Latest news with #WaterServicesAssociationofAustralia
The Age
10-07-2025
- Business
- The Age
Our water bills are too cheap – and we'll soon pay dearly for that
There are no more important social and economic policy challenges in Australia today than housing and productivity. Nationally, there is a housing target of 1.2 million homes by 2030 to fix an affordability crisis for existing and future generations of Australians. Meanwhile, the federal government has convened a summit to turn around a decades-long decline in productivity. Playing out across Australia, and particularly Sydney, is an issue that profoundly affects both of these challenges, and it has been building for the past decade. Like new roads and energy infrastructure, new water and wastewater pipes and infrastructure must be built to accommodate new housing. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey has described the years ahead as the decade of pipes and poles. Data centres, the new building block of productivity, need secure water sources just as much as they need energy and land. Data centres of the future will be among the biggest water users in any capital city in Australia, and dozens are expected in major cities over the next decade. In Sydney, against a backdrop of criticism for not keeping pace, Sydney Water has proposed to spend $15 billion over five years to maintain ageing infrastructure, meet the housing needs of a rapidly growing city and ensure a resilient and secure supply of water. However, in its draft decision, the NSW pricing regulator, IPART, has proposed a cut of $5.9 billion, or 35 per cent, over the next five years – one of the largest cuts to proposed water investment we've seen for a generation. IPART's draft determination has cut investment for housing-related infrastructure by $3.2 billion over those five years compared with what Sydney Water proposed. Loading Like many others, the Water Services Association of Australia, which I lead, has raised concerns that delaying investment risks a lack of new water and wastewater connections placing a handbrake on housing and productivity in Sydney. While Sydney is the focus of friction now, we've been highlighting for some time the funding constraints that exist across the industry. The National Performance Report for the urban water sector was released this year by the Bureau of Meteorology. It went unreported in the media. It shows two contrasting trends over the past decade: first, bills for water and wastewater services have remained flat; second, investment has been significantly increasing – water and wastewater capital expenditure during that period roughly doubled. The flat bill trend is not sustainable. A step change in capital expenditure is required, with investment for housing being the biggest driver.
Sydney Morning Herald
10-07-2025
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Our water bills are too cheap – and we'll soon pay dearly for that
There are no more important social and economic policy challenges in Australia today than housing and productivity. Nationally, there is a housing target of 1.2 million homes by 2030 to fix an affordability crisis for existing and future generations of Australians. Meanwhile, the federal government has convened a summit to turn around a decades-long decline in productivity. Playing out across Australia, and particularly Sydney, is an issue that profoundly affects both of these challenges, and it has been building for the past decade. Like new roads and energy infrastructure, new water and wastewater pipes and infrastructure must be built to accommodate new housing. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey has described the years ahead as the decade of pipes and poles. Data centres, the new building block of productivity, need secure water sources just as much as they need energy and land. Data centres of the future will be among the biggest water users in any capital city in Australia, and dozens are expected in major cities over the next decade. In Sydney, against a backdrop of criticism for not keeping pace, Sydney Water has proposed to spend $15 billion over five years to maintain ageing infrastructure, meet the housing needs of a rapidly growing city and ensure a resilient and secure supply of water. However, in its draft decision, the NSW pricing regulator, IPART, has proposed a cut of $5.9 billion, or 35 per cent, over the next five years – one of the largest cuts to proposed water investment we've seen for a generation. IPART's draft determination has cut investment for housing-related infrastructure by $3.2 billion over those five years compared with what Sydney Water proposed. Loading Like many others, the Water Services Association of Australia, which I lead, has raised concerns that delaying investment risks a lack of new water and wastewater connections placing a handbrake on housing and productivity in Sydney. While Sydney is the focus of friction now, we've been highlighting for some time the funding constraints that exist across the industry. The National Performance Report for the urban water sector was released this year by the Bureau of Meteorology. It went unreported in the media. It shows two contrasting trends over the past decade: first, bills for water and wastewater services have remained flat; second, investment has been significantly increasing – water and wastewater capital expenditure during that period roughly doubled. The flat bill trend is not sustainable. A step change in capital expenditure is required, with investment for housing being the biggest driver.
