The Murray & Securing our water supply

[omada]

Aside from the Desal water, I think we have to be prepared to drink recycled waste water, we would be more than self sufficient it we could harvest this valuable resource. Maybe this could be a new poll on this site, to see who would be willing to drink recycled water?

[Hippodamus]

It's exactly this attitude that makes us suffer.

WATER IS WATER! irrigation should be no less prescious and open to abuse and overuse just because it's not drinkable to humans... total human minded approach, which does nothing to help the situation either!

Of course remember that irrigation water and drinking water are not the same. Generally, irrigation water is of much lower quality and a large portion is collected in private dams from storm water runoff.

[Hippodamus]

Also...did you also know that only 5 percent of the total water consumed in Australia is used by the major urban centres, and some 95 percent is consumed from just agriculture, mining and defence alone... !!

I was actually thinking about starting a thread on what everyone thinks would be the correct way to structure water restrictions (given the apparent widespread dissatisfaction over the current system), but if this quote is correct then water restrictions are definitely a complete waste of time.

Methinks a serious and fundamental change in thinking on water will be needed in years to come.

Of course remember that irrigation water and drinking water are not the same. Generally, irrigation water is of much lower quality and a large portion is collected in private dams from storm water runoff.

[AtD]

It's exactly this attitude that makes us suffer.

WATER IS WATER! irrigation should be no less prescious and open to abuse and overuse just because it's not drinkable to humans... total human minded approach, which does nothing to help the situation either!

Of course remember that irrigation water and drinking water are not the same. Generally, irrigation water is of much lower quality and a large portion is collected in private dams from storm water runoff.

I have nothing against irrigators, industry and domestic suppliers bidding on an open market for allocations. But any such system will need to take into account that not all water sources are equal.

[Wayno]

i believe this is the first non-agricultural group to publicly protest about the Murray River in south australia. Surely more will follow...

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

Angry Rally over Goolwa water
MORE than 3000 people have rallied in Goolwa angry at the lack of water flowing down the River Murray into their region.

Goolwa businesses have called for a temporary weir to be built up river of the town and for water top be pumped from Lake Alexandrina to Goolwa Pool.

At the rally outside the Goolwa Aquatic Club, protesters showed how falling water levels are hurting the area's economy and environment.

Southern Alexandrina Business Association President John Clarke said Goolwa was "end of the line" for the Murray.

"We need water, not more talk or endless studies or technical debates", he said.

Mr Clarke said the area's boating and tourism industry were being affected by low water levels in the Goolwa Pool.

Some businesses had reported water had dropped 80 percent in the past 12 months.

"The whole community fabric is in danger of collapsing if we do not get water now." he said.

Businesses have called for a $5 million temporary weir to be built on the Murray at Clayton Bay.

Glenise Girke and Malcolm Beattie, who rent out a holiday house on Hindmarsh island, said rentals had virtually halved.

They also had been unable to use their boat because it kept running aground.

Goolwa residents David and Jenny Smallacombe said they were disappointed water levels had fallen so low.

Mr Smallacombe said a nearby marina with space for 115 boats now held only 10.

"They have all moved away," he said.

Senator Nick Xenophon, State Member for Finnis Michael Pengelley, State Opposition and Acting Water Spokesman Adrian Pederick and Alexandrina Mayor Kym McHugh also spoke at the rally.

Mr Clarke said the Federal and State Government were invited to send representatives but none attended.

Another rally is planned top be held at Parliament house in Adelaide on August 1.

[Wayno]

500km long pipe to access water from Tassie?

A consortium proposes to build a water pipe at a cost of $2b, and lease to us (or Victoria), basically whomever signs first...

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

TASMANIA is considering a proposal to pipe a massive 350 gigalitres of fresh water a year to South Australia or Victoria under Bass Strait.

A preliminary Memorandum of Understanding that would deliver Tasmania at least $300 million a year has been presented to the Government by a Melbourne-based water consortium.

If the South Australian government grabs the Tasmanian water before Victoria - and 350 gigalitres is enough water to supply both Adelaide and its struggling Riverland farmers - the undersea pipe would be 500 kilometres long and come ashore near Port Fairy in Victoria's far west.

Last night, a South Australian Government spokeswoman was not able to comment on whether the government had seen proposal.

The deal also promises Tasmania a share of all future profits for the next 30 years, in return for allowing the consortium to pipe pristine water from the Forth River near Devonport on Tasmania's North-West coast across Bass Strait.

The consortium wants to construct the $2 billion steel pipeline linking the North-West town of Burnie to Victoria and buy the water from the Tasmanian Government for resale.

One member of the consortium is understood to be a major oil and gas producer listed on the Australian Stock Exchange, while another is Melbourne water engineer and "pipe-dreamer" Geoff Croker.

The consortium's scheme is based on forecasts showing the only place in Australia with sufficient "spare water" to solve the critical water shortage in the mainland states is Tasmania.

The Forth River, which is already dammed and tapped for hydroelectricity power, has an annual flow of 1300 gigalitres a year.

It is not predicted to suffer lower rainfall because of impending climate change.

Mr Croker confirmed a water purchase and pipeline contract - in the form of a preliminary Heads of Agreement - was before the Tasmanian Government.

The scheme would see the first water piped from the Tasmania's rural and forested north-west region to Victoria by the summer of 2011.

Tasmanian Water Minister David Llewellyn confirmed last night the Croker consortium had submitted a Memorandum of Understanding to government- owned electricity and water company, Hydro Tasmania.

But Mr Llewellyn, who is also Energy Minister, said he had been advised by Hydro Tasmania the draft deal was still a " very long way" from being ready for signing or passing on to Cabinet for approval.

"Several proponents have publicly raised the possibility of commercial arrangements for the import of bulk water supplies from Tasmania," Mr Llewellyn's said.

"Such discussions as have occurred with Hydro Tasmania have been based on early investigations of feasibility; none has advanced to a point that would warrant the Government's formal consideration."

But he stressed because Tasmania receives 14 per cent of Australia's water yet has less than one per cent of the nation's land, it would be "premature and inappropriate" for the Government to refuse to listen to ideas proposing bulk water exports.

According to consortium documents, the length and destination of the 2.5 metre-wide pipeline will depend on if the South Australian or Victorian government is the first to sign a water purchasing agreement with the consortium.

If Victoria decides to buy the Tasmanian water to supply Melbourne with 350 gigalitres of water a year, the pipeline would be 350km long and end at Westernport Bay to Melbourne's south-east.

A gigalitre of water is 1000 megalitres of water, equivalent to covering a football oval to a depth of 50 metres.

Such a long-term purchase of water by Victoria could remove the need to build the unpopular desalination plant planned for the Gippsland coast by Victorian Premier John Brumby.

It would also make a pipeline to bring drinking water to Melbourne from the Goulburn Valley unnecessary, potentially allowing more central Victorian water to flow back into the struggling Murray River system.

But it is understood that the Brumby Government is not keen on the consortium's proposal because it would make Victoria too reliant on Tasmania.

The Memorandum of Understanding also offers the Tasmanian government an alternative scenario to committing to sell its water now for the next 30 years.

The private consortium says it is prepared to fund and build the $2 billion water pipe to Victoria from Burnie itself - rather like the existing undersea gas pipe linking Gippsland to Launceston was built privately by Duke Energy - in return for annual delivery fee.

This way, the Tasmanian government would keep ownership and control of its water, and arrange sale contracts with mainland states when and for what amounts of water it chose to sell.

The consortium is also keen to secure the right to access water from the four-times larger Pieman River catchment on Tasmania's west coast.

This second proposal, which it hopes to build three years after the first water flows from the Forth river's Cethana dam to Victoria, seeks to tap another 500 gigalitres of water annually from the Pieman's River Mackintosh Dam.

This water would be linked to the Forth River and the Burnie outflow path by a tunnel built beneath the hills dividing the Pieman river catchment to the Cethana Dam 40 kilometres south of Burnie.

[Ho Really]

500km long pipe to access water from Tassie?

Waste of money! They could easily do this much cheaper by leasing tankers (ships) to transport water from Tassie to our deep sea port of Port Stanvac.

Cheers

P.S. Of course some infrastructure would need to be built, like tanks and a filtration plant, but I guess this will be part of the desal plant at Port Stanvac anyway.

[Jim]

It's exactly this attitude that makes us suffer.

