Vic govt changes rules on water tanks

Ed Perry · Jun 28, 2007 4:33 am

The Age June 25, 2007 - 10:19AM

As the big dry rolls on, Victorian home builders will no longer be compelled to fit new homes with a rainwater tank.

Fairfax newspapers said that a leaked report showed home builders faced a raft of changes after the Victorian cabinet this month signed off on the second round of its five-star environmental standards for new homes.

Under the new regulations, to be phased in over the next two to three years:

- the scope of the five-star standards will be broadened to cover fixed appliances such as heating, cooling, hot water and lighting;

- rate water savings and energy efficiency separately; and,

- set as-yet-undetermined targets for water, energy savings and greenhouse gas emissions per square metre of floorspace.

But to offset extra costs from the regulations, the requirement for rainwater tanks and solar hot water heating will be dropped, the report said.

The leaked report was endorsed by Premier Steve Bracks, Treasurer John Brumby, Water Minister John Thwaites and Planning Minister Justin Madden, it said.

Government spokeswoman Claire Miller told Fairfax the new regulations were more flexible and sophisticated.

RMIT adjunct professor Alan Pears, a green building expert, told Fairfax the removal of the water tank requirement made sense if the regulations were broadened to encourage alternatives such as grey water recycling.

sneakersss · Jun 28, 2007 10:29 am

Great! So do you think I can get the builder to not install our rainwater tank and give me the credit back?

Adrian B · Jun 28, 2007 2:10 pm

OK the rare occasion I get on my soapbox SO LISTEN UP!!!

Just because we get a little bit of rain the govt decies to reduce the need for tanks. how stupid is that!!

It is a sad reality that city folk whinge and worry about their gardens drying out and their grass turning brown, yet farmers are going out and shooting their stock that they cannot sell, and then unfortunately shooting themselves. In the scheme of things, a water tank is not a big cost, and allows people to use water that would otherwise go down the drain.

Stage 3a is a crock of you know what and a vote collector. Ballarat, Horsham and Geelong have been on stage 4 or above, I think Euroa might be on Stage 5 or more??

Here is an example of how much water can besaved.1 square metre of roof space with 1mm of rain of it is 1 litre.
Take an average size roof of approx 250sqm.
If you had 4000 houses with tanks, thats a megalitre, aka a hell of a lot of water!. And thats for 1mm of rain. Save that into tanks for domestic use, and wow, more water in the dams. Mind you, this is on the assumption that all downpipes were used, which would be very rare.

For once I think the govt got it right by demanding tanks be installed in new houses, I think they are going backwards in removing that legisation.

Could someone please help me off my soapbox now........

Yak_Chat · Jun 28, 2007 2:54 pm

I do note that the report is April 07.
So it's maybe a little old to be a reaction from the recent rains?

But - I totally agree Adrian -

A really good house design needs to include tanks as PART of the DESIGN to make it really effective - educate the users.

My parents were totally water savvy as they both came from the bush where rainwater was all you had.

But re tanks - there is another issue of cleaning them, which is why they were removed in the first place.
In the 50's - nearly every city house in OZ had a water tank and many govt's across OZ made them illegal (ie you must remove it) because people did not maintain them and the mossies bred there - so for health reasons they were banned. How many people today know how to maintain a water tank, keep the mozzies out, clean the tanks etc?

Anyone ? - Hmm Maybe there is - but I predict that we will have good spate of ross river fever or similar in a few years time and you watch what happens then. :shock:

Knee jerk govt reaction stage left I reckon !

But that's not to say we do not need them nor should have them - We do and yes we should collect the water from our roof - but what does that do - what part of the groundwater system is then missing out on this water and what long term effect is that having - rising salinity - creeks not flushing, Fish not breeding, birds have less fish to eat etc etc - it goes on.

I think the key issue is we need to STOP USING SO MUCH WATER

Then and only then will the need / demand for such big tanks be less and the whole cycle will be different.

