Page 1636 - Week 06 - Thursday, 3 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
considerably more than that contributed by other countries of the world. In fact I understand that the contribution to the greenhouse effect per Australian is at least 200 times more than it is per person in places like China and India. Therefore, it is important that we, in Australia, play our part in reducing the greenhouse gases.
Another area that we should look at is the electricity that is required to process the things that we use - for example, the water that we use. Every time we flush the toilet it has to go into the Molonglo treatment plant. The more water we push down into the Molonglo treatment plant, the more processing has to take place and the more electricity has to be used. Therefore, it is up to us to reduce our use of water. If we reduce the amount of water we use - and this is another plus, if you like - we find that in time, as Amory Lovins has said, it will mean that we do not have to construct as many dams.
For example, Mr Speaker, let me just give you some indication as to what might be required in Sydney. In 1965 the people of Sydney were using 455 litres of water per person per day. By 1995 this figure is expected to rise to 645 litres per day. That use of water not only requires processing to enable it to be made fit for human consumption but it also involves moving it backwards and forwards and constructing dams so that it can be stored and provided.
We need to develop innovative responses to allow us to maintain and enhance our lifestyle and a viable economy while being environmentally responsible, and of course recycling is a major issue in that. It was interesting that the Leader of the Opposition should bring up the matter of the Ainslie Transfer Station in relation to recycling. I suggest that as a result of the closure of the Ainslie tip there will be an increase in the amount of recycling that goes on in the north Canberra area. I think it has already been clearly demonstrated in another debate in this place that the majority of the material that was taken away from the Ainslie tip was not being recycled at all.
Mr Berry: That is not relevant. You are supposed to be talking about greenhouse gases.
MR JENSEN: Mr Berry is talking about relevance. Mr Speaker, I suggest that anything to do with energy reduction is relevant in relation to the greenhouse effect. In fact, the recycling proposals that we are talking about will enable the people of Ainslie to drive less distance to do their recycling and their normal rubbish will then be taken in the biweekly collection that we have at the moment.
Mr Moore: In big bins, adding to the greenhouse effect.
MR JENSEN: That is yet to be seen.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .