Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print
Time for Bradfield's scheme? (Read 4224 times)
Ye Grappler
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 43871
Mid-North Coast NSW
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #30 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:48pm
 
Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:22pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:02am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:07am:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 4:20am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 11:53pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 1:12pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:43pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:32pm:
I would like to see all the wasted water
from the tropical Northern Territory
sent south.


As someone in the ABC fact-check article explains, it is far cheaper and more practical to simply de-salinate sea water, if water security for our major population centres is the issue.

The Bradfield scheme is far more ambitious though. It seeks to alter the entire climate, and in turn transform the landscape of Australia by making the inland lakes permanently full, and increasing rainfall. Kinda like the environmental version of human eugenics - and just as loony.



As loony as letting dozens of Sydney harbour
amounts of water wash out to sea when
we live in the driest continent on earth?



So you'd starve our short northern rivers and wet tropics of water for a "pipe dream"(pun intended) of turning our dry interior and lakes into a wet interior?  Grin

You do realise that rivers running to the ocean also help the coastal ecology and the life cycles of our marines species and subsequently our fisheries?

Why don't you think it out instead of rushing in with support for the Bradfield scheme bullshyte?



In the Northern territory -
that water is just storm water and is wasted by
going out to sea & mixing with salt water.


It's not wasted ... it happens for a purpose.

That's why Arnhem Land & its wetlands are unique.

That's how & why that ecological system is so diverse in what it naturally supports .....

and you want to drain it into the desert.  Roll Eyes

Like I said you don't think it out ... ignorance is bliss.



Obviously I don't mean to drain the wetlands.
I'm talking about wasted fresh water that
goes out to sea.




Bobby....Gnads is saying that the water you speak of carries vital nutrients out to sea. Those nutrients are required to make what is our oceans. Reef, micro organisms etc all rely on run off.

Gnads is spot on here.....IMO.


Interesting.. very interesting....
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 33582
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #31 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:55pm
 
For review and comment

http://www.cmar.csiro.au/e-print/internal/mcgregor_x2004a.pdf



Quote:
........... Conclusions
At first sight, it is an appealing idea that a massive increase in water surfaces in inland Australia would lead to increased rainfall over agricultural areas.
There has been speculation for over a century that schemes to 'water the inland' might enhance agricultural productivity.
The general conclusion of those who have studied such proposals, however, has been that they are unlikely to produce the massive benefits suggested by the proponents of the schemes.
Our conclusion matches those of earlier assessments: although there seem likely to be local climate changes (cooling over the lake and nearby)
none of the approaches we have used suggest that major, widespread rainfall increases are likely.
This conclusion also seems consistent with related international studies.

The inland water expanse considered here has been in the region of Lake Eyre, the filling of which is a common suggestion in many of the schemes. One observation that will modify how a large inland lake will ameliorate the climate is the fact that Lake Eyre is actually rarely dry, and so the current conditions may not be far removed from those produced when its whole extent is constantly wet. ENSO influences will also likely swamp any influence of a full lake on rainfall in eastern Australia. The moisture recycling in the catchment is predominantly in the northeast and is linked to rainfall but has no corelation with the filling of Lake Eyre. The results from imposing an inland water expanse in Australia in global atmospheric models show that given a large enough lake, there will be a precipitation response. But, for water stretches less expansive than the size of South Australia, the precipitation response away from the lake is unclear and variable.
We recognise that each of the approaches we have used has its deficiencies. If we were looking for a subtle change in rainfall these deficiencies might be impofiant. However, we are attempting to determine if an inland water surface leads to a major, widespread increase in rainfall. Only if this were the case could it be economically viable to undertake a scheme to flood the inland. Despite their deficiencies, the approaches we have used should be able to detect such a large effect. Since none of the approaches suggest that such a large, widespread effect is likely, it
seems reasonable to conclude, as did Warren (1945), that any change would be minimal and unpredictable. ...............        ...........
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
Ye Grappler
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 43871
Mid-North Coast NSW
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #32 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:56pm
 
A water diversion project is permanent - de-salination is costly and temporary.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Caveman
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2524
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #33 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 1:14pm
 
Ye Grappler wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:48pm:
Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:22pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:02am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:07am:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 4:20am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 11:53pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 1:12pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:43pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:32pm:
I would like to see all the wasted water
from the tropical Northern Territory
sent south.


As someone in the ABC fact-check article explains, it is far cheaper and more practical to simply de-salinate sea water, if water security for our major population centres is the issue.

