Opps! Something Alexandrina councillors overlooked.
In their indecent haste to raid Clarence catchment water, Alexandrina councillors overlooked pertinent information right under their noses.
Might I suggest that it is never wise to place one's faith in a Federal Minister during an election year.
"Clarence River
What Does it Involve?
Various proposals have been made to divert eastward flowing rivers such as the Clarence River in northern New South Wales inland to supplement flows in the Murray Darling River System. The Clarence Hydro-Electric Scheme, promoted in 1984/85 by the Water Research Foundation of Australia, was considered to have the potential to divert 2,000,000 ML/year westward with a power generating capacity of 3000 MW (mega-watt).
There has been little development of this scheme or similar projects since the 1980s. A gravity-only diversion scheme of 1,200,000 ML/year is considered in this case.
What Could This Option Achieve?
The average annual discharge for the Clarence River system is 3,700,000 ML/year. Competition for land and water resources is currently placing increased stress on the health of the river. In some parts of the catchment, a ceiling on total water use at the existing level of development has been recommended. It is estimated that there is only limited scope to permit minor extractions of water from streams in the upper Clarence catchment for inland diversions.
Towns and hamlets along the tablelands surrounding the western and northern parts of the catchments have been identified as potential water users if inland diversions were supported. The New South Wales Government's stated position is not to approve such diversions.
It is very unlikely that the New South Wales Government would ever agree to the diversion of large quantities of water inland."
[www.waterproofingadelaide.sa.gov.au,March 2004,"Water Proofing Adelaide: Large Scale Water Supply Schemes",information sheet,pp.3-4]
Might I suggest that it is never wise to place one's faith in a Federal Minister during an election year.
"Clarence River
What Does it Involve?
Various proposals have been made to divert eastward flowing rivers such as the Clarence River in northern New South Wales inland to supplement flows in the Murray Darling River System. The Clarence Hydro-Electric Scheme, promoted in 1984/85 by the Water Research Foundation of Australia, was considered to have the potential to divert 2,000,000 ML/year westward with a power generating capacity of 3000 MW (mega-watt).
There has been little development of this scheme or similar projects since the 1980s. A gravity-only diversion scheme of 1,200,000 ML/year is considered in this case.
What Could This Option Achieve?
The average annual discharge for the Clarence River system is 3,700,000 ML/year. Competition for land and water resources is currently placing increased stress on the health of the river. In some parts of the catchment, a ceiling on total water use at the existing level of development has been recommended. It is estimated that there is only limited scope to permit minor extractions of water from streams in the upper Clarence catchment for inland diversions.
Towns and hamlets along the tablelands surrounding the western and northern parts of the catchments have been identified as potential water users if inland diversions were supported. The New South Wales Government's stated position is not to approve such diversions.
It is very unlikely that the New South Wales Government would ever agree to the diversion of large quantities of water inland."
[www.waterproofingadelaide.sa.gov.au,March 2004,"Water Proofing Adelaide: Large Scale Water Supply Schemes",information sheet,pp.3-4]
Labels: climate change, environment, water policy politics
posted by Judith M. Melville at
3:50 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home