Australian Bureau of Statistics

Rate the ABS website
ABS Home > Statistics > By Release Date
ABS @ Facebook ABS @ Twitter ABS RSS ABS Email notification service
4610.0 - Water Account, Australia, 2009-10 Quality Declaration 
Previous ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 29/11/2011   
   Page tools: Print Print Page Print all pages in this productPrint All RSS Feed RSS Bookmark and Share Search this Product  
Contents >> Monetary water supply and use >> Revenue and Expenditure

MONETARY WATER ACCOUNT
 
Revenue
Expenditure
Water efficiency


REVENUE

Supply of water and related services
 
The table below presents revenue earned by the Water supply industry from supplying water and related services in 2009–10. The highest revenue from sales of urban distributed water was reported in New South Wales, $1,565 million. This is a 12% rise from the 2008–09 result of $1,400 million and corresponds with a 2% decrease in the supply of distributed and reuse water across the state (see Physical water supply and use tables).

REVENUE FROM NET WATER SALES AND SERVICES (a)—2009–10

DISTRIBUTED WATER(b)
BULK WATER
SERVICES(c)
TOTAL REVENUE EARNED

Urban  
Rural
Urban
Rural
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m

NSW
1 565
85
265
15
1 607
3 536
Vic.
969
138
384
10
1 419
2 920
Qld
1 322
60
428
5
1 046
2 860
SA
508
36
-
-
385
929
WA
832
9
-
2
838
1 681
Tas.
108
10
-
-
87
205
NT
60
-
-
-
38
98
ACT
128
-
-
-
99
227
Total
5 491
339
1 077
31
5 519
12 457

- nil or rounded to zero (including null cells)
(a) At basic prices
(b) Includes reuse water
(c) Wastewater, sewerage and drainage services

 
Queensland recorded the second highest revenue from urban distributed water sales ($1,322 million) which was a 14% increase from 2008–09 revenue of $1,159 million. The physical supply of distributed and reuse water dropped by 5% between 2008–09 and 2009–10. The higher revenue from urban distributed water sales in Queensland is attributed to increased tariffs and increased water use in the household sector associated with easing of water restrictions from level 4 to level 3.
 
Victoria had the third highest revenue from distributed water of $969 million, an increase of 16% from $832 million in 2008–09. The Victorian government continued with Stage 3 water restrictions in most of its metropolitan areas during 2009–10, impacting upon water demand. The 16% increase in revenue was mainly driven by higher tariffs imposed by a number of water providers.
 
The total revenue earned from sales of urban distributed water in Western Australia rose by 12% from $745 million to $832 million from 2008–09 to 2009–10. The 2008–09 estimates have been revised, details of which can be found in the Explanatory Notes, paragraph 55.
 
New South Wales recorded the highest revenue from water related services ($1,607 million), a 15% increase from 2008–09. Victoria earned the second highest revenue from providing water related services ($1,419 million).

Rural water supply

There was considerable variation across the States and Territories in the distribution of revenue generated from rural distributed water supply. Victoria earned the highest revenue from sales of rural distributed water ($138 million), followed by New South Wales ($85 million) and Queensland ($60 million).
 
Regional rainfall variability imposes constraints upon water availability which largely explains the variability in revenue from rural distributed water supply between 2008–09 and 2009–10. Revenue from rural distributed and reuse water decreased in South Australia by 53% to $36 million and by 6% to $9 million in Western Australia. Tasmania showed the largest percentage increase in revenue from rural distributed water (62%) from $6 million to $10 million.
 
Rural bulk water revenue in Victoria fell from $55 million to $10 million, an 81% decrease since 2008–09. This corresponds with a reduction in government funded drought assistance after drought conditions across the state eased.
 
The table below shows the revenue from sales of water and related services by all industries, at purchaser's prices (see Glossary), for 2009–10. The revenue for the delivery of water, wastewater and sewerage services, at the national level, was $12,521 million, which includes imports, taxes and subsidies. Imports relate to expenditure on water and sewerage services consumed by Australian foreign missions and ships, etc. overseas. The taxes and subsidies are primarily on products. In addition to the Water supply industry, the Mining, Manufacturing and Electricity generation industries also contributed to the supply of urban distributed water. The revenue earned by those industries was less than $0.5 million.
 

