Big Australia immigration threatens nation’s water security

Late last year, I questioned why climate change activists and environmentalists refuse to question the planned reboot of the mass immigration ‘Big Australia’ policy, which will place increasing strain on Australia’s natural environment and make meeting the nation’s “zero net” emissions commitments by 2050 and impossible goal:

While Australia’s emissions depend on many factors – including our energy use patterns, exports, and how we live – nobody can deny the fact that Australia’s high population growth (immigration) policy will make it next to impossible to meet our targets nor safeguard Australia’s environment.

Population multiplied by units of consumption equals total environment impact. It’s not rocket science. Yet population growth is rarely questioned by environmentalists…

Environmental groups need to stop the hypocrisy and confront Australia’s population addiction head on, since it is a direct driver of our environmental malaise.

Sadly, their cognitive dissonance and concerns of being labelled ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobic’ means that extreme immigration-driven population growth is rarely questioned. This has given the growth lobby free rein to direct policy makers as they see fit.

The very same arguments can be levelled at Australia’s water security, which will be placed under increasing strain as Australia’s population swells by a projected 13.1 million people (a 50% increase) over the next 40 years on the back of extreme immigration levels of 235,000 people a year (charts from the Intergenerational Report):

A new report from the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, summarised in the Herald-Sun, suggests Melbourne could run short of water by the end of this decade as its population swells to 6 million people and then beyond:

A report from Victorian Auditor-General’s Office shows that as the state’s population grows, there will be immense pressure on dams and other stocks of drinking water.

It warns that in 2028 the demand on water for metropolitan Melbourne could outweigh availability unless more is done to take pressure off supply…

“The Victorian Government estimates that the demand for water could exceed our supply in some areas of Victoria as early as this decade due to population growth and climate change,” VAGO wrote.

“To prevent this, the water sector must take further action to increase our water supply and efficiency.

A veritable conga-line of reports released over recent years have warned that Australia faces chronic water shortages as its population swells.

For example, the Productivity Commission in March 2021 warned that the projected 11 million population increase across Australia’s cities “present significant risks to the security of Australia’s water resources”:

Looking ahead, climate change and population growth present significant risks to the security of Australia’s water resources. Drought conditions are likely to become more frequent, severe and prolonged in some regions. Higher anticipated demand from a growing population, alongside reductions in supply, will increase water scarcity and put further pressure on all users (including the environment)…

Australian cities have been growing rapidly and are expected to continue to grow in the long term… By 2050 an additional 11 million people are expected to live in capital cities, and almost half (45 per cent) of all Australians will live in Sydney and Melbourne (up from 41 per cent in 2019) (ABS 2018, 2019c). Notably — with the exception of Darwin — all of Australia’s capital cities are located in southern or eastern parts of Australia, which are regions likely to see future declines in water availability as the climate changes.

In major cities where readily-available supply sources have already been accessed, ongoing population growth is likely to create significant pressure on water supplies. Major supply augmentations will often be needed. Scenarios developed for Melbourne, for example, include a worst case of demand outstripping supply by around 2028…

A draft strategy on Sydney’s future water supply, released in September, warned that Greater Sydney will need up to 70 gigalitres more water in 20 years time if it continues to grow at its present rate. The strategy forecasts that Sydney could be looking at a 13% shortfall in its water supply if its rate of growth is maintained and climate change makes rainfall less predictable. Increased desalination is one way by which Sydney could make up the predicted shortfall:

“A secure water supply is vital and this plan ensures we are able to support economic growth as we recover from the pandemic and set the foundations for the future,” the state’s water minister, Melinda Pavey said.

“We need to plan now for how our growing city and region will use water wisely as Sydney’s population is set to grow to 7.1 million by 2041. During the most recent drought, our dam levels depleted faster than we’ve experienced since records began – at a rate of 20% per year”.

In 2018, Dr Jonathan Sobels – a senior research fellow at the University of South Australia and the author of a key 2010 report prepared for the Department of Immigration (quoted below) warned that Australia’s water security is being placed at risk from endless mass immigration:

…We are coming up towards physical limitations within our physical, built and natural environments that will lead to compromises in the quality of our life…

Not only are the dams not filling, but the ground water supplies are not filling. The only option you have open to you is water efficiency use and whacking up desal plants. But if your population keeps increasing at the rates we have seen in recent times, you won’t be able to afford putting up billion dollar desal plants, which also have their environmental impacts…

The same 2010 report prepared for the Department of Immigration, entitled Long-term physical implications of net overseas migration: Australia in 2050, warned that high net overseas migration will guarantee water supply problems:

Decreased urban water supply is a significant environmental constraint exacerbated by higher levels of NOM.  Modelling shows the vulnerability of Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth to deficits in water supply, on a NOM strategy of 260,000 pa.: a view strongly supported by empirical review of State Government reports…

Only NOM levels of 50,000 pa or less result in Melbourne and Sydney maintaining a small surplus of net surface supply over demand on average out to 2050, assuming current climate conditions persist. Potential options to alleviate water stress at high NOM levels over the longer term may be hard to find.

While it is possible to boost water supplies via technologies like desalination and recycling, these solutions are far more expensive than traditional water storages:

High cost of new water supplies

Accordingly, household water bills will rise dramatically, which will adversely impact lower income households in particular.

In fact, modelling by Infrastructure Australia in 2017 projected that household water bills would more than quadruple in real terms because of population growth and climate change, rising from $1,226 in 2017 to $6,000 in 2067. The report also warned that “the impact of these changes on household affordability could be substantial… and could lead to significant hardship”:

The problems around water is another example of how running a mass immigration ‘Big Australia’ policy wrecks living standards of the working class.

The additional 13.1 million additional people projected by the Intergenerational Report will massively increase Australia’s water demand at the same time as supply is reduced from lower rainfall and rising evapotranspiration rates due to climate change.

Therefore, the best and cheapest thing our policy makers can do to safeguard the nation’s water supplies is ensure that immigration does not return to its manic pre-COVID level, nor is raised to the insane levels demanded by NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet, KPMG and the various business lobbies.

It’s time to cut through the bullshit: Australia’s mass immigration policy is the key threat to Australia’s water security. It’s time to talk honestly about the issue and to start factoring in the huge costs of immigration.

Unconventional Economist
Latest posts by Unconventional Economist (see all)


  1. SupperannuationMEMBER

    Keep emailing your local member/opposition candidate about this. They don’t have anything but all we plebs can do is make some noise.

  2. Add this to the long list of reasons we’re leaving this c(o)untry next month. Too stupid. Too corrupt. Too exposed.

          • Across the ditch, 10 minutes outside Nelson, a nice small city and close close to stunning scenery, great beaches, good golf courses and much better weather than Hellbourne. Not to mention a whole lot less mendacity, stupidity and rampant corruption. It ain’t perfect, but it beats the non-choice between Scomo and Albo in a nation run by and for vested interests to the detriment of everyone else

          • rob barrattMEMBER

            Envy Envy
            And 1/8 as many civil servants per head of population to support, Half a dozen less gubmint web sites telling you how to fill a hot water bottle, 1 car driving license, Wow !

        • Well done, I am very jealous.

          Beautiful place and great people although the weather would be a challenge for me. Close to the South Pacific as and when you needed it though I guess.

          • Nelson has the most sunshine days in NZ. No wind 1 day in 4. Frosty in the winter but clear days and it warms up. Snow on the ranges and an ocean view in the near distance. Plus the 1.4 acre property has 340 vines producing Chardonnay and Pinot, about 150 bottles of each a year. An almost perfect drinking balance for my consumption.

            None of the expensive pointless insurance crap we have to suffer here for businesses, all replaced by no-fault ACC (Accident Compensation Commission) levy that’s way way cheaper. Sure, petrol is more expensive, but you can’t have everything. At least I could afford this piece of paradise when compared to paying $1m+ for a crummy 2-bedder apartment in Prahran. Fibre there has speeds of 500/300 Mbs, so working from home online on Aussie (and kiwi) jobs while looking out over my vines and the sea makes way more sense, especially when there’s excellent free schools minutes down the road.

