We want our "Blue Line" sea grasses back!!!!

[tonyb 1,017]

Hi All,At the Metropolitan Fishers Alliance (MFA)Meeting last night, we were inspired by an educational talk, given by one of the top blokes in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), about the extensive work the EPA has been doing over many years to try to reduce storm-water and sewage effluent loads along the Metro Coastline.Peter gave us some frighteningly high statistics of the thousands of tonnes of sediment and chemicals dumped into Adelaide's shoreline on a yearly basis! The waste water treatment plants at Bolivar and Christies Beach being the two worst offenders! However, Penrice Soda Products is an absolute shocker, but with the good news that they are spending lots of money, with the urging of the EPA, to try and reduce their loads and the EPA has been able to record some very positive results tho' it is at the time of writing, still some thing like 800 tonnes per year going into the Port River!!The de-Salination Plant at Port Stanvac also came in for a fair bit of discussion and I asked about one of my personal long standing issues with the set-up at Stanvac and that was the question with the two 750mm grey water effluent outfall pipes at the Christies Waste Water Plant which discharge about a kilometre south of the in-let pipes for the de-salination Plant which of course only removes salt then pumps the water up to our holding Reservoirs for drinking, not too mention that the highly saline discharge back into the Coast-line can't be good for all sorts of Marine life including the struggling sea-grasses! Interestingly, one of our MFA Leaders, who was at the Meeting, was involved in the Environmental Impact Study on the chances of the poo being sucked up for our drinking water and they found it to be highly unlikely?? Hmmm, I must confess to still being very sceptical about the findings I also raised the issue of the sand dredging off Stanvac to replenish the Beaches and Peter had to admit that it was an environmental disaster, with the tides pushing silt both north and south (hellooo, inlet/outlet pipes?)and the really sad news that Port Noarlunga reef is still struggling to recover, even this far down the track :ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:Peter told us that the EPA has masses of Science behind it and they have even built "models" of the various problem areas and how they are progressing/regressing. This Science has been gathered together and formulated into the Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan (ACWQIP)and it can be viewed at their Web-site. We were luckily able to grab CD's and leaflets at our MFA Meeting which Peter kindly brought along for us. http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/environmental_info/water_quality/adelaides_coastal_watersPeter's closing comments rang very true to us all and he stressed that the only way forward is for the Community to get involved. The Community was surveyed in a major costly excercise some years ago and the result of it was that they all wanted their "Blue Line" back again

[Kingsley 19]

If a certain poll in Toowoomba back in 2006 said Yes instead of No, we wouldn't have a desal plant and you wouldn't have to worry about any outfall from the treatment plants :whistle:

[tonyb 1,017]

Good point Kingsley and I always thought the de-Sal. plant was a total knee jerk reaction from the drought, when everyone was screaming doom and gloom with planet warming, rising salt levels, higher water usage, carbon footprints, etc. etc.!Bottom line is that it is almost 100% the NITROGEN loads which are killing the grasses and these come directly from Waste Water plants and Penrice. The push is to reduce, at all costs, these levels even if it is tiny steps at a time

[crispy 2]

hi all well if i remember a show on tv i think it was the hudson river in america wasthe most polluted in either the world or america,anyway they took a strategy of employing a sherrif on the water to check ships discharging ballast ect into the river when i watched this show they said the river was recovering so if something can be done about this penrice mob ?and the pooo shootersand also the outlet for the desal plant i cant understand why it is so close why not 1km out in the gulf ? then maybe the ocean will repair itself vast tracks of grass have gone from around hallets when i stand on my brother in laws balcony you can see the sand areas ,i remember as a lad spearfishing htere was always a definite start area for the blue line crispy

[Kingsley 19]

Bottom line is that it is almost 100% the NITROGEN loads which are killing the grasses and these come directly from Waste Water plants and Penrice. The push is to reduce' date=' at all costs, these levels even if it is tiny steps at a time [/quote']I'm not sure how the treatment plants could possibly reduce the amount of nitrogen they pump out, they already have a denitrification process involving bacteria and bolivar uses the ponds as well (no ponds at christies). Was the treatment plant at Glenelg mentioned at all?Unfortunately the only way i can see to get nitrogen levels down from treatment plants is to fund RESEARCH into more efficient denitrification processes (OH NO SPEND MONEY??). There was some research done on using duckweed on the ponds to eat up some nitrogen, the problem was it blew around with the wind to one side, combat that by sectioning off the ponds using barriers, then the ducks ate all the weed coz it was easier to get to lol...believe it or not, treatment plants are actually fairly interesting places, there is a lot involved and a lot of money spent in treating our poo and there are a lot more treatment plants than people would think (some of which pump their 'outfall' into creeks and rivers that ends up guess where? )anyway, i digress, i want our sea grasses back! more squid and gar thanks.

[Wahoo 146]

Hi Kingsley. Peter did mention that one of the best ways to reduce the Nitrogen was to re-use the treated water for horticulture. It's happening a lot already, if you lived up north you'd have seen nothing but lilac coloured pipes for the last few years as they supply Virginia and surrounding districts. Trouble is it's an expensive infrastructure to install. Same with Stormwater, it's all very well creating wetlands but the fine sediment still ends up at sea, better to harvest the water from the wetlands for use elsewhere.Crispy. The Desal intake is betwen 800m and 1 km long, the discharge is 1.2km long and uses duckbill valves to increase the discharge velocity to aid with mixing.CheersWahoo

[tonyb 1,017]

Not sure how long the two Christies poo pipe discharges go out to sea, nothing like a kilometre that's for sure, but I do know the discharge end of the pipes are perforated along the last bit so as the poo gets spread out on the sea bed a bit more evenly

[Kingsley 19]

Ah yeah, there's been a bit of that going on down south too. I had heard that the christies plant has significantly reduced its outflow in recent years. a chunk goes to aldinga/mclaren vale for the vinyards, and the purple pipes have been rolling out down south for parks etc for a few years now. but they are also increasing their capacity by double (aging plant).I'm fairly sure the plant at Mt Barker supplies local growers with water too.I'm all for any form of wastewater reuse.although i think the desal plant is the biggest waste of money, i don't think it will have a significant impact on the marine environment. the brine is fully dispersed within 100m or so of the outlet. multiple studies done in other areas with low tidal movement (saudi arabia, persian gulf etc).

[afishyfish 4]

Is it just the nitrogen thats the main culprit here ?Working in the cleaning industry, I see the build up of road grime on peoples window sills near main roads, and it's not pretty :S For a start the thousands of tyres wearing on our roads each day must cuase a :c of fine sediment that will drop out in our near coastal areas, yet alone dripping oil from sumps etc :pinch: Good to see there's some efforts being made to counter the affects of some of the rpoblems, lets hope they effort keeps growing

[Kingsley 19]

Not sure how long the two Christies poo pipe discharges go out to sea' date=' nothing like a kilometre that's for sure, but I do know the discharge end of the pipes are perforated along the last bit so as the poo gets spread out on the sea bed a bit more evenly [/quote']haha, the poo leaves the plant in trucks to be 'composted' tony ;)used to be pumped i believe to the poo ponds at river road, dried out and then trucked out.you can actually see the water flow from the outflow pipe on a clear day on the surface of the water. its about 500m if that out.

[Ranger 48]

Bottom line is that it is almost 100% the NITROGEN loads which are killing the grasses and these come directly from Waste Water plants and Penrice.

I dunno if I'm correct or not, but I was of the belief that the outfall and silt from Penrice wasn't nutrient rich, but was instead quite harmless sodium bicarbonate by-product, whose greatest effect was only slightly altering the pH of the surrounding water. ...........I'd like to be corrected if I'm wrong.What I AM aware of though, is that they entered a $1.5M clean-up back in 2006, to dredge around 150,000 cubic metres of silt from the port and remove their built up silt, where it is now taken to Penrice land for drying prior to being blended as landfill.

[tonyb 1,017]

Bottom line is that it is almost 100% the NITROGEN loads which are killing the grasses and these come directly from Waste Water plants and Penrice. The push is to reduce' date=' at all costs' date=' these levels even if it is tiny steps at a time [/quote'']I'm not sure how the treatment plants could possibly reduce the amount of nitrogen they pump out, they already have a denitrification process involving bacteria and bolivar uses the ponds as well (no ponds at christies). Was the treatment plant at Glenelg mentioned at all?Unfortunately the only way i can see to get nitrogen levels down from treatment plants is to fund RESEARCH into more efficient denitrification processes (OH NO SPEND MONEY??). There was some research done on using duckweed on the ponds to eat up some nitrogen, the problem was it blew around with the wind to one side, combat that by sectioning off the ponds using barriers, then the ducks ate all the weed coz it was easier to get to lol...believe it or not, treatment plants are actually fairly interesting places, there is a lot involved and a lot of money spent in treating our poo and there are a lot more treatment plants than people would think (some of which pump their 'outfall' into creeks and rivers that ends up guess where? )anyway, i digress, i want our sea grasses back! more squid and gar thanks.

AND it was mentioned by Peter what a draw-card it would be for rec anglers to catch KGW's from the Beach as well :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: Glenelg was mentioned too tho' only fleetingly.On the settlement ponds, these are no longer neccesary for the Christies Plant as they use massive centrifuges which separate the sludge which can then be carted away and dumped elsewhere.Interestingly, the old sewage settlement ponds along River road near Port Noarlunga will be converted into a 2 million dollar Bird Sanctuary when the new Railway Bridge is completed, directly over the old ponds, in early 2013 ALL that crap which used to leach into the Onkaparinga River will finally be gone and all the storm-water that is caught up in the Sanctuary, will be filtered through a complex series of circular ponds before entering the Onka system a helluva a lot cleaner than it went in

[afishyfish 4]

I know a lot of the sludge from Bolivar gets dried out, then trucked out to be spread on our cereal crops. ( My F.I.L does it for his wheat/barley/canola.)Anyone for Weetbix now? ( dont forget the sugar )

[tonyb 1,017]

Bottom line is that it is almost 100% the NITROGEN loads which are killing the grasses and these come directly from Waste Water plants and Penrice.

I dunno if I'm correct or not' date=' but I was of the belief that the outfall and silt from Penrice wasn't nutrient rich' date=' but was instead quite harmless sodium bicarbonate by-product, whose greatest effect was only slightly altering the pH of the surrounding water. ...........I'd like to be corrected if I'm wrong.What I AM aware of though, is that they entered a $1.5M clean-up back in 2006, to dredge around 150,000 cubic metres of silt from the port and remove their built up silt, where it is now taken to Penrice land for drying prior to being blended as landfill.[/quote'']http://www.chemlink.com.au/soda.htmhttp://www.penrice.com.au/pdf/100520%20CEDA%20Luncheon%20final.pdfAnd here we are, the second biggest mains potable water user in SA with a mere 7.5 gigalitres per year :ohmy:

[Ranger 48]

Ok, I've read both the provided links, but I'm really not sure what you're trying to tell me.The first link never explained my question of whether the silt contains nitrogen, or is harmless to the environment.The second link you provided discusses how Penrice ONCE was the second largest mains water consumer at 7.5 gig (prior to 2006), but have now reduced their water consumption by 90% through installing RO and now recycling used water.Is this bad, or are you now concerned because they installed their own reverse osmosis plant in 2006 to reduce mains water consumption and you believe this is going to destroy the port river environment? From what I see, Penrice have been attempting to clean up their act for a number of years now. They employ over 300 people, export to 27 countries, put over $150M into the economy, have been around since 1936, and are now making large investments to clean up their act. The alternative is for us to go without glass, lime, baking soda, detergent, pharmaceuticals, stockfeed, etc..............and instead be purchasing overseas product while yet another Aust company shuts down. I dont see purchasing glass and stockfeeds from overseas as a viable option.We want jobs, we want Australian made, we want dollars into the economy. We complain about foreign products flooding our country, we talk of export, resources and national wealth...............we don't get to have everything! What is it that we actually want? Is it that we want the soda ash, we want the jobs, we want the money, we want the glass, we want the other products manufactured here from this soda ash, but we dont want water usage in the process?I'm as pro environment as the next person, but I think we also have to be realistic in the process.....I don't see Penrice as the enemy anymore, and as long as they continue pumping dollars into procedural improvement, I dont see any reason to go on the defence against them............am I wrong in this?

[Fishie 98]

Can their "Science" explain why the majority of local KGW and rugger snapper have been caught inside and along the blue line right along the Metro Coastline.. In the last couple of years the fish seem to be migrating in very shallow water as opposed to out along the deeper seagrass meadows... even reports on this site will confirm this with reports of snapper and whiting taken from our local jetties and not to mention the posts from our regular kayak fishers who seem to do pretty well in the shallows... same for Port Noarlunga Reef... we're still taking good fish from that line of structure.

[Fishie 98]

Brighton Jetty "Blueline" circa 1937 as opposed to current Google Earth Pic.. considering they chopped some of the length off the original Jetty (from memory about 30 metres) I would say the "Blueline" is in better condition now than 70 odd years agoTheir "Science" doesn't cut it with me

[afishyfish 4]

Without trying to stir the pot, I'm pretty sure the penrice discharge is only a flocullated substance anyway

[Wahoo 146]

OK. Shoot me if I get this wrong as I'm going from memory of Wednesday night & have left the handouts with the facts on them at home!The 2 culprits are Nitrogen and fine sediment. Penrice ONCE had the largest Nitrogen discharge as well as one of the highest sediment discharges. They have significantly cleaned up their act and are on their way to being the lowest producer of Nitrogen and are working toward significantly removing the fine sediment. Same Same the waste water treatment plants leaving stormater runoff as the major significant problem as it's managed by so many different bodies who as is common in dear old Adelaide seem unwilling to work together toward a common goal.Wahoo

[Ranger 48]

OK. Shoot me if I get this wrong as I'm going from memory of Wednesday night & have left the handouts with the facts on them at home!The 2 culprits are Nitrogen and fine sediment. Penrice ONCE had the largest Nitrogen discharge as well as one of the highest sediment discharges. They have significantly cleaned up their act and are on their way to being the lowest producer of Nitrogen and are working toward significantly removing the fine sediment. Same Same the waste water treatment plants leaving stormater runoff as the major significant problem as it's managed by so many different bodies who as is common in dear old Adelaide seem unwilling to work together toward a common goal.Wahoo

I dont wanna shoot anyone down!I was just looking for some answers to clarify things for myself, as I was also in contact with Penrice some time ago to discuss the issues of the silt and the dredging, as I had my own concerns in regards to the health and maintenance of the port river system.Following my own discussions, I was of the belief that the issue was now under control and no longer of concern.Just for the record, I dont believe for a moment that Penrice voluntarily decided to start spending money on a massive clean-up. I would instead suggest, that the EPA was on their tail, and Penrice made the decision to act BEFORE it was forced upon them, and in a manner that may well have cost far more in the long run.You now inform me that the waste water treatment plants have also cleaned up their act. Something I'm also aware of in regards to the Bolivar Treatment Plant, as a friend employed there as a microbiologist regularly discusses with me the ongoing water testing and monitoring they perform in the general northern metro environs.So from this discussion, I am now of the understanding that the "largest" current threat to our inshore environment is stormwater run-off and the associated pollutants, or are there still other concerns?I just wanna see our efforts directed to the true areas of largest concern, rather than us just complaining about pollutants and industry ruining our environment......coz if we start heading down that path we'll just start to sound like extreme greens who want EVERYTHING shut down for the benefit of the environment, and that will get us nowhere. I recon as fishermen and locals, we need to be a bit more realistic and sensible, by addressing areas of concern, noting the need for balance between industry, population and the environment, and then coming up with more realistic compromise to achieve overall balance and benefit.Is that a fair call?