The Bradfield scheme is far more ambitious though. It seeks to alter the entire climate, and in turn transform the landscape of Australia by making the inland lakes permanently full, and increasing rainfall. Kinda like the environmental version of human eugenics - and just as loony.



As loony as letting dozens of Sydney harbour
amounts of water wash out to sea when
we live in the driest continent on earth?



So you'd starve our short northern rivers and wet tropics of water for a "pipe dream"(pun intended) of turning our dry interior and lakes into a wet interior?  Grin

You do realise that rivers running to the ocean also help the coastal ecology and the life cycles of our marines species and subsequently our fisheries?

Why don't you think it out instead of rushing in with support for the Bradfield scheme bullshyte?



In the Northern territory -
that water is just storm water and is wasted by
going out to sea & mixing with salt water.


It's not wasted ... it happens for a purpose.

That's why Arnhem Land & its wetlands are unique.

That's how & why that ecological system is so diverse in what it naturally supports .....

and you want to drain it into the desert.  Roll Eyes

Like I said you don't think it out ... ignorance is bliss.



Obviously I don't mean to drain the wetlands.
I'm talking about wasted fresh water that
goes out to sea.




Bobby....Gnads is saying that the water you speak of carries vital nutrients out to sea. Those nutrients are required to make what is our oceans. Reef, micro organisms etc all rely on run off.

Gnads is spot on here.....IMO.


Interesting.. very interesting....



It is when you get into the nitty gritty of it.

For exanple...The salt in our ocean is caused from land runoff.
Then there are underground vents that rise up to the ocean floor that also contribute. We call them wonky holes. Great for fishing and a massive booster for marine life.  They carry nutrients from ground water out to sea.



IMO...leave the land how it is. Humans will only wreck it more.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
minarchist
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 374
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #34 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 1:47pm
 
Rather than focus on creating an inland sea, why not desalinate the ocean water? Mainland Australia has about 36000 km of coastline. If you developed a quarter of the land within 50 km of the coast for agriculture, you'd have an extra 45 million hectares to utilise. Of course, this would reply on additional electricity to turn the ocean water into irrigation water.

Or you could follow the Chinese:

Back to top
 

People accuse Capitalism of being a "dog eat dog" system, yet it was the Communists who ate each other when they were starving!
 
IP Logged
 
Ye Grappler
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 43871
Mid-North Coast NSW
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #35 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 2:26pm
 
minarchist wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 1:47pm:
Rather than focus on creating an inland sea, why not desalinate the ocean water? Mainland Australia has about 36000 km of coastline. If you developed a quarter of the land within 50 km of the coast for agriculture, you'd have an extra 45 million hectares to utilise. Of course, this would reply on additional electricity to turn the ocean water into irrigation water.

Or you could follow the Chinese:



A lot of that land is not fertile anyway - lots of reclaimed or ancient swamps and sand soil.... not to mention such things as extensive mangrove swamps and mud flats that can be miles wide at low tide...

'a quarter of the land within 50km' sounds good - but what about cliffs and other stuff?  Mountains rivers existent and built up areas?  National parks and such.....
(allows time for the awesome distant sound to grow to a roar)
... what about the secred saghts, Bro?
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39014
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #36 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:23pm
 
Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:22pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:02am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:07am:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 4:20am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 11:53pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 1:12pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:43pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:32pm:
I would like to see all the wasted water
from the tropical Northern Territory
sent south.


As someone in the ABC fact-check article explains, it is far cheaper and more practical to simply de-salinate sea water, if water security for our major population centres is the issue.

The Bradfield scheme is far more ambitious though. It seeks to alter the entire climate, and in turn transform the landscape of Australia by making the inland lakes permanently full, and increasing rainfall. Kinda like the environmental version of human eugenics - and just as loony.



As loony as letting dozens of Sydney harbour
amounts of water wash out to sea when
we live in the driest continent on earth?



So you'd starve our short northern rivers and wet tropics of water for a "pipe dream"(pun intended) of turning our dry interior and lakes into a wet interior?  Grin

You do realise that rivers running to the ocean also help the coastal ecology and the life cycles of our marines species and subsequently our fisheries?

Why don't you think it out instead of rushing in with support for the Bradfield scheme bullshyte?



In the Northern territory -
that water is just storm water and is wasted by
going out to sea & mixing with salt water.


It's not wasted ... it happens for a purpose.

That's why Arnhem Land & its wetlands are unique.

