sharetrader
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 121 to 133 of 133
  1. #121
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Lets look at the (non) issues. Christchurch "use twice as much water as Aucklanders". No surprise there as Christchurch gets half as much rainfall as Auckland (600mm vs 1200mm) so at a residential level has a greater need.

    But how much water is there and where does it go: As a broad benchmark the city used 50 million m3 of groundwater a year: 57% goes to residential use, 21% for commercial and industrial uses, 17% is unaccounted for, and 5% for public use. Outside of this private irrigators around the city took 36 million m3 and industries 14 million m3.

    So you have a total of 100m m3 and resident use 28.5%

    Average daily use is around 275,000 m3 a day. Max use over summer gets to about 400,000 m3 a day. Aquifers recharge around 780,000 m3 a day - 95% of Christchurch aquifers are fed from the Waimak

    Anyone smell a revenue gathering exercise?

  2. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    "They [the government] said they can't charge the farmers for it no matter how much they use because we can't decide who owns it, so how can the council charge me for it? I don't mind them charging me to get it to my door, but they shouldn't be able to charge me for supply of it."

    Seems that some of the public still don't understand the difference between charging for water and charging for distribution.

    Some councils are also promoting use-based distribution charges as a way to lower rates for some ratepayers. I suspect just like credit card fees, this will not result in a lowering of the rate take but will instead be treated as an additional source of revenue.

  3. #123
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post

    Some councils are also promoting use-based distribution charges as a way to lower rates for some ratepayers. I suspect just like credit card fees, this will not result in a lowering of the rate take but will instead be treated as an additional source of revenue.
    The problem with paying for distribution is that there is a couple of elements. Cost of infrastructure, R&M and depreciation. Given the number of years the meters have been in the ground (20?) probably little cost here.

    Then there is the cost of pumping water on a daily basis. Arguably this could be done on a pro rata basis house by house. Except the majority of the costs are going to be in a pipe network up to that last 20 meters before it gets to the house. So everyone should pay equally for that. You then end up paying from the gate to the house - a smidge of total costs. Now add on meter reader and account processing costs (which only serves to give people non-productive jobs at ratepayer expense) and it seems costs will outweigh any made up benefits.

  4. #124
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    I think we can close this thread down. It appears that taxing water is now no longer a Labour Policy in the new Labour / NZ First coalition. Winston was dead against it. So best Labour does what Wiston wants.

  5. #125
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,919

    Default

    The problem is getting worse though and we need solutions. Councils on one hand are supporting large acreage intensification increases (canterbury) one moment and then on the other the reduction of nitrates whilst an increasing number of water supplies there are above safety limits for town supply even!!?.
    Note the recent blue baby effects where babies blood can't carry enough oxygen because of the nitrates(cow urine) absorbed through the tap water.

    It seems its off the table for now(water tax) whereas water charges are spreading to more urban centres and water wars will only increase with charges increasing(currently$1-$1.50 a cubic metre) where greedy landowners with water rights are making a killing. A water charge for these people and other heavy users and wasters is still the way to go. Reductions in vol of water used average 30% as soon as people have to pay . Bottlers will be the first and i hope the rest follow whether its for the water or the use of it. Its a global problem , we can learn from the mistakes of others, california for example. meanwhile i look forward to the salvation of our water quality and how its going to be paid for, the polluters are still in the crosshairs and deservedly so.

  6. #126
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    , , napier. n.z..
    Posts
    1,659

    Default

    Collect rainwater in a tank. Drink it, wash in it, flush the toilet with it. And best of all, don't pay water rates. It works for this and thousands of other families and health problems are figments of other peoples imagination. Rainwater also makes the finest spirits and beers.

  7. #127
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,919

    Default

    Hear hear i remember a while back one could buy simple diversionschutes where the leaves etc went one way and the water into the barrel/tanks simple but effective. You've got to stick around AT least another 3 years craic to see what this new govt achieves; i think it will be great things for our communities. sure there will always be some people can't be helped but putting a brush across the lot in some sort of default position is defeatist imo. I know you've experienced the unsavoury aspects of human nature in your profession but thankfully these are in a minority and there are great stories of redemption that come out of there too.

  8. #128
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    The problem is getting worse though and we need solutions. .
    Obviously there is no problem. If there was and Labour was as principled as people say they are then they would be continuing with this policy as they saw it as a solution. They would also ensure the Greens (as the best advocates for water) would have a seat in Cabinet. Instead their policies will be watered down to some outside cabinet role.

    Clearly nothing to see here - time to move on

  9. #129
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,919

    Default

    "Obviously there is no problem" Yes and you're wearing no clothes, and the tides a way off. Greens are doing their apprenticeship and will have influence and reason and facts which labour won't overlook like previous govt.

  10. #130
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    . Greens are doing their apprenticeship and will have influence and reason and facts which labour won't overlook like previous govt.
    The Greens should already have done their apprenticeship - did they learn nothing in 9 years in opposition? Obviously still have their nappies and training wheels on - couldn't even get a single seat at the cabinet table despite having only one seat less to off a Coalition than NZ First.

    Heres something you can take as a given. The Greens will achieve absolutely nothing sitting on the cross benches. Any environmental gains will be claimed by Labour and NZ First. ( I suggest you get a recording of Winstons speech from last night. Listen carefully to how many times he mentioned working closely with the Greens. Then come back and tell me what they are really likely to acheive)

  11. #131
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,919

    Default

    Yes well we will revisit this thread at some point and just see how good your "visions "turn out to be.
    Meanwhile go and catch a trout and reflect on how lucky you are to still be able to do this .Thats what being out in nature is all about, reflecting and accepting oneself as counting in the great scheme of things and leaving ones environment better than one found it(an increasingly impossible goal it seems).

  12. #132
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Meanwhile go and catch a trout and reflect on how lucky you are to still be able to do this .Thats what being out in nature is all about, reflecting and accepting oneself as counting in the great scheme of things and leaving ones environment better than one found it(an increasingly impossible goal it seems).
    I would enjoy my fishing if it wasn't for our damn tourism industry that let some American in with Didymo on his waders. That is a far bigger killer of ecosystems in our rivers than cows - but you wont hear the Greens bang on about that!

    "Didymo smothers streambeds and affects the habitat ofinsects such as mayflies and caddisflies that fish rely on for food. Large quantities ofDidymo can reduce the amount of dissolved oxygen in river water, which also impactsnegativily on fish and invertebrates."

  13. #133
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,919

    Default

    Its a global problem and its right here in NZ building up undeground.Federated farmers have about as much credibility in dealing with water pollution as national.
    Download Document 54.06KB

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •