FFS Forrest, when I wrote "publicly available" I meant on TV or in newspapers and stuff. It seems noone wants to be bothered to learn about the steps and stages etc. or plans on the Queensland Water Commission website.

http://www.qwc.qld.gov.au/HomePage

or if you can't read or follow links then:
http://www.qwc.qld.gov.au/How+is+it+made

The maps for the pipelines are also available:
http://www.qwc.qld.gov.au/Projects+-+South+East+Queensland+Water+Grid

Get your act together people!

SEQ is a high rainfall area, you can get more rain in the tail end of a cyclone than we get in a year.
What about storm water there's a big waste.
You are drinking sewerage water already, do you think animals in the catchment areas go to toilets?.
Most downstream towns on our major rivers drink treated sewerage water from the ones upstream.
Alanpoi

Given our state governments track record my confidence in the integrity of the treatment system is less than it might otherwise be.

Will the drive to make money out of water become a higher priority than public safety?

Will executives in the organisations managing the construction of the plant(s) and overseeing the treatment of water be get performance pays based on the quality of water returned to the system or on the return on investment heading to treasury?

Will they get their positions based on management ability and understanding of the complexities of relaible and safe water treatment or because of their contacts in the ALP?

Treated water should be safe but then electricity networks are not all that difficult to run (if you spend income from them maintaining and growing them), it's not all that difficult to spot dodgy doctors in public hospital unless you are not wanting to listen.

The technology does not scare me, the prospect of Beatty saying yet again that he is sorry, it's not his fault but he will fix it does.

R0bert

I'm with you RObert, I can't think of anything I would trust Beatty, & his lot with, or my local council for that matter. That goes double with my health, or anything out of sight.

Do you remember the NSW government, a few years back, managed to contaminate perfectly good water, just by putting it into their system?

I'm lucky, I don't have town water, but I don't like a large chunk of my tax being used to subsidise those who do. I believe the only fair way to finance SEQ water is full user pays. I can see no reason why the people of the bush should pay for a pipe line to take their water to supply the city.

These totally impractical ideas of pumping water down from the Burdekin, would lead to people cleaning their teeth in Fosters, because it was cheeper. Desal water will be much cheeper.

We have depended on our tanks for 18 years. There was only one period, in 1993 & 4, when it was much dryer than now, when we had to reuse washing machine water. Look after yourself, the service is better, & a damn sight more reliable.

Given the description of the SEQ water grid as "a network of two-way pipelines to connect major bulk water sources in the region" given in the target of Bugsy's third link in his post above, it may prove possible to use this already planned infrastructure to deliver seawater to Swanbank and Tarong power stations. Lead times for this part of a reduced-pressure distillation desalination project using waste heat from electricity generation would be greatly reduced.

At the power stations, multi-effect humidification under reduced pressure would see around 90% of incoming seawater desalinated, and 10% accumulated as the water component of near-saturated brine. Both are valuable products. The brine would be held in solar ponds under fresh blanket water, reaching temperatures of between 50 and 80 degrees C. The blanket water could, but need not necessarily, be recycled water.

The desalinated water produced at Tarong in excess of cooling requirements could be piped to Toowoomba, discharged downstream to Boondooma dam, or returned to Wivenhoe as convenient. The existing pipeline from Wivenhoe delivers to Tarong at the rate of 76 Ml/day, representing around 10% of Brisbane's daily requirement of around 700 Ml. Initially around 68 Ml/day could be recoverable as desalinated product, but waste heat capacity alone would exist to desalinate up to 240 Ml/day at Tarong under reduced-pressure humidification if pipeline capacity was available.

If incoming seawater was preheated in the solar ponds prior to reduced pressure distillation, production of desalinated water could be gradually increased beyond 240 Ml/day at Tarong subject to available pipeline capacity.

Using only the existing pipeline to deliver seawater to Tarong, it would take around 13 years to accumulate sufficient near-saturated brine in around 560 surface Ha of solar pondage to be capable of producing solar generated electricity equivalent to the 1400 Mw generating capacity of the existing coal fired operation.

Everthing here in relation to Tarong would be relevant, pro rata to waste heat available, at Swanbank, except that seawater supply, and the desalinated delivery, pipelines are shorter.

Got my act together, Bugsy.

I have used rainwater stored in tanks as my only water for half my life, most rural people do.
Now I have one tank,no dam or any other water just that single tank about 20.000 liters.
All sewage on my rural quarter acre is treated and pumped back on to my lawn or fruit trees teated in the septic tank.
So I need less water than a city home, the only outside water is used at a car wash.
If every suburban home had a water tank like mine, and had to use it on gardens and car washes we would store as much water on our property's as all our dams.
City's must not drink tank water it is no longer safe if you see what is dropped on your roof you would agree.
Recycle? why not just for a second think of the dead animals that flow down river into the dams now, and the other products of those animals.
A million million roof areas exist to fill our dams thats why we treat water already.