Farm1 wrote:

Did you watch "Two men in a Tinnie" and then see the latest news item
on Cubbie? I was amazed at how much water Cubbie had when the Tinnie
show was on but bone dry in the latest news item. I can't believe
that Cubbie trys to store water in what is in effect massive
evaporation ponds and then trys to justify such irresponsible action
in such flat country. Simply beggars belief.

It beggars belief that the pollies allowed it.
Goes to show what the power of a political donation can do.

I was all set to talk the wife into moving to Qld (her home state) but
Beattie is turning out as bad as Joh ever was.

Terryc wrote:
Farm1 wrote:

Did you watch "Two men in a Tinnie" and then see the latest news item
on Cubbie? I was amazed at how much water Cubbie had when the Tinnie
show was on but bone dry in the latest news item. I can't believe
that Cubbie trys to store water in what is in effect massive
evaporation ponds and then trys to justify such irresponsible action
in such flat country. Simply beggars belief.


It beggars belief that the pollies allowed it.
Goes to show what the power of a political donation can do.

I was all set to talk the wife into moving to Qld (her home state) but
Beattie is turning out as bad as Joh ever was.
Yeah then why did he get back in!!

because the opposition where donkies and asses (and one of those
parties even put one of the asses back into the drivers sdeet although
none of them appeared impressed by his dismal performance), and the 18
year old vote because they think putting a tick on paper is a fun game
and they don't know shite from clay.

so he has his mandate (lesson learnt from the bespectacled gnome in
can'tberra), to now feed class 2 recycled sewerage into our fresh
water dams.

and it won't matter what state all premiers will be tarred with the
same brush or they wouldn't be there.

oh and beattie is the cheshire cat.

so what are the alternatives? when apart from a few the voting public
is apparently mindless.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 21:25:54 +1000, Jonno
wrote:

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.gardenlen.com

More from the lovely boys...


http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...0/s1771775.htm

yep all about profits and control, the boys do think that they own 90%
of what falls from the clouds. and they will be charging those who
collect rainwater for selling in bottle, that one was on the abc years
ago so all this is nothing just out of the hat it has been in the
pipeline for at least a decade.

the losers the little people, the winners the multi-nationals and
those boys.

bets are they or theirs will never have this sewerage stuff pass their
lips.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 08:05:25 +1000, Jonno
wrote:

More from the lovely boys...


http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...0/s1771775.htm

With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.gardenlen.com

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
because the opposition where donkies and asses (and one of those
parties even put one of the asses back into the drivers sdeet although
none of them appeared impressed by his dismal performance), and the 18
year old vote because they think putting a tick on paper is a fun game
and they don't know shite from clay.

so he has his mandate (lesson learnt from the bespectacled gnome in
can'tberra), to now feed class 2 recycled sewerage into our fresh
water dams.

Len, what is wrong with recycled sewerage water being used as drinking
water? we have done it here for year. Treated sewerage and industrial water
is pumped back in to the rivers and taken down stream as drinking water.
Given that the daily flows of water dilute the sewered water, however the
process of drinking stuff that has been round once (or several times) isn't
that horrific.

rob

you can have it rob,

obviously the chemical residues in the stuff along with possible
viruses is of no concern. then i suppose if it is going into a river
that gets flushed maybe no worries.

ours is going into our dams no flushing there just years of
accumulated pollutants.

to me it seems like an indictment that in this modern world any
community should have to drink recycled sewerage water.

anyhow so long as the drinkers eyes are wide open. for me i just don't
have that sort of blind faith in the administrator especially at the
end of the day when it is all about profits and control.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 00:04:52 +1300, "George.com"
wrote:

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.gardenlen.com

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
you can have it rob,

obviously the chemical residues in the stuff along with possible
viruses is of no concern. then i suppose if it is going into a river
that gets flushed maybe no worries.

ours is going into our dams no flushing there just years of
accumulated pollutants.

what pollutants are they?

to me it seems like an indictment that in this modern world any
community should have to drink recycled sewerage water.

anyhow so long as the drinkers eyes are wide open.

you have to keep in mind that all water is part of the precipitation cycle,
so all water is recycled. the water you drink tomorrow could have been peed
out by elvis ;-) any "pollutants" in your area which enter the
precipitation cycle (or others, elsewhere) are therefore going to be part of
that as well, so it seems odd to have one set of pollutants to be concerned
about which are solely associated with sewage (?)

for me i just don't
have that sort of blind faith in the administrator especially at the
end of the day when it is all about profits and control.

i don't have much faith in those types either, but recycled sewage would be
the least of it. the standard way it's done, anyway.
kylie

0tterbot wrote:

what pollutants are they?

mercury, cadium, PCB's etc



you have to keep in mind that all water is part of the precipitation cycle,
so all water is recycled. the water you drink tomorrow could have been peed
out by elvis ;-) any "pollutants" in your area which enter the
precipitation cycle (or others, elsewhere) are therefore going to be part of
that as well, so it seems odd to have one set of pollutants to be concerned
about which are solely associated with sewage (?)

evaporation usually cleans the water, althougb PCBs have made it ti the
artic by cycles of evaporation.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:34:34 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:

snipped

what pollutants are they?

snipped
kylie

all those household chemicals used on a daily basis.

all the residue in peoples pee from all the prescription medicines
they take

all the medical including low grade radiation residues from hospital
waste including chemotherapy.

all the residues from light/medium industry that go into the sewer
system least of which are the heavy metals and acids.

plastisizers

and the cocktail of chemical residues mixed together make up dioxins
which are in the end product.

the hard to neutralise viruses, bird\flu, bse/cjd, hepatitis. look at
the rise in legionaires disease from people using potting mixes since
they started putting treated and composted sewerage humus in the
mixes.

hormones mainly estrogen.

and probably some we don't even know about. notice i haven't mentioned
pathogens, because yes i believe they can somewaht easily deal with
them, though we would need assurances that there is a safety valve for
when the system breaks down as it does more often than people may
realise.

and all the interviews i've seen "they" never want to talk about the
above issues.

and what are the checks and balances where communitites have allowed
this to happen? was the administrator transparent in saying that
certain things could be there? have they trialed this so they can
create some parameters so that when problems begin to occur they can
address them?

my bet is the community just swallowed the need for greed, and didn't
seek assurances from those in charge.

like i said my bet is those in charge aren't drinking it, and that
those who do have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

it's the accumlative combined effect the legacy which is going to be
for your childrens/children yet to come? and when they find that what
they did has corrupted the fresh water system then what? there won't
be an effective clean up.

i didn't say what i said to cause a debate i had hoped it may open
some eyes to at least ask the rude questions, and if you are happy
drinking it then far be it from me to convince you otherwise. and we
are going to pay money to drink "it".

there might even be a link on my page to something about sewerage
sludge.
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.gardenlen.com

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
you can have it rob,

obviously the chemical residues in the stuff along with possible
viruses is of no concern. then i suppose if it is going into a river
that gets flushed maybe no worries.

ours is going into our dams no flushing there just years of
accumulated pollutants.

to me it seems like an indictment that in this modern world any
community should have to drink recycled sewerage water.

our problem, at least in Hamilton, is not the availability of water but the
cost of getting hold of it and disposing of it. We have a nice big river
that flows right through town. Increasing city population places pressure on
the existing facilites which have to be enlarged to keep pace. That costs
$$. If we decreased our consumption by 20% that would save the city a mint.
The quality of water in the river has actually improved in recent times I
believe.

rob