Steve

Sallyho · Jun 28, 2007 2:55 pm

I'm all for water tanks regardless of what the government say/think. I will have one in my yard whether or not it becomes a legislation.

perryr · Jun 28, 2007 5:13 pm

Onya Adrian.

I agree with what you say, although I don't think that the revised 5 star legislation is necessarily connected to the recent rain.

In Geelong we've been on stage 4 for awhile. That's life. Stage 3a is, as you said, an election stunt.

Consider this - with the new desal plant etc, water prices will go through the roof (so to speak), so I for one will be insisting on a new tank for our new place (and another one connected to the shed).

Perry

Ed Perry · Jun 28, 2007 8:18 pm

As someone who put a tank in 10 years ago, I agree. But I think today's tank prices and connection costs bear no relation to reality - its supply and demand. This change should take the heat out of the market and get the competition back... and prices should normalise.

Ed Perry · Jun 28, 2007 8:20 pm

Yak_Chat

I do note that the report is April 07.
Steve

The report was dated Monday... and before the deluge.

Ed

newhomebuilder · Jun 28, 2007 10:39 pm

Here in Ballarat we have been on stage 4 for some time now, with our water storage down to only 9.6%.

We have 2 water tanks connected to our house, and 2 to the shed. Havn't had a need to connect to town supply yet (being in our new house for about 9 months now)

grime · Jun 30, 2007 10:57 am

A comment heard on ABC Gippsland during the week.
'The first things that got washed away were the No Dam on the Mitchell signs'

norbs · Jun 30, 2007 11:36 am

Is this an attempt to save the govt. money on tank rebates? I guess now that they are going to build a hugely expensive desalination plant, perhaps they believe tanks are not required!? This govt. seems to react and deflect and change directions as quickly as the weather.

I personally am not for water tanks as I believe the govt. should provide long term and sound solutions for the community (I don't water my garden). They seem to be failing on infrastructure on many fronts (power, water, roads, transport, hospitals, education etc.) but are happily putting money in areas that supposedly lift the profile of Melbourne :evil:

I'm also in two minds about the desalination plant. Yes it will guarantee water supply for Melbourne, but at huge environmental and economic cost. Also, will rural victoria benefit from this? Why not build more catchments?

mattwalker · Jun 30, 2007 12:04 pm

norbs

I'm also in two minds about the desalination plant. Yes it will guarantee water supply for Melbourne, but at huge environmental and economic cost. Also, will rural victoria benefit from this? Why not build more catchments?

SImple, because we can't predict the weather....

Do you know that it will rain over a certain area and at what time?

Desalination is the answer at all costs

norbs · Jun 30, 2007 6:58 pm

mattwalker

norbs

I'm also in two minds about the desalination plant. Yes it will guarantee water supply for Melbourne, but at huge environmental and economic cost. Also, will rural victoria benefit from this? Why not build more catchments?

SImple, because we can't predict the weather....

Do you know that it will rain over a certain area and at what time?

Desalination is the answer at all costs

I disagree. We've had the worst drought on record and our water supplies got down to 28% albeit with restrictions. A damn or too at a much cheaper cost would reduce the likelihood of restrictions.

Oh and for all those opposed to damns on the premise that you need the rain to fill them, well the same applies to water tanks

mattwalker · Jun 30, 2007 7:32 pm

norbs

Oh and for all those opposed to damns on the premise that you need the rain to fill them, well the same applies to water tanks

But not to desalination....

Yak_Chat · Jul 01, 2007 1:59 pm

Disagree Matt-
Short term view to the problem. (But hey we expect that from some people)

The issue is people are using more water than the country can deliver.
So desal can help.

But without major reform to peoples thinking and habits and expectations - people will continue to think everything is fine. Just build another desal plant, then another and another etc

Have a look at the issues the LA viaduct has.

Desal is an option - but we can't just continue to think we can use as much water as we like becasue we can make more water!!!
What do we do when port philip bay trends towards being another dead sea?
Steve

mattwalker · Jul 01, 2007 2:32 pm

Yak_Chat

What do we do when port philip bay trends towards being another dead sea?
Steve

Desalinate it and build another one!!