            I’m the frog who was getting boiled from cold and decided to jump. As China’s iron ore demand craters and coal gets it in the arse, all Australia really has left is a population ponzi scheme to pretend it’s adding value and generating true wealth while destroying its environment and running out of water to house them all. No thanks. I came to Melbourne when the population was 3 million, the place was great. But 20 years later the place is far worse off with 5 million. It’ll be odd for a little while being on the outskirts of a city with just over 1% of Melbourne’s population, but I’m fine with that. I’ll miss the live jazz scene and my favourite bar, and while I give up playing at one of the best golf courses in the world (very pricey Sandbelt) I get to play by the ocean for 1/6th of the annual cost on a lovely course. I’ll invest the difference into my MB fund thank you very much.

            Sometimes you just gotta take the plunge and change the only life you ever get. It’s the 8th time I’ve moved countries so what the hell. I might just change my moniker to Cortez…

        • Which exy sandbelt course are you exfil-ing from
          Congrats on the move
          I’d love a bottle of Pinot thanks! Let us know if you sell it!

          We need an MB forum and messenging

          • Hey there Swampy
            Victoria GC will miss me. Fantastic track and nice members who aren’t show-offs. Like most of these courses its still lost in the 1950s in some ways and the Entrance Fee nowadays is the same as what I paid for my first house back in 1980 in a uni town in NZ. Puts things in perspective.

            Will open up a few days a year for purchases/tastings so we can utilise the tax benefits and its a way to meet a few different people and have a chat. Time to make life fun again…

        • Absolute BeachMEMBER

          Good decision Mr mdsee. And a bit of land as well. Bravo. I look forward to hearing of your’ adventures in the Land of the Long White Cloud.

  3. Uncle WattleberryMEMBER

    I have read and reread your article, including the one from October last year, Leith, and I can’t see any evidence that environmentalists have ignored immigration as an environmental problem. Could you link something please?

    • MerkwürdigliebeMEMBER

      The complete absence of any mention of environmental impact of Australia’s immigration program in the Greens policy statement would be a handy place to start…..

      The Australian Greens


      Australia has humanitarian and legal obligations to accept refugees and reunite families. Australian society benefits from immigration.

      The Australian Greens believe that:

      1. Australia’s cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity should be celebrated for greatly enriching our society and economy, and this diversity is enhanced by the immigration of people to Australia.

      2. Immigration must be non-discriminatory on the grounds of nationality, ethnicity, religion, language, level of English language competence, gender, disability, sexuality, age or socioeconomic background.

      3. Australia must uphold its humanitarian and legal obligations to people seeking asylum and refugees, grant refugees protection and reunite families as required by international human rights law and the Refugee Convention 1951 and its Protocol.

      4. Australia must uphold its humanitarian and legal obligations to special category visa holders.

      5. Seeking asylum is a human right. People who enter Australian territory to seek asylum do so lawfully.

      6. Asylum seeking is a humanitarian issue rather than an issue of border security or defence, and people seeking asylum must be treated with compassion, as our equal in rights and dignity.

      7. The treatment of refugees and people seeking asylum must be humane, transparent, predictable and consistent.

      8. Arbitrary detention of refugees and people seeking asylum is a gross violation of human rights.

      9. Extreme weather events, natural disasters, and environmental degradation as a result of the climate crisis are already, and will continue to displace increasing numbers of people globally.

      10. A co-operative international response is required to find durable solutions for displaced people.

      11. As a party to the Refugee Convention, Australia must fairly and promptly assess the applications of all people seeking asylum who arrive in Australian territory, including territorial waters, irrespective of their mode of arrival.

      12. Australia has additional responsibilities to refugees from countries where Australian defence personnel have been deployed in conflict situations.

      13. Temporary migrant workers are entitled to fair pay and working conditions. They are entitled to a safe workplace, free from discrimination, exploitation, harassment and occupational hazards as well as fair remedial outcomes in the event of exploitation and underpayment.

      The Australian Greens want:

      1. A permanent migration program for refugees and migrants to Australia that prioritises family reunion and humanitarian entrants, and facilitates migration or resettlement to Australia within a reasonable time.

      2. The development of networks, materials and programs that increase community understanding of the causes and benefits of migration.

      3. Sufficient funding for public and community sector agencies providing migrant-specific services to deliver adequate, effective and timely support.

      4. A review of the family, skilled and business migration streams to prioritise family reunion and meeting skills shortages.

      5. Skilled migration programs that do not substitute for training or undermine wages and conditions in Australia.

      6. Accessible pathways to employment for skilled migrants permanently settling in Australia, including, consistent, timely, fair, transparent and non-discriminatory assessment of overseas qualifications.

      7. Adoption of a Human Rights Charter that protects and promotes the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and people who are stateless.

      8. Recognition that children have rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Article 37(b) and (d) and therefore unaccompanied children are entitled to special care and assistance. This requires the abolition of indefinite detention for all people seeking asylum.

      9. No family unit to be forcibly separated by Australian immigration assessment processes.

      10. Greater incentives for rural and regional distribution of refugees and immigrants using successful models for settlement.

      11. Access to Australia’s migration programs, including the family migration program, to not discriminate on the basis of economic circumstances.

      12. The incorporation of relevant international conventions into immigration law to ensure that there is an avenue for complaint when these rights are breached.

      13. Any appointment to tribunals to be independently made in accordance with a predefined formula of civil society representation and legal expertise.

      14. Services for new migrants, refugees and special category visa holders that include appropriate English language and financial literacy classes, social security, health, legal and interpreter services, and post-trauma counselling where needed.

      15. Greater Australian investment in Asia-Pacific regional cooperation to provide safer pathways and long-term planning for people seeking asylum and those displaced by ongoing conflicts and climate change.

      16. Australia to take a leading role in advocating for a new international framework to provide protection and solutions for people at risk of displacement, or displaced, by the impacts of climate change.

      17. Australia to show leadership in our region by fostering international cooperation to protect people seeking asylum and refugees, founded on shared responsibility according to capacity, and by encouraging all nations to sign and ratify and uphold the Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol.

      18. Australia to adequately contribute to the funding of, and work closely with, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and other agencies assisting in the movement of asylum seekers, refugees and displaced people.

      19. An increase in the humanitarian quota, and offshore quotas fulfilled without reference or linkage to any onshore arrivals or other programs.

      20. Restoration of the Australian migration zone to match Australia’s territory and acceptance of responsibility for assessing all asylum claims of people who seek Australia’s protection within the migration zone.

      21. People seeking asylum to be fully informed of their rights on arrival and given immediate access to legal support and health care, assisted by interpreters, as required.

      22. The current system of humanitarian visas (granted only by ministerial discretion) to be replaced with an open, accountable humanitarian visa assessment.

      23. Assessment of applications for asylum completed in a timely and transparent manner.

      24. Refugees to be treated with dignity, including within the discourse used by Australian Government departments and agencies.

      25. The elimination of mandatory and indefinite detention, and the abolition of offshore processing (where a person seeking asylum, refugee or special category visa holder is returned from Australian territory to another nation to be assessed) and other forms of punitive or discriminatory treatment.

      26. Once initial health, security and identity checks are completed within a maximum of seven days, people seeking asylum who arrive without a valid visa or travel documents to be accommodated in the community, unless otherwise ordered by a court, with periodic judicial review thereafter. Access to health and education services must be immediately provided.

      27. All people found to be refugees, but given negative security assessments, to be given the reasons for such assessment, access to legal representation and the opportunity to challenge this in the appropriate forum. They are only to be detained as individually required by court order, with periodic judicial review.

      28. People seeking asylum to have work rights, access to social security, legal representation, interpreters, health care, case management, and appropriate education for the duration of their assessment.

      29. People seeking asylum whose protection visa applications have been denied, and individuals who have had visas cancelled, to be provided with accommodation within the community until they can be repatriated. Where a person is found to be stateless they shall be accommodated in the community until they are issued with a visa or another durable solution is found, in accordance with our obligations under the 1954 and 1961 UN Conventions on Statelessness.

      30. Training of immigration decision-makers to enable them to properly assess claims for family reunion or refugee status based on sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status.

      31. Replacement of the Special Category Visa with a permanent residence visa available to all New Zealand citizens on arrival, with the same entitlements of other permanent resident visas.

      32. When a non-citizen is imprisoned for a crime, once initial sentences are completed, they should be accommodated in the community unless otherwise ordered by a court.

      33. End mandatory deportation of people who are both permanent residents of Australia and citizens of New Zealand

      34. Special category visa holders subject to negative character assessments by the Immigration minister to be given reasons for such assessment and the opportunity to challenge this in the appropriate forum

      35. Visa holders subject to character test to have work rights, and access to social security, legal representation, interpreters, health services, case management, and appropriate education for the duration of their assessment.

