McKay J, Moeller A
School of International Business, Division of Business and Enterprise, Water Policy and Law Group, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, 5001, Australia.
Environ Manage. 2001 Oct;28(4):469-81. doi: 10.1007/s002670010237.
Presently in Australia there are no mandatory drinking water standards. Here we argue that the risk associated with drinking water in Australia is of a dimension discernible to warrant mandatory regulations. The catchments that supply the major metropolitan areas of Sydney and Adelaide, and the groundwater for the city of Perth have been seriously compromised by the encroachment of development and activities. Melbourne in the past has generally relied on a closed catchment reservoir system; however, population growth in the near future will sequester the full online operation of additional reservoirs, which have multiple land use catchments. In addition to the current landscape circumstances, the management of a water system in itself proposes significant issues of risk. Two critical assumptions that are unique to a mass medium substance like water and dramatically alter the appraisal of risk are: (1) very large numbers of people are potentially exposed, and (2) small changes in contaminant levels may have adverse population outcomes. It is also known that water reticulation systems frequently suffer from contamination problems caused solely by the distribution system, and optimal management of these facilities would best be served by statutory protected transparency and dedicated water quality programs. In 1979, an Australian parliamentary committee stated that an "uncontaminated water supply is" a "basic requirement for the obtainment of good health"; however, recent surveys of Australian water systems show many are not meeting basic water quality criteria, and many communities are not receiving regular monitoring or testing as required by government authorized Australian drinking water guidelines. Exacerbating this situation is the lack of reporting and statutory endorsed standardized procedures to ensure information is properly and promptly recorded and that data are centralized for maximum benefit. The evaluation of risk associated with drinking water in Australia is often hampered by inadequate or incomplete data. Lastly, regional and rural water supplies face a vast array of contemporary problems and experiences that include widespread usage of pesticides and agricultural chemicals. In recent years, the Darling River has experienced the worst algal bloom known to man, and this river system not only supplies a number of regional and rural towns with water, but eventually connects with the River Murray, which supplies the State of South Australia with approximately 50% of its water requirements.
目前在澳大利亚没有强制性的饮用水标准。在此我们认为,澳大利亚饮用水相关的风险程度明显,足以制定强制性法规。为悉尼和阿德莱德等主要大都市地区供水的集水区,以及珀斯市的地下水,已因开发和活动的侵入而受到严重影响。墨尔本过去通常依赖封闭集水区水库系统;然而,在不久的将来,人口增长将使额外水库的全面上线运营受到限制,这些水库有多个土地利用集水区。除了当前的景观情况外,水系统的管理本身也带来了重大的风险问题。对于像水这样的大众媒介物质来说,有两个独特的关键假设,它们极大地改变了风险评估:(1)大量人群可能受到影响,(2)污染物水平的微小变化可能对人群产生不利影响。还已知供水系统经常遭受仅由分配系统引起的污染问题,而对这些设施的最佳管理需要法定保护的透明度和专门的水质计划。1979年,一个澳大利亚议会委员会指出,“无污染的供水”是“保持健康的基本要求”;然而,最近对澳大利亚水系统的调查显示,许多水系统未达到基本水质标准,许多社区也未按照政府批准的澳大利亚饮用水指南要求接受定期监测或检测。使这种情况更加恶化的是,缺乏报告和法定认可的标准化程序,以确保信息得到妥善及时记录,并将数据集中起来以实现最大效益。对澳大利亚饮用水相关风险的评估常常因数据不足或不完整而受阻。最后,区域和农村供水面临着一系列当代问题和经历,包括农药和农用化学品的广泛使用。近年来,达令河经历了有史以来最严重的藻华,这个河流系统不仅为一些区域和农村城镇供水,最终还与墨累河相连,墨累河为南澳大利亚州提供约50%的用水需求。