WATER IS WATER! irrigation should be no less prescious and open to abuse and overuse just because it's not drinkable to humans... total human minded approach, which does nothing to help the situation either!

Of course remember that irrigation water and drinking water are not the same. Generally, irrigation water is of much lower quality and a large portion is collected in private dams from storm water runoff.

I have nothing against irrigators, industry and domestic suppliers bidding on an open market for allocations. But any such system will need to take into account that not all water sources are equal.

In regard to our river irrigator’s water problems, is it illegal to flood irrigate? Surely if not it should be in times of drought. It would be disastrous to see the growers whom have done the right thing and borrowed to invest in water saving technology go to the wall when those whom haven’t survive long enough to benefit from tax payer subsidised systems in the future. It’s would be ludicrous to be giving any water allocation to those whom still flood irrigate. By banning flood irrigation or poor practices, these inefficient farmers would be forced to sell their allocations to those whom use it efficiently! The idea of tax payers having to pick up the bill by buying or subsidising the inflated cost allocations is ludicrous when some legislation would solve the problem.

[AtD]

^^ Or just charge a market price for the water (based on its quality of course). If the farmer wants to waste bucketloads of water and cash flood irrigating, so be it.

[Wayno]

^^ Or just charge a market price for the water (based on its quality of course). If the farmer wants to waste bucketloads of water and cash flood irrigating, so be it.

Exactly!

[Jim]

^^ Or just charge a market price for the water (based on its quality of course). If the farmer wants to waste bucketloads of water and cash flood irrigating, so be it.

Yes I agree we should set a water price that reflects it value.

[Jim]

I have come around to thinking that we should return the lower lakes to the sea ASAP. Building the new barrage on the Murray entrance to the lakes would stop the evaporation from 150sq Km’s of relatively shallow water from lake which is just a waist. The return of sea water is at least better than no water.

[Wayno]

I have come around to thinking that we should return the lower lakes to the sea ASAP. Building the new barrage on the Murray entrance to the lakes would stop the evaporation from 150sq Km’s of relatively shallow water from lake which is just a waist. The return of sea water is at least better than no water.

This won't be done - at least not for a while, and only when the political timing is right. I'm sure everyone in the SA Govt knows this is the only option, but taking this simple action will mean a drastically reduced focus on SA from a murray-darling compensation perspective. Can you imagine the eastern states ever being convinced to release "environmental flows" if we flood the lower murray lakes with sea water?!?

This is simply a game of "Whomever blinks first loses", and yes it's a very sad situation.

[Jim]

I have come around to thinking that we should return the lower lakes to the sea ASAP. Building the new barrage on the Murray entrance to the lakes would stop the evaporation from 150sq Km’s of relatively shallow water from lake which is just a waist. The return of sea water is at least better than no water.

This won't be done - at least not for a while, and only when the political timing is right. I'm sure everyone in the SA Govt knows this is the only option, but taking this simple action will mean a drastically reduced focus on SA from a murray-darling compensation perspective. Can you imagine the eastern states ever being convinced to release "environmental flows" if we flood the lower murray lakes with sea water?!?

This is simply a game of "Whomever blinks first loses", and yes it's a very sad situation.

Spot on Wayno, and they have to get that new pipe built first. Just wish they had the balls to just do it. Cheers Jim

[Wayno]

Rally urges more action on Murray
I'm very glad to see a public rally in Adelaide! Twist goes the thumb screw...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008 ... 321357.htm

Hundreds of people have rallied on the steps of Parliament House in Adelaide, calling on the Federal and South Australian Governments to save the ailing Murray.

murray-rally.jpg (63.56 KiB) Viewed 2636 times

With water in the river system in short supply, the protesters have had to brave rain to make their point.

They represent farmers and communities along the Murray in SA, from Renmark in the Riverland to the lower lakes where the Murray flows into the sea.

Those at the rally urged that more water be released from storages upstream to benefit the river's lower reaches.

Irrigators in SA have been allowed just 2 per cent of their usual water entitlement in recent times, while farmers and communities near the mouth are grappling with massive salinity levels.

It has prompted consideration of whether the lower Murray should be flooded with sea water to help the area survive.

Federal Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson was at Clayton on the lower Murray yesterday, urging more federal action to save the region from disaster.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, with SA Premier Mike Rann, made a tour of the lower lakes region a month ago.