So now it is 110m storm surges from climate change and 40% drops in rainfall. For the record, the drop in rainfall for Sydney over the interval from 1950 to 2003 shows up on the BOM maps as bright (alarming) red but closer examination reveals two things,
1 this drop amounts to only 5mm each year for a mean annual rainfall of 1250mm and,
2 50 years of this only amounts to 20% change.

But when we compare the current falls with the change over the interval between 1900 and 2003 we actually get a 2mm a year improvement.

And that means Sydney households will still get a tonne of water for each square metre of roof they have connected to a decent tank or tanks.

Kaep

I agree with the idea that some are profiting greatly from immigration at the expense of other Australians and the environment. But I think your suggestion (of a conspiracy between the CSIRO and the NSW Government to adversely affect the weather in order to further profit at the public expense) to be a bit too much of a stretch for me.

I am curious to hear an update from you of your appraisal of the cyclone risk for Northern Australia using RECCE theory.

Yes there is precious little else left to tax, so why not hit the people who are unable to pay extra, will the Howard Government eventually install camera's in our bedrooms and give us a daily allocation of fresh air, as sex and air are the only things they have not taxed so far.

Howard should be building more water storage sites so when the drought breaks we will have extra water capacity, but that would be too progressive, for conservatism.

I live in the Riverland of SA and pay $25.00 per month for 8,000 ltr of water. I cart it myself from a standpipe 1km away. The water is straight from the river, Irrigation water in fact, I pump settle in a tank and filter. After use, toilet bath and kitchen it flows to my "garden" a couple fruit trees some Red gums the rest saltbush. Since being charged I have neither increased nor decreased my usage! the river is unaffected whether I pay or not. I've just contributed $25.00 per month to the O/S owners of the distribution rights

At the bottom of my block the Murray flows but I have no right to pump from same, and connot attain it. Having grown up in the Mallee, by nature water conservation is always a priority.
I used to get from the standpipe free but with all the buhaha currently, they put locks on the standpipe and now I need pay.

I am a pensioner and Central Irrigation Trust insists this is fair. If I lived in a city and the cost were proportionate I would need pay at least $5 per kilolitre to equal what I pay now, the water would be unfiltered and everyone would have a real belly ache.
I also know the guy over the road who waters grapes for wine pays .30 cents per k litre
{1} it what does not profit him{2} He uses 50 ml per year.

How to make sense of all this?
fluff

Further to my previous post.
I always thought that water was free? What you paid for in rates was the infrastructure to deliver the water to your property.
This entitled govt. to charge for installation of pipes, building dams and gutters to keep excess controlled. When did we decide it was alright to charge for water itself?
Will the rich care if they pay $20 a litre, the poor certainly would.
Furthermore every litre of rain captured by tanks will affect the flow in our rivers, this may sound spurious but think of the rate that water is captured by Cubby, so denying the Darling of the enviromental flow essential to flood plains which are by far greater areas of influence on nature than water that flows in the river proper.