That's how & why that ecological system is so diverse in what it naturally supports .....

and you want to drain it into the desert.  Roll Eyes

Like I said you don't think it out ... ignorance is bliss.



Obviously I don't mean to drain the wetlands.
I'm talking about wasted fresh water that
goes out to sea.




Bobby....Gnads is saying that the water you speak of carries vital nutrients out to sea. Those nutrients are required to make what is our oceans. Reef, micro organisms etc all rely on run off.

Gnads is spot on here.....IMO.



Inland Australia needs those vital nutrients more.
We have to turn desert back into arable land.
Back to top
 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Online


OzPolitic

Posts: 24673
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #37 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:25pm
 
OMG.....how come no one else has ever thought of that Bobby?
Back to top
 

And Indian women aren't exactly LBFMs..yuk. 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39014
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #38 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 5:53pm
 
Aussie wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:25pm:
OMG.....how come no one else has ever thought of that Bobby?



About 10 million people in Australia have thought of it -
didn't you?
Back to top
 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Online


OzPolitic

Posts: 24673
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #39 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 6:00pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 5:53pm:
Aussie wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:25pm:
OMG.....how come no one else has ever thought of that Bobby?



About 10 million people in Australia have thought of it -
didn't you?


No Bobby.  I'm not smart enough to know that if you make land arable, you can grow stuff on it.  Forgive me.
Back to top
 

And Indian women aren't exactly LBFMs..yuk. 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39014
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #40 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 6:02pm
 
Aussie wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 6:00pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 5:53pm:
Aussie wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:25pm:
OMG.....how come no one else has ever thought of that Bobby?



About 10 million people in Australia have thought of it -
didn't you?


No Bobby.  I'm not smart enough to know that if you make land arable, you can grow stuff on it.  Forgive me.



Do you have anything of value to add to this thread?
Back to top
 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Carl Sagan
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Online


OzPolitic

Posts: 24673
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #41 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 6:23pm
 
I can't possibly top this Bobby:

Quote:
Inland Australia needs those vital nutrients more.
We have to turn desert back into arable land.
Back to top
 

And Indian women aren't exactly LBFMs..yuk. 
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11828
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #42 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 9:49pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:02am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:07am:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 4:20am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 11:53pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 1:12pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:43pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:32pm:
I would like to see all the wasted water
from the tropical Northern Territory
sent south.


As someone in the ABC fact-check article explains, it is far cheaper and more practical to simply de-salinate sea water, if water security for our major population centres is the issue.

The Bradfield scheme is far more ambitious though. It seeks to alter the entire climate, and in turn transform the landscape of Australia by making the inland lakes permanently full, and increasing rainfall. Kinda like the environmental version of human eugenics - and just as loony.



As loony as letting dozens of Sydney harbour
amounts of water wash out to sea when
we live in the driest continent on earth?



So you'd starve our short northern rivers and wet tropics of water for a "pipe dream"(pun intended) of turning our dry interior and lakes into a wet interior?  Grin

You do realise that rivers running to the ocean also help the coastal ecology and the life cycles of our marines species and subsequently our fisheries?

Why don't you think it out instead of rushing in with support for the Bradfield scheme bullshyte?



In the Northern territory -
that water is just storm water and is wasted by
going out to sea & mixing with salt water.


It's not wasted ... it happens for a purpose.

That's why Arnhem Land & its wetlands are unique.

That's how & why that ecological system is so diverse in what it naturally supports .....

and you want to drain it into the desert.  Roll Eyes

Like I said you don't think it out ... ignorance is bliss.



Obviously I don't mean to drain the wetlands.
I'm talking about wasted fresh water that
goes out to sea.


Well that freshwater accumulates in those wetlands/flood plains  and drains out into creeks & rivers then into the sea.... it helps the wild populations of Barramundi through their lifecycle ..... thence be part of a sustainable fishery.... them and other fish species that breed in fresh to brackish water.... mangroves where fry survive and grow before going back out to reefs.... like Mangrove Jack and Fingermark.

You have no idea how and what these wetland and river systems support in important breeding and growing cycles of fish, bird, crustaceans, crocodiles and plant species.

Stick to Hanging em High.
Back to top
 

Politicians are like nappies; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.
The most difficult choice a politician must ever make is whether to be a hypocrite or a liar.
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11828
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #43 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 9:54pm
 
Ye Grappler wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:15am:
The GAIA Mk II - one of the major issues for water is when it reaches the lower levels, around Lake Eyre
(before they change the name to suit ten Aboriginals - insult to the bruvvas, that name!)
has a huge quantity of salt underground, and thus salinity would (gasps) rise to prominence in any discussion.

Without open access to the sea and constant tidal renewal, the Eyre Inland Sea would become a new Dead Sea, and the yellow and red tailed frog-jumper
(or whatever it is the conservationist extremists claim)
would become extinct due to crashing into the salt covered surface
(not to mention the Crested Gullywhumper once thought extinct but newly re-discovered in the Lake Eyre Basin)


As it is, a hell of a lot of water flows inland during The Wet and is absorbed by the 'lend' (bro) or is evaporated... so my view is an opening to the sea AND water diversion
(wonder how many bodies in barrels they'll dig up in SA?)


Many will project disaster - I say those are pure guesswork.... and the results will probably be fabulous.


Nah .... leave it be.  Tongue
Back to top
 

Politicians are like nappies; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.
The most difficult choice a politician must ever make is whether to be a hypocrite or a liar.
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11828
Gender: male
Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #44 - Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:16pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 3:23pm:
Captain Caveman wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 12:22pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 11:02am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:07am:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 19th, 2019 at 4:20am:
Gnads wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 11:53pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 1:12pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:43pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jun 18th, 2019 at 12:32pm:
I would like to see all the wasted water
from the tropical Northern Territory
sent south.


As someone in the ABC fact-check article explains, it is far cheaper and more practical to simply de-salinate sea water, if water security for our major population centres is the issue.

The Bradfield scheme is far more ambitious though. It seeks to alter the entire climate, and in turn transform the landscape of Australia by making the inland lakes permanently full, and increasing rainfall. Kinda like the environmental version of human eugenics - and just as loony.



As loony as letting dozens of Sydney harbour
amounts of water wash out to sea when
we live in the driest continent on earth?



So you'd starve our short northern rivers and wet tropics of water for a "pipe dream"(pun intended) of turning our dry interior and lakes into a wet interior?  Grin

You do realise that rivers running to the ocean also help the coastal ecology and the life cycles of our marines species and subsequently our fisheries?

Why don't you think it out instead of rushing in with support for the Bradfield scheme bullshyte?



In the Northern territory -
that water is just storm water and is wasted by
going out to sea & mixing with salt water.


It's not wasted ... it happens for a purpose.

That's why Arnhem Land & its wetlands are unique.

That's how & why that ecological system is so diverse in what it naturally supports .....

and you want to drain it into the desert.  Roll Eyes

Like I said you don't think it out ... ignorance is bliss.



Obviously I don't mean to drain the wetlands.
I'm talking about wasted fresh water that
goes out to sea.




Bobby....Gnads is saying that the water you speak of carries vital nutrients out to sea. Those nutrients are required to make what is our oceans. Reef, micro organisms etc all rely on run off.

Gnads is spot on here.....IMO.



Inland Australia needs those vital nutrients more.
We have to turn desert back into arable land.


BS..... why? It would get what nutrients it needs now during the unpredictable flood events except it all gets siphoned off. Cubbie station holds as much as Sydney Harbour.

As for the other systems you want to exploit and the land you want to use for further agricultural expansion .... why?

Just so big Gas & Oil can come along and FRACK the farc out of it, turn it into a lunar landscape and contaminate the water both above and below ground. As the Cotton Industry want to do to the Channel Country... i.e. Cooper Creek etc.

We grow excesses now with the land we have, and when there's a glut it gets ploughed back into the ground or stockpiled to rot on the ground.

Why farc up more country, river systems and the environment and its natural inhabitants anymore than is necessary.

Not long ago all those water using crop growing farmers in marginal dry country along the Culgoa, Darling and Murray systems didn't exist....... those there ran sheep and cattle...... and goats.

Some bright spark said we can use those river systems when the floods come down to irrigate crops..... so they went gang busters expanding growing grain, grapes and other fruits.... then along came the thirstiest crop of all... COTTON... and the expansion went apeshit.....

But those big flood events out there are aren't a yearly occurrence..... water licenses became currency..... and the water was over exploited....

Now there is a shortage of water in the biggest river system across the 3 eastern states and Sth Aust.... it is in crisis.

And you want to do this to the FNQ COASTAL, GULF and central Australian systems of the Cooper Creek Basin that flows into Lake Eyre and Lake Frome?

It's bloody madness... enough is enough.

You talk through your southern gate.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 19th, 2019 at 10:26pm by Gnads »  

Politicians are like nappies; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.
The most difficult choice a politician must ever make is whether to be a hypocrite or a liar.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print