It's not just because I live here but the latest news about Brisbane's water management program is fluid for thought.
Drought-conscious Brisbane residents have been issued another pat on the back after figures showed water consumption has reduced 47 per cent since the introduction of water restrictions in 2005...It can be done when the doing has to be done as Brisbane's catchment dams are still mere muddy shallow pools. Recent rains did add H20 but it won't be enough to allow the city to reverse to largesse usage.The water consumption figures also illustrated the contributions made by businesses with an almost 35 per cent reduction in water use since the start of restrictions in May 2005. [SOURCE]
So the city can still turn on a tap thanks mainly to the cooperative effort of the people who live here and a considered management plan.
Does this deserve a pat on the back? Yes -- but there are other issues in play. This exercise in conservation indicates what could also be done in regard to any other element related to resource management.
I'm sure that Brisbane can reduce its mains water consumption even more as various ab hoc rainwater tank and grey water recycling measures kick in. But that's the case, you see: ab hoc. This city has not even begun to plan its water usage, water transport, catchment and storage . The change so far registered is primarily a voluntary exercise in reduction with occasional threats(and tragically a disastrous dam project on the Mary River as well as stop gap water recycling measures).
Fostered by good PR -- it does suggest what else could be done in regard to other issues, especially electricity, commuter travel and garbage. People want to be part of such a major project as saving their corner of the planet because we happen to be facing an emergency.
So if Brisbane can slash water usage what about the other parameters we could tackle? And if we can or could tackle them aggressively -- why aren't we?
Why can't we move commuter travel to public transport on a massive scale? What would be required in terms of motivating the shift? Then what infrastructure changes could be generated to consolidate and support that change?
The water situation was -- and still is -- an emergency. This city -- the whole of South East Queensland --is running dry. Do we have to assume that an emergency has to arise before action is drastically taken?
Brisbane's major advantage is that exercises like the water one can work because it is the largest municipality in Australia. So the scale to fiddle was already there and while I'm not advocating council amalgamations as a standard, the fact that the city could intervene at a large level of demographics and 'community' suggests what could be done at state and federal level if the will, method and guts were in there to harness.
So can we combat climate change? You betcha -- but only if we treat it as an emergency -- which it is!
Unfortunately at this election -- even the main stream green perspectives on offer don't do that. We're caught in a crude game of upmanship which has served to obscure the bottom line actions we need to take because piece meal panaceas are plaid off against one another. It's a green urine pissing competition.
And no party with elected representatives -- including the Greens -- is willing to face up to that reality. We need to be on a war footing not at the urinal.
So if water saving is very feasible politics we have to make it that renewable energy production, transport and every other carbon and methane marker you can think of is dealt with using very feasible politics .