REVENUE FROM NET WATER SALES AND SERVICES(a), by industry—2009–10

DISTRIBUTED WATER (b)
BULK WATER
TOTAL WATER SUPPLIED
SERVICES(c)
TOTAL REVENUE EARNED

Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m

Agriculture, forestry and fishing
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mining
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Manufacturing
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Electricity, gas and waste
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water supply(d)
5 491
339
1 077
31
6 938
5 519
12 457
Other industries
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Imports
-
-
-
-
-
-
20
Taxes
-
-
-
-
-
-
107
Subsidies
-
-
-
-
-
-
-64
Trade and transport margins
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total supply(a)
-
-
-
-
-
-
12 521

- nil or rounded to zero (including null cells)
(a) At purchaser's prices
(b) Includes reuse water
(c) Wastewater, sewerage and drainage services
(d) Includes sewerage and drainage services industry

  


EXPENDITURE

Use of water and related services

The table below shows the expenditure on water and related services by state, at basic prices for 2009–10. It also relates to the above table, by showing how much expenditure on water supply services originates from households (final consumption) and how much originates from industries (intermediate consumption), by State/Territory.
 
Expenditure on intermediate consumption of water by industries decreased by 1% from $2,022 million to $2,004 million. The largest decrease of 10% was reported in Queensland, followed by New South Wales with a decrease of 8%. Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory all experienced moderate expenditure increases.

EXPENDITURE ON WATER AND SERVICES(a), by State/Territory—2009–10

DISTRIBUTED WATER(b)
BULK WATER(c)
SERVICES(d)
TOTAL USE

Urban
Rural(e)
Intermediate consumption by industries
Final consumption by households
Intermediate consumption by industries
Intermediate consumption by industries
Intermediate consumption by industries
Final consumption by households
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m

NSW
449
1 116
85
279
348
1 259
3 536
Vic.
334
634
138
394
480
939
2 920
QLD
511
812
60
432
309
737
2 860
SA
229
279
36
-
122
263
929
WA
371
461
9
2
439
400
1 681
Tas.
22
86
10
-
7
81
205
NT
27
33
-
-
15
22
98
ACT
62
66
-
-
31
68
227
Total
2 004
3 488
339
1 108
1 751
3 769
12 457

- nil or rounded to zero (including null cells)
(a) At basic prices
(b) Includes reuse water
(c) Includes urban and rural
(d) Wastewater, sewerage and drainage services
(e) Final consumption by households is negligible

 
Expenditure on water related services increased by 6% in Australia, mainly attributable to increased tariffs across the States and Territories. There was a large variation in the expenditure among jurisdictions reflecting differing consumption characteristics and differences in the type and range of service delivery charges across the country. All jurisdictions maintain a fixed charge for these services, however some states have an additional volumetric charge.
 
The table below shows the expenditure on water related services by industry in 2009–10. Total expenditure on water and related services at purchaser's prices increased by 12% from $11,181 million in 2008–09 to $12,521 million in 2009–10. Expenditure on urban distributed water by all industries decreased by 1%. The Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry reported an 8% increase in expenditure on urban distributed water. The Electricity generation industry experienced the largest increase of 26% followed by households, with a 23% increase in aggregate expenditure on urban distributed water.
 

EXPENDITURE ON WATER AND RELATED SERVICES(a), by industry—2009–10

DISTRIBUTED WATER(b)
BULK WATER(c)
TOTAL WATER SUPPLIED
SERVICES(d)
TOTAL USE

Urban
Rural
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m
$m

Intermediate consumption
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
51
309
-
359
2
362
Mining  
99
-
-
99
11
110
Manufacturing  
364
-
-
364
411
775
Electricity, gas, water and waste(e)
104
-
1 115
1 218
15
1 233
Electricity generation
71
-
-
71
3
74
Water supply, sewerage & drainage  
-
-
1 115
1 115
-
1 115
Other industries
1 423
-
-
1 423
1 350
2 773
Total intermediate consumption
2 041
309
1 115
3 465
1 789
5 253
Final consumption
Final consumption by households(f)
3 488
-
-
3 488
3 769
7 256
Final consumption by Government
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total final consumption
3 488
-
-
3 488
3 769
7 256
Exports
-
-
-
-
-
11
Total use
-
-
-
-
-
12 521

