Therefore, it was
suggested that the primary focus should be on the latter for the
time being, especially in the UK.
Presentation from Yarra Valley Water
26. In the afternoon, the Committee was welcomed
to Yarra Valley Water's offices by the Chairman, Alan Cornell,
and the Chief Executive, Tony Kelly. Mr Kelly gave the first
presentation, explaining that Yarra Valley Water—which has
a customer base of some 1.6 million people—was one of the
three retail water companies providing water and sewerage services
in the Melbourne area, all of which were state-owned but operated
under corporation rules. It had originally been intended to privatise
the three retail companies but this plan had been shelved indefinitely.
27. Faced with the current serious drought, and an
expected long-term increase in temperature and decrease in rainfall,
Mr Kelly explained that Yarra Valley Water was focusing above
all on water conservation. This was by far the best way to cope
with the twin challenges of population growth and water shortages,
because as a concept it was socially acceptable, economically
viable and ecologically desirable. Yarra Valley Water demonstrated
that they had undertaken very detailed and comprehensive sustainability
assessments of all aspects of their service provision.
28. The key to water conservation was behavioural
change amongst the public, which was being addressed in Melbourne
in the following ways: the introduction of permanent water saving
rules; continuing community education; a rebate scheme on water-saving
devices until June 2007; mandatory water efficiency labelling
on appliances; water efficient plumbing for new homes (fittings,
flow control valves); and funding for conservation initiatives
such as Smartwater. In addition, the water companies were working
with developers to reduce water use by up to 25 percent in new
developments and with industry to help cut consumption. Work was
also continuing on leakage reduction.
29. The Committee was particularly impressed by the
company's Smart Accounts, introduced in 2004 to provide better
information to customers about their consumption of water. Under
this scheme, water bills[160]
showed each household its consumption over the last quarter and
compared this to its usage in each quarter over the last year.
Furthermore, the bills enabled comparison of usage against the
average for households of a similar size and against best practice
levels.
30. Also in 2004, the company had introduced rising
block tariffs, under which there were three "tiers"
of water usage with the unit price increasing in three steps,
including a five percent environmental contribution to help factor
in externalities. The unit price for the first block of water,
at 2004/5 prices, was A$0.75 per kilolitre; the price per kilolitre
in the next block was A$0.88; and the price in the highest block
was A$1.30. This clearly provided an additional spur for customers
to keep their water use in check. There were a range of measures
available to help vulnerable customers or large households having
trouble paying their bills, although it was notable that family
size and household income were not factored into the tariff structure.
31. Another initiative of interest, currently in
the testing phase, was the Ecosaver retrofit programme whereby
banks would offer discounts on loans to members of the public
on the condition that the saving be spent on water efficient devices.
This was felt to be a promising scheme because the customer would
pay the same overall and no subsidies would be needed. Yarra Valley
Water's end-use research had shown that using the most water efficient
appliances could potentially reduce household non-seasonal indoor
usage from 169 litres per day to 118 litres per day, which would
clearly be a valuable saving.
32. Finally, the Committee was told about the new
"star" rating for energy and water efficiency in homes.
Under this initiative, promoted by the federal Government and
picked up by the Victorian Government, all new houses would require
a five star rating which could be achieved through the provision
of one of the following: a rainwater tank connected to a toilet;
solar power for hot water; or connection to the water utility's
water recycling network.
Meeting with the Treasurer of Victoria
33. The Committee later went to the Victoria Department
of Treasury and Finance, where we met with the Honourable John
Brumby MLA, Treasurer of the State of Victoria, Minister for State
and Regional Development and Minister for Innovation. He explained
to the Committee that one of the key reasons that water was managed
successfully in Victoria was the high level of bipartisan policy
cooperation over the last 20 years.
