Tough consent rules drive up sewage bill

By Mark Reynolds

Changes late last year to environmental requirements for an upgrade of Auckland's main sewage treatment plant at Mangere will push up the operating costs of the plant significantly.

The changes, and other costs could lift the plant's electricity bill by an estimated $1.8 million a year, which will be funded from the pockets of companies and homeowners in the region.

The cost will fall more heavily on the business sector, which pays about 55 per cent of Watercare's costs.

There will be an added burden as Auckland's bulk water and waste company, Watercare Services, has to borrow to pay for the upgrade.

The environmental consent changes appear to have been imposed in part to counter Maori concerns over loss of fishing and recreational access to the foreshore near the South Auckland facility. Those concerns might be actionable under the Treaty of Waitangi, but usually such grievances would be settled by central Government, rather than paid for by the customers of a local-authority-owned group such as Watercare.

Before the latest changes to the Mangere plant specifications were imposed late last year, wastewater charges in Auckland were already projected to rise 50 per cent over the next 10 years, excluding inflation. The new specifications could swell those charges by a further 20 to 30 per cent, according to infrastructure-industry analysts.

Preliminary costings for the change in plans will not be made public until late next month, when an assessment is completed by Fletcher Challenge Building. But Fletcher, which has been contracted to upgrade the facility, has indicated the extra work could cost $30 million. That is on top of $324 million already slated for the upgrade.

The environmental director for Manukau City, Lee Auton, said changes to Watercare's upgrade plans were sought by local groups late last year. The groups believed an "ability to bathe in that environment was pretty critical."

"We want to ensure that they can actually use the water [close to the treatment plant] for swimming and shellfish collection," he said.

The area near the facility, in particular the northern foreshore of Puketutu Island which borders the treatment area, has not been used for recreational fishing or swimming since the plant was developed in the 1960s.

The construction of the plant destroyed shellfish areas close to the adjacent Makaurau Marae, and Mr Auton noted that a settlement for this damage could be asked for under the Treaty of Waitangi.

"One of the things we are trying to achieve is the restoration of [Maori] rights, in effect."

Watercare agreed to change the specifications for the upgrade in December, but only after local authorities and residents' groups used an appeals process to impose environmental standards in excess of those already agreed to.

A group, including Manukau City Council, Waitakere City Council, Makaurau Marae representatives and Mangere residents and ratepayer lobbyists, demanded that Watercare not use chlorine as part of the wastewater disinfection process, and also pressured Watercare to eliminate the potential for viruses to be transmitted through the sewage system to the sea.

Watercare considered effluent standards it had already proposed were the cleanest in the world. It suggested an increase in the level of treatment would lead to a steep escalation in costs that was disproportionate to any environmental improvement.

Watercare spokesman Owen Cook said the company was concerned that an appeals process had been used to impose stricter standards than those previously agreed upon. "Effluent" to be pumped into the harbour from the plant would have fewer viruses than what existed naturally in the harbour waters.

The decision to upgrade the Mangere treatment facilities was originally made after a Planning Tribunal Enforcement Order required Watercare to minimise the discharge of odours beyond the boundary of its plant. Mr Auton agreed the original reason for the upgrade "had grown to concern in general about the standards of the plant."

The project has involved nearly six years of consultation and negotiation, with construction finally getting underway late last year.

A feature of the new plant is that it will use electricity to treat effluent, rather than breaking it down with sunshine in settling ponds. The use of electricity rather than the unsightly oxidation ponds means operating costs will be higher.

Watercare had planned to use chlorine to treat peak loads, and this would have reduced costs. But the tougher standards that have now been imposed mean using an estimated 3MW more of electricity a year. That amount of electricity will cost an estimated $1.8 million a year to deliver.

Pictured: New reactor clarifiers start to take shape at the plant. HERALD PICTURE / MARTIN SYKES