- nil or rounded to zero (including null cells)
(a) At purchaser's prices
(b) Includes reuse water
(c) Includes urban and rural
(d) Wastewater, sewerage and drainage services
(e) Includes all industries in Electricity, gas, water and waste services not elsewhere classified
(f) Includes social benefits paid in kind by Governments

 
The figure below compares relative consumption of distributed water with relative expenditure on water. The Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry used 55% of total distributed water, while households accounted for 24%. Expenditure on distributed water by the Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry was only 6% of the national total, compared to 60% for households. This difference in physical water use and corresponding expenditure is associated with different costs of storage, treatment and delivery of water used by urban and rural users. The Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry also undertakes expenditure on self sourced water, which is not included in this comparison.


EXPENDITURE AND PHYSICAL USE OF DISTRIBUTED WATER (a), by industry and households—2009–10

The physical use of distributed water increased for households (by 5%) and the Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry (11%) from 2008–09 to 2009–10. Corresponding expenditure on distributed water by households increased by 23% and by 2% in the Agriculture, forestry and fishing industry. Distributed water use in the Mining industry decreased by 48%, however expenditure on water decreased by 1%. This is attributable to the provision of low cost water to the mining industry during floods in Queensland in January 2009. The group of 'Other industries' also experienced decreases in distributed water use by 21%, however expenditure decreased by 2%.

ABS has developed a new method for estimating household expenditure on distributed water resulting in revisions to the 2008–09 household expenditure estimates (see Explanatory Notes, paragraph 51). The table below displays the State and Territory breakdown of the expenditure on urban distributed water by households in 2009–10.

New South Wales households recorded the highest expenditure ($1,116 million), which accounted for 32% of the national expenditure by households. New South Wales households also recorded the highest physical use of urban distributed water (527 GL or 32% of total water use by households). Although Victoria (323 GL) and Queensland (330 GL) displayed similar water usage, Queensland's expenditure was 28% higher than that of Victoria. Queensland households pay the highest unit price for urban distributed water ($2.46 per kL). The highest annual average expenditure per household occurred in Western Australia ($531 per household per annum).
 

HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE ON URBAN DISTRIBUTED WATER, by State/Territory—2009–10

URBAN DISTRIBUTED WATER(a)
Population
at 30 June 2010
No. of households
at 30 June 2010(b)
Water use in 2009–10
URBAN WATER USAGE


Total  expenditure
Expenditure per capita
Expenditure per household
$ spent
per kL
Volume used per household
$m
$
$
'000
'000
GL
$/kL
kL/household

NSW
1 116
154
431
7 233
2 590
527
2.12
203
Vic.
634
114
301
5 546
2 110
323
1.96
153
QLD
812
180
514
4 514
1 580
330
2.46
209
SA
279
170
436
1 645
639
119
2.34
186
WA
461
201
531
2 294
869
254
1.82
292
Tas.
86
169
503
508
170
59
1.46
346
NT
33
146
498
230
67
31
1.08
459
ACT
66
185
477
359
139
28
2.40
199
Total
3 488
156
427
22 327
8 163
1 670
2.09
205

(a) Includes reuse water
(b) Connected properties only

 
The table below displays the State and Territory breakdown of the expenditure on water related services by households in 2009–10. Household expenditure on water related services increased by 13% nationally, with the highest growth of 18% recorded in Victoria and the lowest growth of 5% in Western Australia. New South Wales households paid the most for water related services on a per household basis ($556). Residents in the Australian Capital Territory paid the most for water related services on a per capita basis ($189).
 

HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE ON WATER RELATED SERVICES, by State/Territory—2009–10

Total  expenditure
Expenditure per capita
Expenditure per household
Population as at 30 June 2010
No. of households as at 30 June 2010(a)
$m
$
$
'000
'000

NSW
1 259
174
556
7 233
2 264
Vic.
939
169
477
5 546
1 970
QLD
737
163
486
4 514
1 515
SA
263
160
484
1 645
543
WA
400
174
541
2 294
739
Tas.
81
159
530
508
152
NT
22
98
437
230
51
ACT
68
189
492
359
138
Total
3 769
169
511
22 327
7 372

(a) Estimated connected households

 

 
WATER EFFICIENCY
 
Assessments of water efficiency can be focused on the supply side (water supply distribution network) or on the use side (consumption by industry and households). Water productivity is one measure of water efficiency and can be expressed as the amount of output produced from one unit of water. The table below provides data on water consumption and industry gross value added for 2009–10, from which we can calculate water intensity by industry.

The Agriculture industry generated, on average, $3 million in gross value added for every GL of water consumed in 2009–10 (see the table below). Industry gross value added decreased by 1% (in chain volume terms) while water consumption remained virtually unchanged from 2008–09. The use of chain volume terms to describe movements in financial estimates between years is explained in Explanatory Notes, paragraph 44.
 

INDUSTRY GROSS VALUE ADDED FOR WATER USING INDUSTRIES—2009–10

Industry gross value added  (a)
Water consumption
Industry gross value added per GL of water consumed
$m
GL
$m/GL

Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Agriculture
24 265
6 987
3
Aquaculture, forestry, fishing
4 499
200
22
Total Agriculture, forestry and fishing
28 764
7 187
4
Mining
Coal mining
22 576
76
298
Oil and gas extraction
26 340
34
785
Other mining(b)
38 880
336
116
Exploration and mining support services
8 309
44
187
Total mining
96 105
489
196
Manufacturing
Food, beverages and tobacco
23 953
301
80
Textile, clothing and footware
4 102
12
335
Wood and paper products
7 736
81
96
Printing, publishing and record media
4 088
4
941
Petroleum, coal, chemical and associated products
17 807
77
230
Non-metallic, mineral products
5 783
33
176
Metal products
21 310
139
153
Machinery and equipment
19 881
9
2 134
Other manufacturing (includes furniture)
3 047
1
2 998
Total manufacturing
107 707
658
164
Electricity and gas
18 837
297
64
Water supply, sewerage and drainage
7 191
1 893
4
All other industries
944 442
1 084
871
Total
1 203 046
11 609
104

(a) At 2009–10 current prices
(b) Includes services to mining

 
The Mining industry recorded (on average) $196 million in gross valued added per GL of water consumed in 2009–10, showing a 6% increase (chain volume terms) from the previous year. Physical water consumption actually decreased by 4% during the 2009–10 period. The gross value added per GL of water consumed in the Coal mining industry was $298 million, an increase of 6% (in chain volume terms) despite a 23% decrease in physical water consumption. Other mining recorded $116 million gross value added per GL of water consumed. In contrast to Coal mining, this industry showed a 3% increase in water consumption with a corresponding 11% increase in industry gross value added (chain volume terms).
 
The Manufacturing industry recorded (on average) $164 million in gross value added per GL of water consumed in 2009–10. This was an increase of 1% (chain volume terms) from the result in 2008–09 and corresponds with a 3% decrease in water consumption. The largest consumer of water within the Manufacturing industry was Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing, recording $80 million gross value added per GL of water used in 2009–10. This was an increase of 7% (chain volume terms) from the result in 2008–09 and corresponded to a 4% increase in water consumption. The Wood and paper products industry recorded $96 million gross value added per GL of water used in 2009–10, an increase of 4% in chain volume Industry gross value added. Water consumption in this industry decreased by 16% over the same period.
 
The gross value added per GL of water consumed in the Electricity and gas supply industry was $64 million in 2009–10. This was an increase of 4% (chain volume terms) from the result in 2008–09 with a corresponding 10% decrease in water consumption.




Previous PageNext Page

Bookmark and Share. Opens in a new window


© Commonwealth of Australia 2014

Unless otherwise noted, content on this website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia Licence together with any terms, conditions and exclusions as set out in the website Copyright notice. For permission to do anything beyond the scope of this licence and copyright terms contact us.