34. Praising the changes to the way in which water
was priced and traded, Mr Brumby noted that water was now
being purchased for the cultivation of more high-value products
such as grapes and almonds, which helped maximise the return on
the water used. He also pointed to progress made by industry,
for example the proposal to send recycled wastewater from Melbourne
to Gippsland (a region east of Melbourne) for use in industrial
cooling in place of fresh potable water, which would in turn be
sent to Melbourne or put back into river flows.
35. Finally, Mr Brumby spoke about the success of
VicUrban, which not only helped to deliver the sustainable development
required by the Government, but also provided the Government with
financial dividends. Moreover, the Government was entitled to
instruct VicUrban on a particular project, although this would
mean that the agency would be exempt from having to provide a
commercial return.
Presentation from CSIRO
36. In the evening, the British Consul General, Peter
West, hosted the Committee and some of the people with whom we
had met, for dinner at his residence. Before dinner, the Committee
was given a presentation by Colin Creighton, Director of the Water
for a Healthy Country Flagship at the Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). CSIRO received A$600m
of federal government money and A$300m of external funding. In
terms of water research, the focus was on three main areas: identifying
better desalination technology; promoting a higher level of indirect
potable re-use of water; and preparing for the impacts of climate
change.
37. Mr Creighton told the Committee that there were
three key issues facing water management in Australia: making
the best use of water by finding the optimum balance between irrigation
and ecology; enhancing water quality and tackling diffuse pollution;
and identifying sustainable urban water systems. The presentation
focused on the latter point, with Mr Creighton stating that the
combination of population growth and climate change meant that
Australia's main cities needed to find a reduction in per capita
water consumption of 40 percent over 25 years and to find alternative
water sources, not least through re-use. Demand management alone
would not be sufficient.
38. Mr Creighton went on to discuss the individual
situations in Perth and Sydney. In Perth, there were a number
of options to address the problems presented by a drying climate:
desalination; groundwater development; engineering redesign; enhanced
water trading; tariff changes; and managed aquifer recharge. The
latter would involve recharging aquifers with treated wastewater,
which would have the added benefit of helping to improve public
attitudes to drinking re-used water. In Sydney, meanwhile, Mr
Creighton noted that demand management had been very successful
and was in fact the cheapest of all the options if external costs
were properly factored in. A desalination plant was also planned
but he felt that this was problematic because it would not help
to create a long-lasting community conservation ethic.
Wednesday 1 March
Tour of Caroline Springs
39. On Wednesday morning the Committee was welcomed
to Caroline Springs, a very large new housing development outside
Melbourne, by Tod O'Dwyer of Delfin Lend Lease, the development
company. Construction of the new community had commenced eight
years ago and completion was scheduled for six or seven years
time.
40. Mr O'Dwyer told the Committee that water sensitive
urban design was a key feature of Caroline Springs. The stormwater
that fell on the development was collected before being delivered
into Kororoit Creek and the ponds throughout the development,
thus creating a community asset and improving the habitat for
wildlife such as the endangered growling grass frog. The water
was cleaned during passage through on-site wetlands, with a higher
quality of water leaving the site than entering it. Of note, the
ponds were maintained by Melbourne Water, which had a statutory
duty to do so if the relevant asset had a catchment of more than
60 hectares. The local council was responsible for maintaining
the other open spaces and, elsewhere, assets with catchments of
less than 60 hectares.
41. This contrasted with the situation in England
and Wales, where water companies were responsible for the provision
of water and sewage services but not sustainable stormwater drainage
systems. Therefore, it was easier for development companies to
allow stormwater to drain into the sewers, where it became the
responsibility of the water companies. There was thus little or
no incentive for development companies to install sustainable
drainage systems. However, it was notable that the proposed Code
for Sustainable Homes encouraged the use of these systems, despite
there being no clear institutional responsibility for their future
maintenance.
