It would be nice if there government rebates for installing solar panels on all new houses as well as rebates for fitting water saving plumbing devices. If the givernment was proactive in providing rebates for solar panels then an innovative Australian industry could increase its market and the cost per unit would decrease making the technology more affordable.
This could result in less drain on our electricity supplies thus less need to build more coal fired or nuclear power stations.

Is water that falls on a person’s roof the property of that person?

As part of the Victorian election campaign, the ALP, to its credit, responded affirmatively.

Does anyone know the position in other States?

Do the Governments of Australia – with the exception of the ALP if re-elected in Victoria – claim that water that falls on a person’s roof is the property of the State Government?

The Prime Minister and State Premiers meet in December to review water plans. Perhaps they could clarify?

Greg Cameron

I wish people would stop talking in terms of "Olympic swimming pools". I don't know how much one of those holds, and to the best of my knowledge, none of my water comes out of one.

However, now that I've gone to the trouble of looking it up, it turns out that an Olympic swimming pool is considered to hold 1 megalitre.

So apparently we could save 45,000 megalitres per year across Australia.

Last week, Sydney alone consumed 10,000 megalitres. So the annual savings across Australia's capital cities would be just four and half weeks of Sydney's consumption alone.

OK, it's better than a kick in the teeth, but it illustrates the extent of the problem. These various water saving initiatives are just a distraction.

Sylvia.

What worries me is whether our government systems can handle these severe and long term environmental threats and problems. Problems that require lots of forward thinking, far-reach plannning, extensive scientific investigation and prediction, and continued action over long periods that overstretch any term of incumbency.

With all the short-term politicking our politicians engage in and the focus on immediate threats like terrorism how can they possibly implement a solution to these large scale problems that we face that are a much bigger threat to our future growth and survival.

We've known about alot of these potential environmental issues for a while but it's not until they are an emergency that our government begins to do anything and then its lots and lots of talk, a few restrictions placed on its citizens, but not much else. And it could just be that we are reacting too late.
Can our government ever operate proactively on the environment or is the system just not designed for effective action in that direction?

The Author wrote, "It has been suggested that the Arctic icecap will completely melt in summer within 30 years. It is a global threat that must be tackled on a global scale". So who made this suggestion, Daffy Duck?

For the record, at the current rate of ice melt in Greenland, it will take 11,000 years for the entire ice sheet to melt. And that doen't take into account the fact that new ice is forming in the centre while melting takes place at the perimeters.

And for an industry representative to regurgitate such a blatant bit of green deception and misinformation is inexcusable. There is more than enough codswallop floating about in the firmament without the HIA switching to vaudeville.

Liz, its a pity that you spoiled a reasonable presentstion with this BS about a 1000 year drought.
Our lying state leaders have leapt on this rubish, to try to cover their incompetence.
With them, & people like you reinforcing this rubish we are getting into a bigger problem.

Over 30 years ago core drillings, from the reef, had evidence of much drier times.
While our old mate Captain Cook was sailing around thr Pacifec, Qld had a drought, drier than present, that lasted 23 years.

Yes, thats right. Bloody frightening, isn't it?
Perpetuating this myth of a thousand drought, without any proof, other than some state premier said so, is very silly. Currently, at least in SEQ, it is not yet a 1 in 100 year drought, let alone a 1 in 250 year drought, & thats with known information.

The thing that worries me most, is, that the people with this information, will not come forward & refute the rubish being sspouted by the pollys. The fact that they are frightened for their futures does not say much for our system of government.