The potentially futile quest for chlorine-free water in Christchurch

Saturday, 20 May 2023

Augie, 5, drinks a glass of water after parents Samantha and Mark Bailey had a plumber instal a tap water filter in 2018 due to the chlorination of the city’s water supply.

For as long as chlorine has been in Christchurch’s water, the city council has been working to get rid of it, spending almost $200 million in the process. The chlorine-free quest took a major hit this week and the chemical is likely to remain for a long time, possibly forever. TINA LAW reports.

Back in 2018, Christchurch City Council told residents to expect chlorine to be out of the city’s water supply within a year.

Five years on it remains.

About 80% of the city’s water supply still has chlorine in it and, thanks to a direction from water regulator Taumata Arowai, the remaining 20% will be chlorinated within a matter of weeks.

Chlorine is now required in water supplies across the country after a law came into force in November last year. Water suppliers must obtain an exemption from the regulator to remove chlorine.

Christchurch City Council staffers Helen Beaumont and George Chapman visit a Christchurch pump station in 2018.

Taumata Arowai, set up by the Government in November 2021 to ensure all communities have access to safe drinking water, delivered a devastating blow to the city this week when it declined the council’s first application for a chlorine exemption.

It was for the Brooklands/Kainga area, which the council deemed to be a low risk.

The decision is a draft one and the council has until early next week to give feedback before the regulator provides its final determination.

But the council says the final decision is unlikely to change because the draft identified a huge amount of work required to make the water supply compliant and eligible for an exemption.

In fact, the amount of work now required has angered many within the council, who say the goalposts keep getting moved.

Mayor Phil Mauger said earlier this week he was “pissed right off”.

“I feel as a council we have been led up the garden path by Taumata Arowai.”

An anti-chlorination protest in February 2018 drew about a dozen supporters outside the Christchurch City Council headquarters on Hereford St.

Taumata’s Arowai’s stance has left many within the council questioning if the water will ever be free of chlorine.

On Tuesday, Mauger said in his “heart of hearts” he did not think it would be possible.

An information page on the council’s website following the regulator’s decision states: “To achieve exemptions for any of our water supplies we’d have to make substantial upgrades to our water supply network at the cost of many millions of dollars, and even then it may not be possible.”

Taumata Arowai says while it is yet to approve any chlorine exemption applications, gaining one is achievable.

In 2018, Christchurch man James Wallis Martin claimed the water chlorination levels at his Parklands home were far too high, contributing to an infected right eye.

A spokesperson points out that there are many suppliers overseas operating without residual disinfection (chlorine), including Denmark.

“Our view is that it is possible to operate a drinking water supply safely without residual disinfection because we have seen these supplies and how they are operated.”

But the spokesperson says suppliers must meet very high operational standards, have infrastructure that is in very good condition and demonstrate that they are able to effectively manage the risks associated with not using residual disinfectant.

A major criticism by the council is that the Government keeps changing the rules, making them harder and more expensive to achieve.

It has got to the point, according to deputy mayor Pauline Cotter, that staff do not know where the bar sits, and she questions if Taumata Arowai even knows.

She is worried just how far the council will have to go to get approval.

Emily Arthur fills up containers with spring water instead of drinking the city’s chlorinated tap water in May 2018.

“What’s next? Are we going to have to rip water pipes out and change them to stainless steel? Who knows where it’s going to end.”

Cotter hopes Taumata Arowai will front up to the council so the city can get clarity on where that bar lies.

Mauger has invited chief executive Allan Prangnell to a council meeting in June.

Taumata Arowai has confirmed it received the invitation but would not say if it planned to accept.

Council acting head of three waters Brent Smith says the council is still working through the draft decision to understand exactly what it means for Christchurch and Banks Peninsula, but a huge amount of work is required to make the supply compliant.

It is likely to include completing inspections and remediation work at all its reservoirs and suction tanks, installing UV disinfection and improving water loss.

Water leaks have been named as one reason why Christchurch has not gained a chlorine exemption.

The Press reported in March that water leaks continued to grow as 38 million litres a day were lost from the city’s pipes – that’s about 15 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of water. The water lost represented 27% of all water use, up from 18% in 2018.

Wasted money?

The council has spent almost $200 million improving its water infrastructure since 2018, with the main goal being ridding the city of chlorine.

In that time it has invested $60m on water supply improvements related to meeting the drinking water standards, as well as $115m in pipe renewals.

In its 10-year budget, the 2021-31 long-term plan, $837m was carved out for drinking water infrastructure.

But Smith and Cotter insist the money has not been wasted.

Smith says all the money the council has spent upgrading the water supply has been a good investment.

Almost 120 well heads have been raised above ground since June 2018 under major efforts to future-proof Christchurch's drinking water network. (First published 2018)

“It is important work that needed to be completed to improve the security of our water supply. This work would have happened anyway as part of our renewals programme, but it also contributes to bringing our water supply network up to standard.”

Cotter agrees, and believes the council should continue to improve its drinking water infrastructure even if it turns out the aim is not to get the chlorine out.

“It’s the right and good thing to do.”

A decision will have to be made at some point about whether the council keeps pushing to become chlorine free, but the Government’s Three Waters reform is likely to take the decision away from the council anyway.

Councillor James Gough says it is too early for the council to start talking about whether it ditches its chlorine-free plan.

“We are all a bit shell-shocked.”

He and Cotter say they still want the council to strive for chlorine-free water, but Gough says it cannot be at all costs.

Christchurch has spent millions of dollars upgrading water facilities around the city, and while a chlorine exemption was declined this week, acting head of three waters Brent Smith says it’s still a good investment.

“We have to live in the world of reality”.

It is likely those decisions will be made next year as part of the council’s long-term plan.

The current cost to chlorinate the water is about $2.1m per year, but this will increase by $700,000 as the council works to chlorinate 100% of its supply, as per the Taumata Arowai direction.

Councillor Sam MacDonald wants the Government to be pragmatic about how it sees risk because he believes it is over-regulating.

“No-one has got sick from the water and no-one has died from our water.”

On Wednesday, MacDonald called on Local Government Minister Kieran McAnulty to intervene and launching a petition, saying the rules were “not pragmatic enough” for the city. The petition had attracted more than 2350 signatures as of Friday evening.

“The rules are obviously way out of whack with where the city is.”

McAnulty ruled out getting involved, saying it was a matter for the council and the regulator.

But Taumata Arowai is making no apologies for its stance.

It says power to exempt drinking water suppliers from requirements that Parliament has imposed must be exercised carefully.

Exemptions should be used sparingly to solve exceptional problems or respond to exceptional circumstances, where other options have been discounted, rather than as a business-as-usual tool, it says.

“Nevertheless, we approach each exemption application neutrally, and it is possible to achieve an exemption.

“But the requirements for doing so are necessarily high to recognise that an important barrier is not being provided and to ensure that consumers receive safe drinking water.”