Australian Politics Forum - Time for Bradfield's scheme?

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95491
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #60 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 1:10pm

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 11:33am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 9:11am:

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 8:54am:

So what?

How are you going to stop mother nature?

Building more dams wont help.

Water was let out Wivenhoe because it was so full and the fears it could breach..... that attributed to the water as well.

Water from flooding is not wasted .... it serves a purpose in the environmental cycle.

When Wivenhoe dam was approaching full & a flood was
on the way it was time to send the water somewhere else
where it would be useful.
Instead - 1000s of homes & businesses were destroyed.
Is that how we should manage water?

There's only one place you can send it when it's full ... that's out of the sluice gates and downstream ... that's what they did.

Being greedy(selling water) they hung on to enough water as they could ... but for too long.

You tell me where else would the water have gone or been sent to? Roll Eyes

"only one place you can send it when it's full "

That's because we don't have an alternative pipeline
to send it to lake Eyre or anywhere else.

Back to top

IP Logged

UnSubRocky

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Legend

Posts: 21743
Rockhampton, Q
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #61 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 4:34pm

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 11:36am:

There is a finite amount of water on the planet ....

it goes round & round in a cycle of evaporation from the sea ..... rain on land ... flowing down rivers and back to the sea ...

and so it continues ....

We have a finite amount of water. But, unless we start transporting massive quantities of water off planet in some kind of sci-fi fashion, we are not in danger of running out. Over 70% of the Earth's surface is water.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 28107
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #62 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:10pm

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 1:10pm:

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 11:33am:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 9:11am:

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 8:54am:

So what?

How are you going to stop mother nature?

Building more dams wont help.

Water was let out Wivenhoe because it was so full and the fears it could breach..... that attributed to the water as well.

Water from flooding is not wasted .... it serves a purpose in the environmental cycle.

When Wivenhoe dam was approaching full & a flood was
on the way it was time to send the water somewhere else
where it would be useful.
Instead - 1000s of homes & businesses were destroyed.
Is that how we should manage water?

There's only one place you can send it when it's full ... that's out of the sluice gates and downstream ... that's what they did.

Being greedy(selling water) they hung on to enough water as they could ... but for too long.

You tell me where else would the water have gone or been sent to? Roll Eyes

"only one place you can send it when it's full "

That's because we don't have an alternative pipeline
to send it to lake Eyre or anywhere else.

You're deluded.

Pipeline from the Lockyer & Brisbane Valley to Lake Eyre for a 1 in 100 year event?

Grin

As I said you stick to Hangin em High. Roll Eyes

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 28107
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #63 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:15pm

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 4:34pm:

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 11:36am:

There is a finite amount of water on the planet ....

it goes round & round in a cycle of evaporation from the sea ..... rain on land ... flowing down rivers and back to the sea ...

and so it continues ....

We have a finite amount of water. But, unless we start transporting massive quantities of water off planet in some kind of sci-fi fashion, we are not in danger of running out. Over 70% of the Earth's surface is water.

That's right ... and the scifi fashion & suggestion
isn't a consideration .....

transporting/pumping water from the east coast into our arid interior is a big of a dreamers dream as needs for Bobby ...

Expense, scientific & engineering wise prohibitive.

In lay mans terms .... stupid.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 46588 Gender:	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #64 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:38pm Brian Ross wrote on Jun 18^th, 2019 at 11:26am: The Bradfield Scheme is supposed to alleviate drought. So why has it been rejected so many times? It's been stated often that it is just poor management. Whities can't cut the mustard when it comes to looking after the land.
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95491
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #65 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:48pm

Gnads wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:10pm:

You're deluded.

Pipeline from the Lockyer & Brisbane Valley to Lake Eyre for a 1 in 100 year event?

Grin

As I said you stick to Hangin em High. Roll Eyes

It's fools like you who need a Christian hanging.

A good pipeline would take water from all areas where there
is extreme wastage & send it out for useful purposes.

People mostly live on the coastline & forget that
we live in driest continent on earth
yet waste a huge amount of water.
We're probably looking at dozens of Sydney harbors
worth of fresh drinking water
mostly flushed out to sea or causing damaging floods.

At the very least we could turn the center of Australia into a beautiful oasis.
On the other hand we could irrigate farms when drought arrives.
How many cattle were lost & farms turned into desert
in the last 6 months?

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47466 At my desk.	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #66 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:56pm Bobby why do you think cost doesn't matter? Why is it so important to get this particular flow of water halfway across the continent?
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 95491 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #67 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:10pm freediver wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 5:56pm: Bobby why do you think cost doesn't matter? Why is it so important to get this particular flow of water halfway across the continent? Because it's being wasted on the driest continent on Earth.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gordon Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20231 Gordon Gender:	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #68 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants.
Back to top	IBI IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 95491 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #69 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:28pm Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm: I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants. Nuclear power stations leave dangerous waste around for 100 million years. It's not a good idea.
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 37678 Gender:	Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme? Reply #70 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:40pm Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm: I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants. Don't be modest. Share this number crunching with us all. I'll bet it is very detailed and will stand up to review by your clevah peers.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gordon

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20231
Gordon
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #71 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:43pm

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:28pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm:

I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants.

Nuclear power stations leave dangerous waste
around for 100 million years.
It's not a good idea.

Gen4 reactors burn their own waste.

Back to top

IBI

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 95491
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #72 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:46pm

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:28pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm:

I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants.

Nuclear power stations leave dangerous waste
around for 100 million years.
It's not a good idea.

Gen4 reactors burn their own waste.

Are you sure?
Thorium looks like the future to me:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/0#0

Back to top

IP Logged

Gordon

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20231
Gordon
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #73 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:46pm

Aussie wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm:

I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants.

Don't be modest. Share this number crunching with us all. I'll bet it is very detailed and will stand up to review by your clevah peers.

Sorry that's commercial in confidence. As a kid pinning cabby you'd appreciate that.

Anything else you're wondering about??

Back to top

IBI

IP Logged

Gordon

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20231
Gordon
Gender: male

Re: Time for Bradfield's scheme?
Reply #74 - Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:47pm

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:46pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:28pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2019 at 6:22pm:

I've crunched the numbers and it would be more cost effective to build a bunch of nuclear power stations and desal plants.

Nuclear power stations leave dangerous waste
around for 100 million years.
It's not a good idea.

Gen4 reactors burn their own waste.

Are you sure?
Thorium looks like the future to me:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/0#0

Thorium is for fags who watched Chernobyl on HBO and got scared.

Back to top

IBI

IP Logged