Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 12 Hansard (13 November) . . Page.. 3493 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

Many things that can be done in households are simply commonsense and require no legislative change. Let us look at a few examples:

Only run your dishwasher and washing machine when they are full;

Don't pre-rinse your dishes before loading the dishwasher-that saves up to 75 litres a load or almost 25,000 litres a year per household;

Look at using waste water from the washing machine, the shower and the sink to water outdoor plants;

Steam vegetables instead of boiling them;

Chill water in the fridge instead of running the tap until water gets cold;

Take shorter showers;

Fix the washers, repair the leaks.

Leaking taps, worn-out washers and faulty plumbing are major water wasters. A study by the American Water Association showed that plumbing leaks alone accounted for as much as 14 per cent of household usage, with toilets the major offenders which often go undetected. Something as simple as a worn washer causes a tap to drip. A tap dripping at the rate of one drop every second will waste 10,000 litres of water a year. These are simple things, yet the savings that they can effect are enormous when multiplied on a household-by-household basis.

The average household uses 260 litres of water per person per day indoors. This would fall to a 195 litres, a significant drop, even with minimal improvements; and even to 150 litres by introducing more efficient toilets, washing machines, dishwashers, shower heads and bathroom taps. Even further efficiencies can be made by reusing some of this water as grey water in the garden.

While on the subject of toilets-I think this is something that we don't think about often enough-the basic technology of Thomas Crapper leaves much to be desired. In an effort to make solid human waste invisible, pathogen-bearing faeces are mixed with relatively clean urine, and then the slurry is diluted, in Canberra's case, with pure drinking water 100 times its volume. But wait, there's more. That mixture is then combined with industrial toxins in the sewerage system, thus converting what is in essence an excellent fertiliser and soil conditioner into a far-reaching and dispersed disposal problem. Supplying the clean water, treating the sewerage and providing all the delivery and collection in between it is a very expensive business.

The point that I am making is that the bill that I am introducing cannot be seen as a stand-alone measure but as a component of a much wider exercise to raise awareness of how we can better use water. I think that, given the Stanhope government's professed commitment to the principles of sustainability, it would be churlish to oppose this measure on some technical pretext merely to score a dubious political point. The conservation and efficient use of water is far more important than that. The fact that we

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .