I feel the Desalination Plant is being put on perfect coast. Why can’t they put it on already destroyed land? I think they should put it somewhere else. I Think people would agree. I feel a bit sad because some animals will die and alot will get injured.

Pros:
• A bit environmental
• Destroying coast
Cons:
• Animals will die
• Destroying coast
• We don’t get a choice
• People kicked out of houses for land
• It might send the state broke
• Expensive
• Damage marine life
• They let off heaps of carbon emissions
• It increases the chances of global warming

By Olivia Grade 5

I don’t like the desal because it kills animals and it cost too much and it doesn’t give us a fair go.

Pros:
• Its environmental
• Melbourne gets water
Cons:
• It destroys part of the Bass Coast
• It isn’t giving us a fair go
• People got kicked out their homes for land
• Animals will die
• It might send the state broke
• It is expensive
• It increases global warming

By Lily Grade 5

Concern grows over Wonthaggi desal plant
Saturday, November 17, 2007 – 11:00
By Katherine Bradstreet, Melbourne
Community concern over the Victorian state government’s plan for a $3.1 billion desalination plant at Wonthaggi is growing following reports that the Labor government is forcibly acquiring properties around the proposed site. The local community and environmentalists have opposed the proposal as being environmentally damaging and the wrong solution to tackle water shortages.

The October 27 Melbourne Age reported that the Department of Sustainability and Environment had confirmed that it was finalising the compulsory acquisition of up to five properties to make way for the plant. Despite this step being taken, the government has yet to commit to undertaking an Environmental Effects Statement (EES), with the decision being referred to planning minister Justin Madden.

An economic impact study conducted by Monash University found that the proposal, which will be delivered as a public-private partnership, will result in economic growth. However this has not allayed fears that a partially privatised plant will result in an increase in the cost of water.

The proposed plant will use a technique called reverse osmosis that will pump vast quantities of seawater through a filtration process involving the use of chemicals such as chlorine, caustic soda and hydrochloric acid, some of which will go back into the ocean. Along with these toxic chemicals, brine with twice the level of salt as regular seawater will be pumped back into the ocean. It is not known what effect the changed salinity in the surrounding waters will have on marine life.

A damning report titled Desalination: Option or Distraction for a Thirsty World was released by WWF in June this year. The report states “all recent studies [of operating desalination plants] have found adverse impacts of entrainment” (the intake of seawater) and “that depletion of marine life may represent the most significant direct adverse effect of seawater desalination”. The document goes on to report that there are “more cost effective and less potentially environmentally damaging alternatives available. This is particularly true of demand management, water conservation and water efficiency measures.”

The plant will also be a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. When completed, the 150-billion-litre plant will use 900GWh of electricity annually. The process will also produce 30,000 tonnes of solid waste each year, which will need to be taken by truck to a landfill site. The state government has promised to expand the production of renewable energy to offset the emissions used by the desalination plant, but as yet no concrete projects have been proposed.

The Your Water Your Say Action Group has organised numerous protests and forums on the desalination issue, including a 1200-strong protest on Wonthaggi beach in October. Five hundred people attended a July 12 meeting of the campaign at the Wonthaggi Town Hall. This meeting passed a resolution opposing the development of the desalination plant as “an energy intensive and unnecessarily costly means of addressing water shortages”.

An August 15 meeting of the Bass Coast Shire Council announced its “dismay at the lack of consultation with the … community” and called for an EES to be carried out.

Your Water Your Say is planning an intensive three-week campaign against the desalination plant once the proposal goes to the planning minister to decide whether an EES will be carried out. To find out visit http://www.yourwateryoursay.org.

From GLW issue 732

After watching both videos here are some questions to consider

What perspective and imagery do both videos use to persuade the viewer to their point of view?