      36. Australia to recognise people escaping gender violence and violence on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status, as refugees belonging to a ‘particular social group’ under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees.

      37. Information sessions on Australian law to be available to all migrants in their preferred language. These should include written materials and cover at least employment and other rights, protections against family violence, protections against racial vilification, and all available support services.

      38. Strengthened protections for migrant workers. This includes increasing civil penalties for organisations that are non-compliant and imposing criminal charges on organisations that engage in systemic wage underpayment, modern slavery and trafficking.

      39. Adequate and targeted funding to the Fair Work Ombudsman so that exploited migrant workers can seek individual remedies to recover stolen wages.

      40. Australia’s anti-slavery framework to be expanded to include labour law reforms.

      (Immigration and Refugees Policy as amended by Special National Conference August 2020.)

      • Have had this argument plenty of times with greens voters. They always mention that they recognise the deleterious impact on the environment of over population and aren’t for a big Australia.
        But when asked to point out any time when they have called out the bipartisan mass immigration policies, the response is crickets….
        If you see fraud and don’t call fraud, you are a fraud.

        • Uncle WattleberryMEMBER

          Here you go, mate. From the Greens website:
          The Australian Greens believe that:

          The current level of population, population growth and the way we produce and consume are outstripping environmental capacity. Australia must contribute to achieving a globally sustainable population and encourage and support other nations to do the same.
          Our environmental impact and ecological footprint is not determined by population numbers alone, but by a range of factors including per capita consumption patterns and levels, distribution of resources, agricultural practices for domestic consumption and export, levels and types of industrial activity and production, urban design and transport options.
          Australia’s population policy should be determined by its commitment to:
          ecological sustainability;
          global and domestic social justice and equity, including women’s rights;
          intergenerational equity;
          international human rights obligations; and
          decent wages and conditions for all workers.
          Population policy should not be primarily driven by economic goals or to counter the effects of an ageing population.
          Population policy should consider the geographical distribution of human settlements in addition to population size at the national level.
          Australia has an obligation to accept humanitarian migration, including that resulting from climate change.
          The continuing rapid increase in the human population is drastically affecting national and international outcomes in environmental sustainability, human health and welfare, and other areas. Current rates of resource use are not sustainable and are compounded by inequitable distribution of wealth and power.

          • Thanks for reinforcing my point 😀
            They have principles, but HAVE NEVER objected (press release, press conference, epic rant in Senate etc) to the single biggest driver of population growth by proposing significantly lower numbers, driven by their expectation for the carrying capacity of this continent.
            Talk is cheap. The Greens are frauds.

          • Anders Andersen

            They don’t walk the walk, it’s all talk. Emailed them a few yrs ago over their sustainable pop policy and was referred to their website, when I pointed out that it just said we support a sustainable pop with no numbers I was referred to Larissa Waters, emailed her with the same request and no response.

            They also will not get my vote.

          • Neil Daniher’s famous quote applies to the Greens

            When all is said and done….

            He will be a big loss

            Glad he saw a Cup.

        • WhatcouldgowrongMEMBER

          From what I’ve seen from these people the general idea is to bring in more people but make things more equal, ie lower our living standards to something more sustainable and equitable. Since this won’t be achievable, we have what we have.

      • Australia has ….. legal obligations to …. reunite families.

        yeah, sure it does….

        Australian society benefits from immigration.

        Great, go whole hog and tell Green voters that eternal drought and water restrictions fights White supremacy [tm]

        • and why does a ‘legal obligation’ to reunite families seem to only involve families reuniting in Aust rather than reuniting elsewhere?

      • David WilsonMEMBER

        All good reasons not to vote greens as they will destroy our culture, our economy, our environment with too many people, they want to suppress our right to choose who comes here and in what numbers.
        Just all green leftist crap cleverly disguised as human rights drivel.

      • Absolute BeachMEMBER

        Yep. I abhorrent hypocrites. I want to vote for a greens party but cannot. I’ll look into Sustainable Australia Party.

    • Which environmental groups have opposed the latest Big Australia immigration push? Name one? They are deafly silent.

      Also, where are The Greens? Immigration spokesperson Nick McKim regularly argues for easier visa entry.

