 Follow us on Twitter
20326 Members
35 Forums
31834 Topics
910424 Posts
Max Online: 404 @ 14/07/10 05:00 pm
|
|
|
Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
#624201 - 20/03/09 03:47 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: sadcase]
|
HiLo
"I could be wrong though."
Silver skigie winner 2006
Pool Room
|
Offline
|
|
Why cant we direct our storm water to go to the dams instead of out to sea?
Because the uneducated masses would rather add sea water to their waste water before recycling it.
_________________________
All sigs are a totally redundant, egotistical, distracting waste of electrons, especially this one.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#624223 - 20/03/09 04:04 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: HiLo]
|
bomber
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
What happens to the desal plant when the power stations are shut down bcause carbon permits are too expensive?
_________________________
Dont take life seriously! It is not permanent
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#624226 - 20/03/09 04:06 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: bomber]
|
sadcase
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
they will be exempt of course
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752754 - 13/08/09 08:16 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: sadcase]
|
VSG
Little crayon, big impact! ... and I own the
Pool Room
|
|
Offline
|
|
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/13/2654291.htm?section=justin
quote
It is costing hundreds of millions of dollars, but the pipeline which is supposed to save Melbourne from running out of water has hit a major hurdle.
An amendment which would give Melbourne the rights to water from Victoria's north has been voted down by the state's Opposition parties, raising the prospect that the pipeline may end up being a 70-kilometre white elephant.
Late yesterday Victoria's Opposition joined with minor parties in the Upper House to block the regulation which would allow the water to flow.
The State Government has now started looking for another way to get its hands on the water without needing Parliament's approval.
More than 60km of the 70km pipeline has already been built, and the pipe is due to start carrying water from the Goulburn river by the middle of next year.
...
The leader of the Victorian Nationals, Peter Ryan, says the savings are not enough to justify taking water away from drought-ravaged northern Victoria.
"The principal effect of this is that the Government will be blocked from looting Eildon Weir of about 75 billion litres of water, which is in there as a result of water savings programs, which are dedicated to providing environmental flows to the Murray and to the Snowy River," Mr Ryan said.
Mr Holding says the Government is now looking at ways to use state water laws to obtain the water.
...
But Mr Holding says the decision to block the water entitlement will not stop the project going ahead.
"We're determined to press ahead with this project. This is a big investment, the pipeline itself, the construction of it has almost been completed now and we expect that we will be able to find appropriate legal devices which will enable us to share the water in the way that we originally anticipated," he said.
"But the simplest and most appropriate way of sharing this water would have been through the bulk entitlement that was presented to the Victorian Parliament.
"Melbourne water consumers are paying $300 million as part of their share of these irrigation upgrades and according to the Liberal National Party and the Greens Party in Victoria, they should get not one litre of water flowing from those upgrades, because of the action that they've taken in the Victorian Parliament."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752759 - 13/08/09 08:20 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: VSG]
|
Vermillion
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
Holy crap it's like banging your head against a brick wall.
PS - Ive met Holding a couple of times and have to say he is a right [auto-censor].
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752765 - 13/08/09 08:26 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Vermillion]
|
VSG
Little crayon, big impact! ... and I own the
Pool Room
|
|
Offline
|
|
Was the whole idea flawed?
From an engineering point of view.. its feasible, it can work.
Reality is... there is very little water to move south.
Can Melbourne and surrounding folks use less water?
Interesting to see what the exit clauses on the contract [ to build the pipeline ] are like....
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752774 - 13/08/09 08:33 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: PG]
|
Mogul
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
Why cant we direct our storm water to go to the dams instead of out to sea? A better question is why don't we just store storm water that falls in our cities? Because that would require a decentralised water infrastructure that would be difficult to tax and levy, making it less attractive to investment banks.
We can, by using water tanks. Since we put ours in (2,000L) and connected it to the toilets we have cut our water usage by at least 30% which equates to around 40,000L per year.
It just doesn't make sense to use drinking water to flush toilets.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752786 - 13/08/09 08:57 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Mogul]
|
PG
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
I suspect the whole idea was based on projected average rainfall....which hasn't happened since 1996 IIRC.
Melbourne's had its driest start to the year on record, and with an El Nino event coming in 2010 the whole project seems like a monumental f***-up.
Mogul - I completely agree with you.
Edited by PG (13/08/09 08:58 am)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752790 - 13/08/09 09:07 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: PG]
|
Petesguitar1
Been Here a While
|
|
Offline
|
|
The Bass strait pipeline is a great idea IMO as it resolves more than one issue. It would also cost less than the desal plant which at best is sh1thouse! It's an eyesore on some of the most beautiful country anywhere in the world and will destroy the local marine life.
I've always wondered whether we could extend the pipe up to NSW and QLD and maybe relieve parts of those states in times of floods? Jus a thought..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752807 - 13/08/09 09:23 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Petesguitar1]
|
Vermillion
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
NSW/QLD is totally un-workable, and it wouldnt be able to handle the sort of water to stop a flood.
I still believe that it's a much better idea to have 20 half empty buckets compared to 10 half empty buckets.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752860 - 13/08/09 10:35 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: currawong]
|
Bogong
Addicted
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have an old map showing a proposal for 2 x 2 km long aqueducts to divert both of the heads of the Tanjil River into the upper Yarra catchment. This would cost bugger all and deliver extra water to Melbourne very cheaply.
Likewise Geelong is to be linked to the Melbourne water supply network because they allegedly don't have enough catchment of their own. Well that's just wrong. Geelong gets much of it's water from the Otway Ranges where the quite small West Barwon Dam is the primary storage. But most of the rain that soaks the Otways flows directly out to sea via short rivers and creeks. Some of these could be diverted into the West Barwon catchment via aqueducts or short and relatively cheap tunnels fixing Geelongs current problems relataively fast and easily. Otway hydrology is complex due to the multitude of small rivers and ridge lines. But there is certainly potential for another dam the size of the existing West Barwon dam to harness another river's catchment which would drought proof Geelong for at least half a century.
Another dam for Melbourne? There are two areas. The first is the Maribyrnong River (formed by the union of Deep Creek and Jackson's Creek). The Maryibyrnong has a strong record of flooding and needs a dam on one of the main tributaries to control this and reduce the impact of floods. It would need to be kept half empty so there was capacity to absorb flood waters. The water quality would be poor because most of the catchment has relatively low rainfall and also because it's mostly farmland. However water from a dam on the Maribyrnong would need minimal treatment to be used for watering parks and supplying factories in the western suburbs. The Libs went to the last state election with a policy to build such a dam and treat the water harvested to a high standard and supply it to households. Getting the water to that quality would be fairly pricey and I don't know why the Libs bothered going to the trouble of working out this plan, 'coz hardly anyone votes for them in the western suburbs anyway.
Secondly, the option that could deliver vast amounts of water to Melbourne is harvesting the rivers in central and near eastern Gippsland, with or without a new dam. This is a really complex, issue especially if you discount building the Mitchell River dam (the ideal solution) as too hard due to political issues (from both cockie farmers and urban greenies). But if anyone wants to know about the issues relating to harvesting Gippsland rivers, I'm happy to elaborate.
_________________________
Politicians are like babies' nappies; they should be changed often and for much the same reason.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752886 - 13/08/09 11:00 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Bogong]
|
Mako
Been Here a While
|
|
Offline
|
|
Unfortunately Bogong dams in both the Otways or East Gippsland would provoke such a response from the green movemement that any State Government would certainly think twice before attempting it. Don't get me wrong I think it's a plausable solution to capture the more severe rainfall events that appear to be the norm these days (the Mitchell has flooded a few times over recent years). Dams would most certainly do this and protect or mitigate flood damage for towns downstream.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752936 - 13/08/09 11:35 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Mako]
|
teckel
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
Maybe they should have thought twice before constructing the pipeline! Especially since they broke an election promise in building it.
_________________________
Plug the Pipe
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752939 - 13/08/09 11:37 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Mako]
|
Ulmerhutte
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
The pipeline is a great concept... but conceived and implemented at entirely the wrong time. The idea of being able to "grid" water, like electricity, seems very sound. The logic of spending money on creating the grid at a time when there is not enough water to go around is asinine. That money should be going to creating more water supplies, ie more dams.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752951 - 13/08/09 11:43 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Ulmerhutte]
|
Mako
Been Here a While
|
|
Offline
|
|
Last pipe goes in the gound on 26th August apparently.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752967 - 13/08/09 11:52 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Mako]
|
Bogong
Addicted
|
|
Offline
|
|
Mako. While dams are the best solution, I agree that they are just too "politically difficult".
However you can use aqueducts to divert creeks and rivers into catchments that are already harvested. This was standard practice in Victoria until relatively recent times. In my estimation, a few diversions that are well managed politically, won't generate any political awkwardness because all but the most fundamentalist green zealots appreciate that we have to do something.
_________________________
Politicians are like babies' nappies; they should be changed often and for much the same reason.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752981 - 13/08/09 11:59 am
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Bogong]
|
Mako
Been Here a While
|
|
Offline
|
|
Too true Bogong but if the regular rainfall isn't there then how much water is able to be harvested from creeks etc.? I can see the greens making an issue out of that as well. Perhaps some State Government is just going to have to make the hard decision and just say DAM IT! (trying not to be too political here).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#752986 - 13/08/09 12:02 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Mako]
|
Vermillion
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well, if for example Labor say they are going to build a new dam on the mitchell, the libs/nats agree and bang dam goes ahead yeah? The greenies can sulk in the corner the filthy watermelons.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#753026 - 13/08/09 12:44 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Vermillion]
|
Bogong
Addicted
|
|
Offline
|
|
Verms. The Mitchell is especially problematic because while Labour and Liberal may well support it, BOTH the Nationals and Greens will oppose it.
The Greens will oppose almost anything, but the Nats may oppose a Mitchell dam too because farmers use the water to irrigate crops on the Gippsland Plains (which are in a minor rain shadow, not all of Gippsland is sopping wet). Gippsland farmers look at Goulburn Valley farmers, some of whom are on 3% water allocation and see them having the little water they have diverted to Melbourne by this new pipeline. Quite understandly, the idea of the same thing happening to Gippsland rivers terrifies them.
But I think there is a way to contain farmer opposition which may work if things are handled sensitively. The Mitchell has a strong tendency to flood as we've seen twice in recent years and entire vegetable crops have been washed away. The Mitchell is a highly seasonal river with huge peaks in winter and spring and a very low flow in summer and autumn. (This seasonably variable flow also applies to nearby rivers which could also be utilised such as the Avon, Nicholson, etc.)
To overcome opposition from cocky farmers, a Mitchell Dam would have to be guaranteed to have at least 10,000 ML spare capacity at all time to absorb floods. Secondly a very generous water allocation would need to be made to irrigators, no matter what, even if people in Melbourne have to stop washing, the cockies still get their water.
That's as much as I can say based on memory of facts and a knowledge of the concerns of pressure groups. But if someone wants to pay me to produce a properly researched report... 
_________________________
Politicians are like babies' nappies; they should be changed often and for much the same reason.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#753069 - 13/08/09 01:28 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Bogong]
|
VSG
Little crayon, big impact! ... and I own the
Pool Room
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have an old map showing a proposal for 2 x 2 km long aqueducts to divert both of the heads of the Tanjil River into the upper Yarra catchment. This would cost bugger all and deliver lots of water to Melbourne very cheaply.
Up nr Mt Toorong? Vesper?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#753072 - 13/08/09 01:31 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: VSG]
|
Vermillion
Part of the Furniture
|
|
Offline
|
|
So, to the people who oppose the building of new dams/and desal/and pipelines, WTF is you solution to sort out this water issue? I see a lot of people opposing everything that gets proposed, but not many people giving alternative solutions that are work-able.
Cool, you oppose the dam/s in gippsland, so what do you do to get extra water in?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#753080 - 13/08/09 01:52 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Vermillion]
|
Ulmerhutte
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
Exactly!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#753100 - 13/08/09 02:18 pm
Re: Vic north south pipeline won't have enough water.
[Re: Ulmerhutte]
|
Born2ski
Dedicated
|
|
Offline
|
|
Hey Victoria do you want to borrow some of our water ?
We (South East QLD) have a desal plant and a water recycling plant that we're not using. Might even be able to throw a few kms of pipeline in for free. But you will have to pay $1.84 per kL and rising. How much do you guys pay for water down there ?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: VSG, trappers, Shrek, TOFF, Ms Gums, Slushii, scullee, Sadie, Doonks, Ben Lomond Brad
|