For each of the videos do you think they are accurate in their representations of their points of view? describe

Phillip Island Car Ferry

I don’t think a car ferry should come because lots more tourists will come but that will also be good because they will keep shops running. I think they should spend the $25 million on another hospital. It will also make the beaches very unsafe for swimming. There will also be no jetty jumping for people like me who love to do that. When the ferry comes in all the marina life will swim away because of the noise. There are still a couple of good things about it because it will be a quick way to get from Stoney Point to Cowes. I don’t think it should come in because it costs too much money and you won’t be able to see pretty beaches and that what Phillip Island is made for. It will also be like the Desal Plant a very bad idea.

By Isabella Grade 5

Phillip Island Car Ferry

He car ferry is going to connect to Stony Point near Hastings and a Melbourne business group has proposed Cowes, Phillip Island. The ferry would fill the missing link for travellers by car from Victorias Great Ocean Road in the west to Wilsons Promontory in the east. The Ferry proposal was submitted to political leaders at parliament house. The ferry plan is part of a proposal to boost development around port Phillip and western port. The plans to make the car ferry in Phillip Island were passed on to the Bass Coast Shire on March 23rd 2010.
The plans include significant changes to Cowes foreshore such as in summer it will be extremely busy and will ruin Cowes beautiful foreshore and the beautiful views over the ocean. There are proposals that they will be moving the Car ferry idea to San Remo, which will be a very good location because the jetty they have in San Remo, less people go there because they choose to go to Phillip Island and the beaches at San Remo are the best place to use and the San Remo needs tourists.

By Eddie Grade 6

Cowes residents rock the boat over jetty proposal on April 6, 2010. Protestors at the site of the proposed car ferry terminal at Cowes, Phillip Island. Photo: Angela Wylie A PLAN to transform the picturesque front beach at Cowes into a terminal for a car ferry has hit strong opposition from Phillip Island residents, who yesterday turned out in their hundreds to oppose the proposal. A car ferry linking Phillip Island to the Mornington Peninsula operated between 1932 and 1948, but closed after a bridge to the island was built at San Remo in 1940. The state government and two shire councils want to resurrect the car ferry, to replace the existing foot passenger service linking Stony Point on the Mornington Peninsula with Cowes. The car ferry idea has strong support on both sides of Western Port Bay, but in Cowes the proposed ferry terminal, devised by engineers Meinhardt, has horrified some residents. Under the plan, the historic Cowes jetty would be kept and a new pier, 10 metres wide and 130 metres long, built alongside. The new pier would carry two lanes of traffic and pedestrians. There would also be an expanded car park on the foreshore. About 350 residents and home owners attended a fiery church hall meeting in the town’s main street yesterday, and vowed to fight the terminal plan. ”It is frighteningly obvious to a lot of us that this is not a good idea,” architect and planner Tim Shannon said. Mr Shannon, a former managing director with architects Hassell, said the proposed terminal was ”an ugly industrial obstruction” that would ruin the waterfront in winter and increase already serious traffic problems in summer. No cost estimates of building the ferry terminals have been made public, although the Phillip Island Advertiser reported the project would cost $20 million. Frank Denvir, who has run the passenger ferry between Stony Point and Phillip Island for 14 years, said there wouldn’t be demand for a car ferry. ”If you could drive around the bay for eight litres of fuel, or pay $70 for the car ferry, which would you choose?” he said. Bass Coast Shire funded the $600,000 feasibility study for the car ferry with Mornington Peninsula Shire and the government. It does not have a final position on the ferry terminal plan yet, but at least one of its seven councillors, Phil Wright, opposes it. ”When we think about what we are going to do to Cowes, we have to think about what people will think of our decisions in 100 years,” he said. Bass Coast’s community and economic development director, Patti Wenn, said the Cowes plan was not finalised, and the views would help the councils and the government decide what to do next. Matthew Hillard, a spokesman for Planning Minister Justin Madden, said the plans had been released to gauge community views. ”It will help shape the views of the government on this project,” he said.

A famous attraction of Phillip Island

How it the tap suspended in the air?

Where is all the water going?

Since that we are experiencing water shortage is this a responsible use of water?  Explain your answer!

What makes this happen?

Is it magic, explain how this works?

Have you been there before, who would you reccomend Amaze’n things to?