Last year I wrote “MDB water-buy-back scheme redundant after rains” after the Govt released their report proposing to waste 4,000GL per year in environmental flows.
Now they have a new scheme to waste 2,750GL PA – only slightly less bad.
The new scheme too should be shelved in the National Interest because both Note: For best results we strongly recommend that men address the condition of ED (erectile Dysfunction) can be sorted quickly by involving certain and quick use of medicines that requires applying wouroud.com cheapest levitra of medical measures and thus finding timely benefits. Combining them with alcohol, nicotine, caffeine and other stimulants may be risky. An egg can remain alive for 2 days, whereas sperms for 5 days, after which, it flows out levitra 20 mg www.wouroud.com/index.php?ln=en in the form of periods. They are an levitra prescription ideal one for controlling colds, digestion issues, stress and skin problems. of these plans were produced by people who are true believers in IPCC Global Warming and Climate Change. So these schemes are tainted with IPCC rubbish science and failed model predictions from the outset.
Let us just put the latest effort in the bottom drawer where it belongs – and concentrate on gathering and promulgating reliable data about the MDB.
So MDB farmers are to have much of their water confiscated as a result of Federal Labor’s treachery. Inevitable result – thousands to become unemployed in the region, whilst Australia goes from being a net exporter to a net importer of agricultural product. But best Simon Crean can come up with to justify Labor’s sell-out to their Green masters – develop new industries in the region. What do you think Simon, maybe more pink bat installers, perhaps more school hall builders, or maybe a few thousand more bureaucrats and green police to implement the carbon (dioxide) tax that we weren’t going to have?
Is it true that Canberra does not have to give up water under this scheme?
Short answer yes.
I heard our Minister Corbell on radio – he said under the 2010 scheme ACT water use was to be cut back to 27Gl PA. Currently we are using ~40 – way down from levels in earlier years pre – restrictions. IMHO 27Gl PA was loony toon. If we are to be restricted to ~40 – then we are wasting money hand over fist building the new 79Gl Cotter Dam – plus the Angle Crossing to Googong pipeline. All this expenditure will give us a Rolls-Royce water supply system easily capable of supplying more than 40Gl PA. IMHO we are wasting money spending on all this improved capacity – obviously an increasing proportion of our dam waters will have to be wasted in environmental flows. As is happening in other places.
Without having read in detail the MDB report, nothing has been said about water availability or usage, for irrigation or the environment, having any relationship to rainfall in any part of the catchment and hence the volume/flow rates in the river system.
However, “Environmental flows” appears to mean that there must be enough water to continually flush out Lake Alexandrina at the S.A. mouth of the system, irrespective of rainfall.
Or do I read this incorrectly?
Does anybody know if the Murray Mouth was ever open 90% of years ? [added 7 Dec – Re Paul80 – yes I heard these percentages quoted on ABC radio last week by an author of the latest plan]
I heard on the radio one of the plans authors claiming that last year’s plan proposing the 4,000GL PA water wasting would have opened the mouth 91 or 92% of years. The latest plan proposing only 2,750GL of water wasting PA will keep the Murray Mouth open 89% of years.
Did I hear that correct ? Anybody know ?
Warwick, ATM, I cannot point to a source but I am almost certain that I read something to the effect that certain dams in Australia were being kept just below a set level so that desal plants would remain in operation. Does that story er.. hold water or was it just speculation? (I will keep looking, doing some never-ending file maintenance and probably have the article saved offline somewhere on one of these huge disks…)
Wind, wave, & solar give me warm and fuzzy feelings at the same time as they make me all hot and bothered. Sure I would love wind, wave, & solar to work but I am darn sure I don’t want to pay multiple times the going rate for the products they produce.
I covered that news in September Paul.
Green MP says NSW Govt wasting dam water to benefit Kurnell desalination plant economics
September 12th, 2011 by Warwick Hughes
Melbourne is similar – they build a huge seawater desal plant at the same time as their main Thomson Dam has to empty out 35% of inflows as “environmental flows” – that is over the last ten years or so.
My “Water Category” has lots of articles.
For at least a decade now – a lot of Australian water bureaucrats wake up every day the sun rises and work hard at getting our rivers to run free to the sea – that is one of the realities Australian voters have not caught up to yet.
Warwick,
before the weirs were built on the Murray (1923?) the river almost dried up in some summers. It reduced to a series of large ponds. I know an old chap whose uncle used to WALK across the Murray in summer to go to school.
The old steamers going up the Murray and the Darling used to tie up to the bank in early summer, and wait for autumn rains to allow enough depth of water to proceed. Intervals of 3 – 4 months were common.
You can easily see that the river mouth was only kept open by incoming sea water, or else was ‘silted’ up by sand. Certainly a winter/spring flood would help flush salt out again, but claims that it is necessary to have the mouth flowing fresh water all the time aren’t necessary “to restore natural conditions”.
The 2750GL ambit claim is enough for SA irrigators as they use 450-500 GL p.a. From a SA point of view, the extra flow they want is to allow greater off-take for city dwellers, new industry (if the local government ever decides they want it) and to keep the lower lakes fresh, as there is a lot of agriculture and increasing houses along the shores (since the barrages across the mouth of the river were built).
Much of the agricultural usage upstream of Adelaide is quite frugal with water, far more so than similar farms upstream. You only have to cross the Hay Plains and see the giant earth walls of the ‘ponds’ used to hold water for constant irrigation in NSW to realise that the evaporation alone from these ponds must strain the supply, let alone that used to make the desert bloom.
For comparison QLD used 2163GL, VIC 4000 and NSW 8000GL for irrigation (96/7 figures are last easily found). It is the huge expansion and wasteful usage in SW QLD and in NSW that has strained supplies.
Yep Warwick, That is the article I remembered(and I read it here! and it stuck in my brain). It is just amazing that the graft is going un-prosecuted.
youtu.be/2MUBrClhgks
No different that that.