West Australian
25-06-2025
- Health
- West Australian
Warning as guide for toxic chemicals in water updated
A vast majority of Australia's drinking water supplies meet new "forever chemicals" safety limits, but an expert warns more research needs to be done to understand true safe levels. PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of 15,000 highly toxic, synthetic chemicals used for their resistance to heat, stains and grease. They are sometimes called "forever chemicals" because they break down extremely slowly, including in humans. Emerging evidence has linked some of the chemicals to cancer, leading to tighter regulation of the substances, particularly in drinking water. Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council on Wednesday updated its guidelines, limiting perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) at 200 nanograms/litre, perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) at 8ng/L, perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) at 30ng/L and perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) at 1000ng/L. The final values are the same as its draft guidelines except PFOS, which changed its limit from 4ng/L to 8ng/L. Industry body Water Services Association of Australia described the new guidelines as very conservative, erring on the side of safety and reflecting the latest evidence, saying recent national testing showed a "vast majority" of treated water sources would meet the new limits. Executive Director Adam Lovell said the water sector is highly regulated, and water utilities will continue to test and take immediate action to isolate, treat and protect drinking water supplies if they are near or exceed the guidelines. Chemical levels have been scrutinised in the past year after their discovery in the drinking water in Sydney's world-heritage listed Blue Mountains, home to 30,000, and at a national park downstream of a former quarry used by manufacturer 3M. Ian Wright, an environmental science professor at Western Sydney University, said data is still lacking to indicate a safe level of PFOS in Australian drinking water. "These guidelines, I can accept that they are reasonable at this point, but I don't think we've done enough research to know without doubt what the safe level is," Dr Wright told AAP. The associate professor, who is working with the Blue Mountains community, said authorities won't understand the true risks unless they study people impacted in detail. Blue Mountains anti-PFAS campaigner Jon Dee labelled the new guidelines a "national disgrace", saying Australia's standards were up to 50 times higher than the American equivalents. "This decision makes Australia a global outlier on PFAS," Mr Dee said. "Our health authorities are putting water utility convenience ahead of public health." The NSW government has confirmed all public drinking water supplied across metropolitan and regional areas meets the updated guidelines, and it is working with suppliers to equip them with long-term solutions to manage risks from the chemicals.
Perth Now
25-06-2025
- Health
- Perth Now
Warning as guide for toxic chemicals in water updated
A vast majority of Australia's drinking water supplies meet new "forever chemicals" safety limits, but an expert warns more research needs to be done to understand true safe levels. PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of 15,000 highly toxic, synthetic chemicals used for their resistance to heat, stains and grease. They are sometimes called "forever chemicals" because they break down extremely slowly, including in humans. Emerging evidence has linked some of the chemicals to cancer, leading to tighter regulation of the substances, particularly in drinking water. Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council on Wednesday updated its guidelines, limiting perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) at 200 nanograms/litre, perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) at 8ng/L, perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) at 30ng/L and perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) at 1000ng/L. The final values are the same as its draft guidelines except PFOS, which changed its limit from 4ng/L to 8ng/L. Industry body Water Services Association of Australia described the new guidelines as very conservative, erring on the side of safety and reflecting the latest evidence, saying recent national testing showed a "vast majority" of treated water sources would meet the new limits. Executive Director Adam Lovell said the water sector is highly regulated, and water utilities will continue to test and take immediate action to isolate, treat and protect drinking water supplies if they are near or exceed the guidelines. Chemical levels have been scrutinised in the past year after their discovery in the drinking water in Sydney's world-heritage listed Blue Mountains, home to 30,000, and at a national park downstream of a former quarry used by manufacturer 3M. Ian Wright, an environmental science professor at Western Sydney University, said data is still lacking to indicate a safe level of PFOS in Australian drinking water. "These guidelines, I can accept that they are reasonable at this point, but I don't think we've done enough research to know without doubt what the safe level is," Dr Wright told AAP. The associate professor, who is working with the Blue Mountains community, said authorities won't understand the true risks unless they study people impacted in detail. Blue Mountains anti-PFAS campaigner Jon Dee labelled the new guidelines a "national disgrace", saying Australia's standards were up to 50 times higher than the American equivalents. "This decision makes Australia a global outlier on PFAS," Mr Dee said. "Our health authorities are putting water utility convenience ahead of public health." The NSW government has confirmed all public drinking water supplied across metropolitan and regional areas meets the updated guidelines, and it is working with suppliers to equip them with long-term solutions to manage risks from the chemicals.
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Experts sound alarm over health hazard lurking in water supply: 'Wherever we look, we find it'
Water experts and providers are pushing for a broad ban on PFAS, or "forever chemicals," which stay in our environment for years, The Guardian reported. These substances can be found in thousands of everyday products and are increasingly showing up in our water. The Water Services Association of Australia wants PFAS banned from non-essential consumer items. "We need to reduce now, as much as possible, how much PFAS is in the environment," said Adam Lovell, the association's executive director. He added that water providers are "deeply concerned about the levels of PFAS that are being allowed to enter the country through thousands of everyday household and industrial chemicals and products." A ban would help protect both people and wildlife from these dangerous substances. Ian Wright of Western Sydney University has found PFAS in platypuses, noting that "wherever we look, we find it." His research shows these chemicals move up through the food chain, reaching humans. Meanwhile, New South Wales has identified 51 sites with major PFAS contamination that require ongoing cleanup. For families, this ban would mean safer drinking water and lower future costs. Removing PFAS from water supplies is extremely expensive. Treating just 1 kilogram of PFAS that has entered a wastewater system costs between $4 million and $25 million. These costs eventually hit consumers through higher water bills. Some industries may worry about finding safe alternatives for their products. However, supporters point to European countries that have already successfully implemented broad PFAS bans. They also note that the targeted approach of banning specific PFAS has backfired, with companies switching to similar but less-researched replacements. "We need to ban them as a class," Nicholas Chartres of The University of Sydney said. How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water? Never Sometimes Often Always Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Starting July 1, Australia will ban three PFAS, showing progress toward cleaner water for all. New drinking water guidelines with updated limits for these substances will be finalized later in 2025. "Ultimately it comes down to the health evidence, and what our local advisory committee advises us is the most certain evidence to base the guideline values on," Kristal Jackson of the National Health and Medical Research Council said. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