42. On the issue of wastewater, Mr O'Dwyer acknowledged
that Caroline Springs was served by a traditional sewerage system
rather than any kind of re-use process, but he suggested that
a different course might be taken nowadays because there had been
significant technological advances in the last decade or so. Indeed,
at Delfin's new development at Mawson Lakes in Adelaide, both
stormwater and wastewater would be recycled and delivered to all
properties—through a separate pipe—for irrigation,
car washing and toilet flushing. There would be separate meters
for recycled water and drinking water.
Presentation from the Ecological Engineering Company
43. In the afternoon, the Committee visited Professor
Tony Wong and Dr Peter Breen of the Ecological Engineering Company,
which was working on a framework for better urban design. Professor
Wong explained that there were three water "streams"
in the urban environment—potable water, treated wastewater
and stormwater—which in turn related to the three priorities
of water sensitive urban design: water conservation; wastewater
minimization; and effective stormwater management. His presentation
focused on sustainable management of stormwater.
44. Sustainable management of stormwater was felt
to be relatively straightforward on green field sites such as
Caroline Springs, because the water could be treated through large-scale
wetlands and ponds. In urban areas, however, there simply was
not enough space for this kind of system and it was therefore
necessary to treat the stormwater on a "micro" scale
as seen in the Docklands development. In particular, the use of
trees as "bio-filters" was appropriate because tests
had shown that they were as effective as normal soil at removing
nutrients and heavy metals, and the trees themselves in fact helped
to maintain the porosity of the soil around them. Professor Wong
added that it was important to engage local residents on such
projects, ensuring that they understood the processes and felt
a sense of ownership. It was also extremely valuable to bring
water into the public domain by making it highly visible in the
ponds and wetlands, because it helped to ingrain in people's minds
that water is a precious natural resource.
45. If this kind of stormwater management was to
become widespread, it was important for local, state and federal
government to set catchment-wide water management goals and to
increase the provision of guidance on best practice and run-off
quality. Guides for designers were also felt to be of value, but
it was important to allow scope for innovation.
Meeting with Professor John Langford
46. Subsequently, the Committee visited Professor
John Langford, Director of the Melbourne Water Research Centre
at the University of Melbourne. He emphasised the importance of
careful allocation of water because, with the growth in demand
and the impact of climate change, there would be greater competition
for resources between household and industrial use, irrigation
and the environment. It was therefore important to establish water
markets that allowed reallocation of water between users and sectors,
and the separation of water rights from land ownership had been
valuable in this regard. He also felt that the rigour of financial
accounting should be applied to accounting for water resources.
47. On demand management, Professor Langford told
the Committee that universal metering helped to drive down water
consumption in the short-term but that, after four to five years,
consumers' behaviour tended to revert to what it had been before.
It was therefore essential to reinforce the conservation message,
which could be achieved by user pays pricing—including the
rising block tariffs discussed above—and by initiatives
such as making mandatory the installation of dual flush toilets
in new bathrooms. Combined with continuing public awareness campaigns,
these initiatives had proved remarkably successful in Australia;
for example, Sydney had accommodated 700,000 additional people
since 1982/3 while average annual demand for water had remained
essentially the same. Melbourne had also reduced the average per
capita demand significantly.
48. However, the "low hanging fruit" had
now been picked and making further progress in demand management
was becoming increasingly tricky. Apart from anything else, it
was difficult for a water utility that makes money out of selling
water to sell less of it, thus reducing profits. It would therefore
be desirable to provide financial incentives to companies to promote
water efficiency because, unlike with heavy regulation, this would
stimulate innovation. Currently, however, Melbourne had a target
of reducing per capita consumption by 15 percent by 2010 yet there
were no rewards or penalties in place.
Presentation from the Water Services Association
of Australia
49. The final meeting of the day was with Ross Young,
Executive Director of the Water Services Association of Australia
(WSAA). The WSAA is the industry body for water companies but
also has a role in research along the lines of UK Water Industry
Research (UKWIR). Recently the WSAA had commissioned a report
to develop a methodology for the assessment of sustainability
in water management in Australia. This study was undertaken by
specialists from the Centre for Water and Waste Technology (University
of New South Wales, Sydney), the Sustainable Water Division of
the New South Wales Department of Commerce and CIT Urban Water
(Chalmers University, Sweden).