      • Absolute BeachMEMBER

        Don’t forget Leith- Aussie pollies have a three year memory. The 2000’s are pre-history for these guys. All it will take is another millennium drought and all the major parties will change their’ tunes. The next drought is likely to affect Southern states the most. How do you reckon social cohesion will be in 2028 when the nature strips are dust, water in the taps tastes like mud and iceberg lettuce costs $10. Then the pollies will DEMAND zero NOM.

    • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

      Is this a joke?

      Greens love mass immigration. Any opposition, and they’re screaming “$%#^ist”

      Greens dragged Labor to be pro immigration in the cities and are behind Labor’s decimation last election.

      WhereTF have you been for the past 20 years?

  4. MerkwürdigliebeMEMBER

    The simple fact of the matter is that the population ponzi alone makes widespread desalination inevitable. The widespread desalination alone makes carbon targets impossible. The carbon target failure alone will see financial penalties applied to anything done in Australia vis the global market.

    As a country we are shoving our head up our jaxi

  5. Believe it or don’t the respective water authorities are pretty well aware of this as threats to “supply” in its various guises is just about the #1 risk they look at over various timescales. Due to the long lead time of planning, approvals, design and construction of fairly large water assets and related infrastructure that takes more than a few years to complete. Its interesting that the most obvious and economic solution to the supply problem isn’t mentioned in either the Dr’s or your assessment above.

  6. Totes BeWokeMEMBER

    There is no way in the world water will be a limiting factor for many decades.

    There’s so much fat in the system it’s ridiculous.

    It’s a non argument.

      • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

        1. Water tanks on every house and block of units
        2. Desal (capable of 15% of present consumption) operates 24/7 and fills inland reservoirs overnight
        3. creek/river/grey/salt water to flush toilets
        4. more desal plants with the salt effluent sent out at night (lower load) via the 2klm-out ocean outfalls
        5. far lower industrial use. Not sure how places like BHP operate, but I’m betting they’re using town supply and fking lots of it. Ditto cardboard and paper manufacturing. No reason they can’t use non potable water
        6. fix leaks (believe it or not are a huge consumption)
        7. quadruple the price, if that doesn’t work double it again, then again
        8. recycling sewage (in poor areas…i.e. everywhere but the elite areas)

        Doing the above we could easily triple Sydney’s population.

        It’s just another part of what’s unfolding. Declining lifestyles and amenity to feed the elites the country’s wealth, who won’t be impacted upon in the slightest. The point is, we’ll be doing all of the above before water will stop them bringing in 400k immigrants a year.

        • I’ve said for a long time coastal cities, all toilet water should be sea water. After all, the fresh scheme water has to be harvested, treated and reticulated. It is an expensive asset.

          Arguments against were retrofitting costs, etc.. I said OK, how about we start with just new builds? I raised this idea in 2003, when the population of Australia was 19.9 million. We are now 25.7 million.

          Virtually all of those additional 5.8 million live near the coast…. imagine 25% of our countrys toilets being sea water how much that would save.

          Could this same principle be applied for sea water air conditioner units? Laundry?

          I’d put the world’s biggest desal plant on the gold coast, and flood the darling whenever it needs it….. irrigate all the way to South Australia.

          • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

            “I’d put the world’s biggest desal plant on the gold coast, and flood the darling whenever it needs it….. irrigate all the way to South Australia.”

            Yep, or harness the triannual cyclonic water further up north that currently flows out to sea.

            Grab all the wasteful environmental flows (flora and fauna are a luxury and do not belong in a 50m plus plus plus Australia).

            Anyone thinking water is a limiting factor needs to start thinking more like a 3rd world citizen to understand how this, and everything else, will unfold for everyone but the elite.

            Our lives are going to sht. This is what we’re doing to our kids, kids.

            We need to stop this, this election, and that means destruction of the Labor and Greens parties.

          • These are nice thoughts but it is clear you are not aware of the cost of manufactured water. That’s what desal is.

          • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

            frag out

            It’s negligible, peanuts, per person. Especially at a quarter today’s consumption. It won’t be a factor that turns mass immigration around.

            “When it’s on the plant can provide 15 per cent of Sydney’s drinking water, turning seawater into 250 million litres of drinking water a day….But it does come at a cost…While the plant lies dormant, Sydney Water customers pay about $87 dollars a year as part of their water bill…..That increases to around $125 when the plant becomes active”

            $125 a year per household to produce 15% of Sydney’s POTABLE water is nothing.



