Jonno wrote:
0tterbot wrote:

"Jonno" wrote in message
u...

ME Ive been saving water for years, but to come up with corporations
to regulate water is completely crazy.
They refuse to put in more infrastructure, and charge like wounded
bulls for a resource which will become limited.



actually atm they don't charge enough. people would take it more
seriously if it cost more.

Yet they say we couldnt have

come this far without the Thompson dam, then say more dams wont
create more water. Er run that past me again?



it's true that the presence of more dams does not create more rain :-)


With only 9% of all water being used by homes, we need a little more
response than putting the blame on people singing in showers. We
should be so happy. Lets face it, the only one with reason to sing in
the showers are the parliamentarians who leave their job with tax
payer funded super annuation...



i think it's two things. householders are becoming more responsible,
and since they have to, that's good. businesses aren't necessarily
becoming more responsible, but they need to also. just because
business doesn't do it's part yet doesn't mean we shouldn't.
kylie (who relies solely on rain water and dam water now).

Is not about making more rain silly. Its about saving the water stored
and using it when it doesnt.
House holders arent the problem we have to look at.
We have to alos look at the big users and realise that there are people
who will sell to the public all sorts of water saving gadgets as its
their business. So the public feels good about that. But the BIG users
will be the real problem, as well as wasteful water delivery systems.