50. Setting out the context of water management in
Australia, Mr Young reported that agriculture accounted for 67
percent of the water used whereas domestic consumption only accounted
for nine percent. However, he noted that politicians were notoriously
reluctant to take any action to change water allocations because
it would be electorally unpopular. Of the water used in households,
44 percent on average was used outdoors—mainly because of
the long, hot Australian summers and the popularity of "English-style"
gardens that required large amounts of water—which was far
higher than in the UK.
51. Having provided an outline of the projected population
growth in Australia's cities and the implications for water demand
and supply, Mr Young addressed the issue of competition in the
water industry. Although competition was virtually non-existent
because of the water companies being state-owned, certain third
party access rights were being introduced in Sydney, whereby private
companies would be able to take on customers and then extract
a proportionate amount of sewage from the mains sewerage system.
This would then be treated and might be passed on to industry,
for example. However, there was a danger that private companies
might "cherry-pick" the easiest or most profitable opportunities,
thus unfairly disadvantaging the existing utilities.
52. Finally, Mr Young displayed considerable caution
about increasing the use of desalination as the sole solution.
The costs had decreased in recent years but the rate of decrease
was slowing, and there were considerable concerns from the community
about the high energy requirements (and thus increases in greenhouse
gas emissions) and the impact of brine discharges on the marine
environment. Moreover, there was a danger of engendering a perception
amongst the public that there was an endless supply of water,
which would most likely have an adverse impact on attitudes towards
water conservation.
Thursday 2 March
Presentation from Sydney Water
53. On Thursday the Committee arrived in Sydney,
where we were welcomed to the offices of Sydney Water by Judi
Hansen (General Manager, Sustainability) and Tom Gellibrand (Manager,
Urban Growth). Sydney Water was a state-owned corporation whose
prices were set by the Independent Regulatory and Pricing Tribunal.
The company purchased water from the Sydney Catchment Authority—an
agency of the New South Wales Government—and delivered it
directly to customers; in other words, there were no separate
retail companies unlike in Victoria. Sydney Water also treated
the bulk of Sydney's wastewater at its treatment plants on the
coast, with a portion of the bio-solids being re-used by agriculture.
Interestingly, there were few difficulties with public attitudes
about this kind of re-use of bio-solids from sewage treatment,
unlike in the UK.
54. Ms Hansen proceeded to outline Sydney's Metropolitan
Water Plan, which set out the city's plans to secure supply and
reduce consumption over 25 years. Sydney was expected to accommodate
an additional one million people by 2031, with approximately 23,500
additional dwellings being built per year. The main supply options
to meet this extra demand were: increasing water transfers; accessing
deep water in existing storages below the current outflows; investigating
the groundwater supply; providing desalination for drought and
long-term water supply; and recycling of wastewater, although
only for non-potable uses at this point in time because of public
acceptance issues.
55. On water conservation, Ms Hansen noted that the
company had retrofitted 300,000 properties with water efficiency
devices at a heavily subsidised charge of A$22 per household (or
free of charge for certain low income households). This included
the provision and installation of a water efficient showerhead,
tap flow regulators and toilet cistern flush arrestors—as
well as the repair of minor leaks. This had resulted in an impressive
average saving of 20,900 litres per household per year (approximately
12 percent of average indoor water use), a figure which showed
little signs of declining over time. This amount of water also
equated to an annual saving of three tons of greenhouse gas emissions
per household per year. Overall, Sydney Water's Demand Management
Programme had cost A$107m since 1999 and, as of 2005, a total
of 34,600 megalitres per year was being saved.
56. The State Government had also implemented a number
of initiatives aimed at cutting water use. The Water Saving Fund
had provided financial incentives for businesses to save water.
