DESAL-questions asked and answered in our brochure and more questions answered
The Penguin Brochure -
Please read our brochure and see if it answers any of your questions.
ask your question
If not please feel free to email us at
info@yourwateryoursay.org
and we will endeavour to answer your question as quick as possible.
But please keep in mind that we are just a small community group, trying to get to and trying to make sense of the not always accessible information.
So please bear with us if it should take a bit longer to get back to you.
questions posed and answered
question:
Please reply as to the litre capacity of the tanks in each suburban backyard to collect 150 billion litres ( the output of the desal plant) in 60 percent of Melbourne backyards if the current drought AND YOUR PREDICTION OF DOOM & GLOOM CONTINIES. ie: DECREASED RAINFALL
Please also reply as to IF the desal plant goes ahead, how it will mean NO MORE CAPPUCCINOS, Come on now , do you really believe that?????
And as far as recycling is concerned, would you sooner drink a glass of water that I have shit in OR a glass from a desal lant???
Our answer:Thanks for the email and those common concerns.
The water tank alternative was examined and costed by economists Marsden Jacobs Associates, at the request of the Australian Conservation Foundation, and the results were published by ACF on April 16, 2007 can be seen on the ACF website
Report by Marsden Jacobs - The economics of rainwater tanks and alternative water supply options
which concluded that tanks are cost competitive c.f. desal and dams, and are 5 times as energy efficient than desal per litre of water.
Based on their figures, a 10000-litre rainwater tank can save more than 140000 litres of water per household per year.
Personally we have 2 20000 litre tanks; a 10000 litre tank is not that big, and where some homes cannot accomodate this, other homes and particularly businesses / public or commercial buildings can accomodate a much larger capacity; thus an average of 10000 litres is very realistic.
Logistically, 72% of existing Melb homes can have a water tank; that is over 1000000 homes. Doing the sums the water captured by this is equal to what the desalination plant is proposed to produce.Depending on which report you read, between 6 and 12% currently have tanks. Many new estates are putting underground tanks to new houses; eg. Vaucluse in Doreen is installing 10000 litre tanks to every allotment.
Cost of a steel 10000 litre tank is less than $2000, pump $500; much less when economies of scale are introduced. ie. less than 2.5 billion dollars for 1000000 tanks, and minimal ongoing costs c.f. desalination.Additionally, according to more conservative government reports Australian households in temperate Australia can save 50-70 per cent of the water they consume when rainwater tanks and grey water recycling (laundry water to gardens) are combined with other water efficiency measures (low flush toilets / low flow showerheads).
Currently Melbourne homes use approx 260 gigalitres per year; thus again highlighting in a different way how we can save the amount of water the water factory will produce.Remember that even if we can only achieve an average of a 5000 litre tank per 72% of homes (thus 80 Gl / year), there are many other ways to save lots of water.
450 Gl stormwater runs into our bays each year; water experts such as Chris Walsh confirm we can easily capture half of this (yes, some of that will be collected in those water tanks, but only a relatively small amount), ie 225 Gl; and that’s before fixing leaky infrastructure and using recycled water!
Re “OUR PREDICTION OF DOOM & GLOOM CONTINIES. ie: DECREASED RAINFALL”; this is a CSIRO prediction, not ours. It is a constant whether arguing water tanks or desalination (well not really; this prediction is theoretically less dramatic
with water tanks because in fact desalination worsens the prediction 5 times relative to water tanks based on the Marsden Jacobs Associates paper as above) and the proposed factory has a finite capacity c.f. tanks that can grow with increasing building.Re “NO MORE CAPPUCCINOS”; that is obviously a tongue in cheek dig at the increased cost of water to end users under desalination c.f. other “cheaper” alternatives.
Re “and as far as recycling is concerned, would you sooner drink a glass of water that I have shit in OR a glass from a desal plant???”: No experts are yet proposing that recycled water be drank in Victoria (though recycling technology does produce completely safe potable water and is drank in many places overseas where real water shortages do exist!).
The proposal is for it to be used in industry (eg. almost 150 Gl of potable water is currently used for cooling Latrobe Valley power stations; this can be easily substituted by safe treated water from the Carrum treatment plant; a proposal state government previously supported).
Then there are recreational fields, other industry etc. Many new estates are putting in dual pipe systems to accomodate use of recycled water; they just need the supply of it to utilise these systems!!Interestingly, there is a treatment outfall just east of the proposed factory; in westerly currents (frequent) there is a real likelihood of this being drawn into water to be desalinated.
Please feel free to ask any more questions.