3timesbuilda · Jul 02, 2007 10:42 am

Yak_Chat

But without major reform to peoples thinking and habits and expectations - people will continue to think everything is fine. Just build another desal plant, then another and another etc

Have a look at the issues the LA viaduct has.

Desal is an option - but we can't just continue to think we can use as much water as we like becasue we can make more water!!!
What do we do when port philip bay trends towards being another dead sea?
Steve

First off, I was under the impression the this is not going to be build on Port Philip bay but rather the open sea. So your dead sea arguement is dead.

The idea that we should restrict our water use is absurd. We should instead be increasing our storage of it. More dams is the cheapest and most effective way to achieve this. Desal is another albeit slightly more expensive option.

Lets consider this: We need to cut our water use so;
lets stop watering sporting venues.
lets ban alcohol as it uses too much water to produce.
lets limit house size to stop water wasteage in construction.
lets ban computers, plasmas, cars and other consumer goods that use lots of water to make.
lets ban meat, dairy, chicken and overseas food.
lets ban fruit as fruit trees are inefficient at using water.
lets remove all public parks and they have trees that suck the water out of the ground.

Starts to sound a bit silly but so is;
lets ban watering gardens.
lets ban long showers.
lets not flush our toilets.

Last week, half a million litres of water flowed into the Thompson dam EVERY SECOND!!! There is plenty of water but huge amounts are wasted by industry, by power plants and by farmers, yes farmers they are capable of being bad too. Ever notice how so much of our farming produce is exported. This is a good thing until we start losing our hygine and standard of living to make farmers a bit richer.

This country has enough water fall on it to give every house 10 times the water it curently uses and still have enough for all our current farming. Governments need to get their act together but there is little votes in it.

/end rant
Phew

Yak_Chat · Jul 02, 2007 8:04 pm

You missed my point 3xB.

I said Port Philipp bay to get a response

- but think of it this way

The oceans are all connected and if every country in the world installed massive desal plants , do you think the oceans could maybe get a bit saltier - even if only slightly?

What impact could that have on fish stocks?

Ever drunk bore water that is 200ppm, then 600ppm, 900ppm and 1500ppm. Try it sometime.

Our farmers are? and I agree it's often caused by abuse not choice

Have you been to the riverland of late?
hectares of orange and other citrus trees are being ripped up and bulldozed by the bucket load due to lack of water.

Do you have a half flush toilet in your house ?
40 years ago you would probably never have even heard of one?

Do you know that there is a predictive watering system - designed in OZ and sold here and overseas that actually reviews the BOM weather forecast -
If rain is due within a timeframe they turn the sprinkers on or off to stop any watering becasue it will be raining when it was "programmed to water"
This system is already installed in SA, VIC, NSW & USA.

I'm not suggesting in any way that we degrade our lifestyle.

Just highlighting the fact that we should be more aware of how and where we use the resources we enjoy to use.

Do you leave the hose running full bore on the concrete while you're washing the car?

Allowing litres and litres of stored, filtered, and pumped water to run down the drain because you do not have a trigger handle on the hose -

It used to be common - but these days most people are aware thatit is wasting wawter and we can turn it off while we are not using it.

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about

And yes - Industry can have the biggest impact and they are making a change - but to just say - store more water and make more avialable is not going to educate them, you or me.

We just need to use it in more harmonious and smarter way

.

Steve

(As for Matt - Well.... he will change

Even if it takes 30 years and it's his son who helps him to learn that consumerism is not the all mighty of life

mattwalker · Jul 02, 2007 8:11 pm

Yak_Chat

(As for Matt - Well.... he will change

Even if it takes 30 years and it's his son who helps him to learn that consumerism is not the all mighty of life

NEVER!!!

I am way to self centered for change.....

ausdesign · Jul 02, 2007 8:50 pm

I'd be interested to know what impact that would have on fish stocks.