          • These are nice thoughts but it is clear you are not aware of the cost of manufactured water. That’s what desal is.

            The marginal analysis isn’t desal water vs harvested rainwater.

            The marginal analysis is desal water, vs water that’s transported in via trucks because rural towns have gone bone dry….

            plus externalities such a population shift because they’re sick of having water trucked in for the 3rd year in a row, etc.

  7. SEQ would already be in trouble if Anna Bligh hadn’t put the dam transfer pipelines in but with house building being the only sizeable industry here and the Olympics goosing demand we are on a hiding to nothing. We just can’t get Wivenhoe Dam filled anymore and they can’t seem to get Somerset Dam fixed after they broke it in 2011 trying to protect the idiots who built units along the Brisbane River ( These same idiots then sued the Water Board and won ! )

  8. Our elite rulers – Liberal and Labor politicians – do not care about a shortage of water in 10 years. All they care about is a shortage of votes next election.

    Voters must withhold their votes from the elite until the elite serve the voters. Not before this will our water problems be solved.

    Vote wisely. Liberal, Labor and Greens last below the line in whatever order you can stomach.

  9. I look forward to the day in Sydney when the punters turn on the tap and nothing comes out…. then they’ll turn off the TV and start asking all the questions…then they’ll see the Big Australia scam for what it is.

  10. Someone needs to be asking KPMG why all the costs of immigration like desalination plants were not taken into account in their recent annalysis, and The Australian should be qualifying the report from KPMG, in their article.

    I don’t have a subcription to The Australian, but i assume there hasn’t been another arricle after the KPMG one that gave the other side of the immigration story.

    • rob barrattMEMBER

      I have a UK and Irish passport. If I were a lot younger I’d get the hell out of here. As it is the most I can now do is practice the phrase “welcome Master” in Chinese.

  11. Lets see if this passes the laugh test
    A good Reverse Osmosis water system consumes about 3kwh/kL

    Ok so what’s the projected cost of Solar power in say 20 years (with today’s PV technology it would be about 2c per Kwh or translated into water about 6c per kLiter) however using PV technology that’s in the development pipeline the cost is more like 0.5c per Kwh or 1.5c/kL.
    So for a water supply cost of $6000/pa (lets say $2000 is fixed infrastructure costs and $4000 is the variable portion for water supply)
    $4000/ 1.5c = 266Ml or water per household. pa or about 730Kl per household per day.
    This level of water consumption seems a little excessive to me…
    So I checked what is the typical water consumption.

    So if I assume that Sydneysiders continue to use an average of 200L per person per day and that a K-Liter of water costs 1.5c than I have a daily cost per person of 0.200kl*0.015 = 1/3c per day For a household of 2.5 average that’s 1c/ day or about $3 pa.
    If I assume no improvements in PV costs and a 6c/Kl costs well that’s almost $0.10 per day for water.

    I’ve always loved KPMG’s work …I just wish they’d get the numbers right occasionally

  12. Rubbish it’s LNP and related (non) legislators who will not make and/or ensure compliance on robust environmental legislation, constrain fossil fuel use and emissions, while corporate ag/mining can rape and pillage the MDB.

    Australians have fallen for the immigration – population – environment nexus, i.e. eugenics, since fossil fuel/auto supported ZPG of the ’70s but re-energised with expansion of the UNPD’s NOM (2006, in time to demonise Rudd/Gillard governments), as have public figures inc. Bob Brown and Labor types, but not supported by any credible or grounded analysis.

    Australia’s permanent working age population, not short/medium term temporary churn over via NOM, has peaked and is in decline as a proportion of the total population, with increasing numbers of oldies inc. baby boomer bubble; within a generation Oz will be begging for immigrants to pay taxes for support of public services (or simply cut Medicare, pensions etc.?).

    There are many examples of no water management, and waste e.g. volume of grey water that is allowed to flush into oceans etc. but legislators are not being compelled to do anything, except shut borders….. too easy a dog whistle.

    Beware the US ‘radical right libertarian trap’ using immigration and other sociocultural issues to deflect from and support fossil fuel friendly policies aka the success with Brexit and Trump, leading to chaos and shambolic governance.