The BASIX (Building Sustainability Index) scheme, meanwhile, had
required all new houses built in Sydney—and alterations
or additions to existing homes—to reduce their mains water
consumption by 40 percent compared to the current average
for similar sized homes. In order to meet this target, builders
could install water efficient fittings and rainwater tanks, or
connect to a recycled water supply where available. Moreover,
from 2007 a minimum level of water efficiency would be required
when a dwelling is sold, a level which could be achieved through
Sydney Water's retrofit service.
Friday 3 March
Presentation from the Institute for Sustainable
Futures
57. On Friday morning the Committee visited the Institute
for Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology
Sydney. The Director of the ISF, Professor Stuart White, and Research
Principal, Ms Andrea Turner, explained that the Institute worked
with industry, government and the regulatory authorities to undertake
applied research and feed into public policy.
58. Professor White focused on the concept of Integrated
Resource Planning, which says that water is a derived demand whereby
people need the services it provides rather than the water itself—so
saving water through investment in improved efficiency or substitution
has the same effect as increasing supply. Accordingly, the role
of utilities should be redefined as one of service provider rather
than commodity supplier. Cost reflective pricing was necessary
but not sufficient; a disaggregated understanding of water use
was needed, including end-use analysis, to identify the best ways
of reducing usage.
59. The ISF had undertaken very detailed studies
of the economic and energy implications of introducing individual
demand management measures and of exploiting new resources. Case
studies had shown how certain measures could be optimally introduced
in stages and how some schemes (such as retrofitting rainwater
collection for garden irrigation) were not always the best option.
There were also major differences between the effectiveness and
efficiency of options for new buildings and retrofitting in existing
properties. The ISF approaches predominantly focused on economic
cost-effectiveness and in some cases had also used sustainability
assessment based on multi-criteria assessment, coupled with deliberative
processes.
Meeting with Blair Nancarrow
60. The following meeting, with Blair Nancarrow,
Director of the Australian Research Centre for Water in Society
at CSIRO Land and Water, covered the social components of water
management. She noted that the social aspects of water use were
often neglected, with the task of involving the public all too
often occurring only after major water management decisions had
already been taken. Social research was essential in understanding
the drivers of people's decisions and behaviour and therefore
the limitations to particular courses of action; difficulties
often started to crop up when initiatives began to impinge on
people's lifestyles.
61. Turning to her research, Ms Nancarrow discussed
some of the difficulties presented by public attitudes to water.
For example, on the issue of recycled wastewater, she had identified
a "yuk" factor which is an emotion brought about by
thoughts of human waste products. Information and education had
little impact on people's intention to drink treated wastewater
or eat products grown with treated wastewater, and the emotional
component had a significant influence on these decisions. Interestingly,
people were more willing to consider drinking recycled wastewater
if it first went through a managed aquifer recharge process or
into a short length of river; the interaction of the treated wastewater
with nature reassured the public about its quality.
62. Asked about the implications of the Water Framework
Directive in the UK, Ms Nancarrow noted that Australia was at
the forefront of integrated catchment management, as demonstrated
by the success of the grassroots-led Landcare movement. However,
she warned that historically there had been too large a distance
between federal funding and the stakeholders on the ground, with
funding often reputedly being siphoned off by states rather than
reaching those stakeholders. By contrast, she pointed to the National
Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAP) which was bringing
together all levels of government, community groups, individual
land managers and local businesses to tackle these issues and
for which the funding would be more effectively delivered.
Tour of Warragamba Dam
63. The final engagement of the visit to Australia
was a tour of Warragamba Dam, which alone accounts for around
80 percent of the region's available water supply. Water is collected
from the catchments of the Wollondilly and Coxs River systems,
covering an area of 9,050 square kilometres, to form Lake Burragorang
behind Warragamba Dam. The Committee was given an introductory
talk by Graeme Head, Managing Director of the Sydney Catchment
Authority, before being given a tour around the dam.
160 An example of which is reproduced on page 76. Back
| 