[snapper15.4kg 67]

You do not need to " shoot anyone down ", when you have a chainsaw

[RJ5023 230]

I just wanna see our efforts directed to the true areas of largest concern' date=' rather than us just complaining about pollutants and industry ruining our environment......coz if we start heading down that path we'll just start to sound like extreme greens who want EVERYTHING shut down for the benefit of the environment, and that will get us nowhere. I recon as fishermen and locals, we need to be a bit more realistic and sensible, by addressing areas of concern, noting the need for balance between industry, population and the environment, and then coming up with more realistic compromise to achieve overall balance and benefit.Is that a fair call?[/quote']Peter's approach to this was that the best way to implement pollution controls within industry is to assist that industry to be successful. EPA has studies that show the most involved and effective improvements to pollution reduction are undertaken by companies that are making a reasonable profit.To paraphrase his words:-".. there's no point in bashing a company over the head to introduce expensive anti-pollution controls if doing that will bankrupt them..."Despite the over zealous and apparently blind attitudes of some of our green friends, there is a significant sector of the environmental movement that maintain a common sense and practical approach to pollution reduction. IMO, these are the people that rec fishers need to team up with.To highlight the different attitudes:-During the Pt Adelaide EPA meeting, one of the string bag ladies present raised strident concerns about the "big chemical companies" being at fault because they manufactured the cleaning agents that she was dumping down her sink and thereby detroying the environment.Peter replied that those chemicals represent a very low percentage of the water treatment problem and were taken out during the processing stage. He said that the biggest pollution problem emanating from her home was her poo.Silence.Cheers,RJ

[Ranger 48]

Thanks RJ, that explains things to me a whole lot better! Just one more question!Did the EPA representative discuss proposals or possible solutions for addressing the stormwater run-off, or being government rather than industry, does that one get thrown into the "too hard" basket?

You do not need to " shoot anyone down ", when you have a chainsaw

Chainsaws dont kill people..........people kill people! :silly:

[RJ5023 230]

I don't think I can answer that one Ranger. Responsibility is spread among far too many Govt agencies, and each one of them is taking some form of action - some a lot more than others.EPA's approach to that is that it will be "people power" that will encourage change. Might sound like a bit of a cop out from the Govt, but I think he's right because there's a tendency for the public to expect more from our Govt than they'll ever be able to deliver. They make just as many poor decisions as the rest of us.For example, when you look at all of the issues that are confronting rec fishing at the moment, there's small chance that the Govt (or RecfishSA) will be able to resolve them all without a bit of a leg up from us. Biggest challenge is to get enough concerned, knowledgeable (and not radical) people together to make a difference.That's exactly what the MFA is all about.Cheers,RJ

[Wahoo 146]

Hi Ranger. Very fair call indeed. From the projections shown Nitrogen & sediment levels from Penrice & Waste Water Treatment have been heading downwards for a number of years and should achieve their very low targets within a few years. The only major polluter that isn't improving is stormwater runoff & RJ has given an excellent answer to that one. Apparently though, just buiding wetlands is not the answer as fine sediment still goes into the gulf, councils need to be harvesting the water in wetlands and using it for irrigation. Playford & Salisbury councils are apparently the best 2 councils at this & if you drive around any of the developments sprouting up all over the North, Munno Para West, Playford Alive & the new estate going up in Angle Vale you see not only wetlands in Playford alive but in the small estates there are what look like sunken parks, when it rains all the stormwater runoff goes into these and gradually soaks back into the ground. Not irrigation I know, but at least it's not going into the gulf, or the Gawler River which is not that far from my place!!

[Tacklebags 404]

Hi all,What about marine growth on the desal plant pipe wall surfaces and the chemicals used to keep them clear?TB

[Wahoo 146]

Hi TB. Are you talking internal or external. There are no pipelines as such. Inlet & outlet are 2.8m diameter concrete lined tunnels it's only where the inlet & outlet go down through the seabed to join the tunnel that there is a need for anti-fouling, which I suspect would be less than is used on the average container vessel's hull.Wahoo

[King Monkey 0]

Sorry to say but I think the EPA is rubbish.I'm trained in marine biology and after noticing continual murky water / silting going on for a month near Brighton (when there was no storm run off) I contacted them.They replied..."well we think it might be this...or we think it might be that....useless ,I asked them if their mandate was to "think" of possibilites or to actually investigate...no response. From my studies I know that it doesnt take long at all to lose a sea grass bed to silting (oh,and by the way...they said the sand pipeline digging going on around the area had nothing to do with it...well,have you checked...no response...lol)Useless beaurocrats with a lot of "thinking and postulating" to do as the sea grasses die!Monkey