North South Pipeline

xbgs351 · 08-01-2008, 04:32 PM

The Victorian Brumby Government is currently constructing a pipeline that will take water from the from Lake Eildon over a mountain range to Melbourne. The pipeline will be 75 km long and pump 75 billion litres of water every year.

The 75 billion litres of water is meant to come from water savings gained by updating the irrigation system downstream of Lake Eildon. These savings are meant to be shared between Melbourne, the irrigators and the environment. The catch for the irrigators and the environment is that Melbourne will start taking the water before any work on water savings is made. Even when all of the water saving measures are implemented it is highly unlikely that they will ever save the amount of water that is required. What else is irritating is that the Victorian Labour Government refused to sign the national water agreement that would have paid for improvements to the same irrigation system.

Melbourne will be taking water from one of the driest catchments and pumping it to its own catchment area which is one of the wettest. Country towns in the region have been on Stage 4 water restrictions for years while Melbourne is only on Stage 3a. Melbournes water storage currently stand at 39% and Lake Eildon is at 24% and falling fast. Many irrigators in the region have 0% water allocation and the most any are recieving is 29%.

galaxy xr8 · 08-01-2008, 05:22 PM

I hear you mate, it has been like this for a while now, Melbourne people really need to take a leaf out off our book and save water while they still have some, and thus would stop them taking it from us, but as long as their park's and garden's look green, that's all that really matter's, don't worry about the infrastructure and the economy that will be hugely effected by this drought, and it will affect them in their pocket's as well they just don't know it yet, bring on rain in '08.

XHUTE6 · 08-01-2008, 10:32 PM

Is the pipeline fibreglass?

[Tonko] · 08-01-2008, 10:43 PM

This is BS, theres still not enough water here so why should it all go down there? Take a look at how many abandoned farms there are around here and further north...
And i'll bet they'll lower the restrictions in Melbs aswell once its up and running.

Daymoe · 08-01-2008, 11:07 PM

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

Elks · 08-01-2008, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

Because a project like that would take over a decade to build Pollies are short term people who gain more from 4 short term fixes in 12 years than 1 x 10 year fix. They work on a 3 year cycle.

Yes it would create thousands of jobs and fix the thing. But the last WA election the liberal candidate (I don't remember who his is) suggested there version of the same pipeline from the Kimberly. He went from the next Premier to gone in two weeks. The beige people that run our state have not made a strong decision in 7 years, do you think without pressure that they would make one now.

Written spoken and authorized by myts on behalf of the people who love old fords party...

DanXR6T · 08-01-2008, 11:32 PM

The biggest problem with people's suggestions of let's build a pipeline from areas where it floods is that flood events usually happen over one week period, in which case you are moving MASSIVE amounts of water in a short period of time, OR you build MASSIVE dams which will be utilised for one-two months of the year, and in most cases will be very expansive in size and shallow.

Also 75,000 megalitres isn't THAT large an amount of water, about the size of the average water resevoir here in QLD.

For example the company I work for is looking to acquire a license for 50,000 megalitres per year, although this in the NT. This is all to grow food, most of which is sold into Victoria.

I will start taking deposits now for the water and pipeline contributions... Water shares start at $1,000,000 if anyone is interested... I expect I'll need about 200,000 partners.... :P

xbgs351 · 09-01-2008, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanXR6T

The biggest problem with people's suggestions of let's build a pipeline from areas where it floods is that flood events usually happen over one week period, in which case you are moving MASSIVE amounts of water in a short period of time, OR you build MASSIVE dams which will be utilised for one-two months of the year, and in most cases will be very expansive in size and shallow.

Also 75,000 megalitres isn't THAT large an amount of water, about the size of the average water resevoir here in QLD.

For example the company I work for is looking to acquire a license for 50,000 megalitres per year, although this in the NT. This is all to grow food, most of which is sold into Victoria.

I will start taking deposits now for the water and pipeline contributions... Water shares start at $1,000,000 if anyone is interested... I expect I'll need about 200,000 partners.... :P

Melbourne used 369 Gigalitres in 2007, so the 75 Gigalitres from north of the dividing range is 20% of that.

4Vman · 09-01-2008, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

Here's a silly fact for you: A 2 meter diameter pipe from Brisbane to Melbourne would take approximately 5500 mega-litres of water just to fill it alone!
The sugerloaf reservoir in Melbourne currently holds 45,000 mega-litres or 48% capacity..!

thexyking · 09-01-2008, 11:54 AM

This water allocation and Murray Darling system control issue is a nonsense. The reason that Victoria didn't want to sign up is because it would have to reduce the amount of water available out of the Murray darling system for its own farmers. The problem has been created by NSW and Queensland over allocating the available water (Cubby Farms, anyone?) and now the crunch has come with not enough water (and no liklihood of enough) to meet the allocations. The Queensland and NSW state governments just handed the problem back to deal with, Victoria said we don't have the same issues, why should we act against the interest of our farmers?

Interestingly, in September the Victorian Gov]'t and the Federal Gov't did reach an agreement but Howard wouldn't sign.

We've all just got to use less, that it the answer.

TheSneakiness · 09-01-2008, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

Total dam storage in Brisbane at the moment is around 24%.

Where were you getting the water from here?

troppo · 09-01-2008, 12:43 PM

One thing that has always amazed me about living in Darwin is you would be flat out finding a single building that even has guttering, let alone a tank to collect it. Having come from an area of SA that is not on Adelaide's supply and which has been increasingly saline since the 70's I can remember growing up with slogans like "turn it off" and "every drop is precious".

Not so in the NT it seems. I watched my neighbor yesterday washing her dog. She turned on the yard tap flat out and left it running for a good hour and a half. Of every bucket full of water that came out that tap, about 3 drops would've gone into the dog washing while the rest ran down the path (which is angled so the water doesn't run off onto the lawn) around the corner of the house, onto the road and down the stormwater drain. I was tempted to say, why don't you just fill your bath and put your dog in that - like I do, but water isn't really a problem here.

My solution - government subsidises people getting rainwater collection equipment (gutters and tanks) fitted to their houses in monsoon areas across northern Aus. It would all be excess water to us as it currently goes straight to sea. It could then be collected annually and sold wherever they like to offset the cost of the additions. Even a 5000 litre tank per house in Darwin isn't a huge amount of water but it's better than none. Oh and a 5000 litre tank would be overflowing about 3 weeks into wet season

YOOT · 09-01-2008, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

What water?

Daymoe · 09-01-2008, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapid_Axe

Total dam storage in Brisbane at the moment is around 24%.

Where were you getting the water from here?

Cairns and all that keep getting heaps of rain on the news.

What about De-cellination plants or what ever they are called?

xbgs351 · 09-01-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troppo

One thing that has always amazed me about living in Darwin is you would be flat out finding a single building that even has guttering, let alone a tank to collect it. Having come from an area of SA that is not on Adelaide's supply and which has been increasingly saline since the 70's I can remember growing up with slogans like "turn it off" and "every drop is precious".

Not so in the NT it seems. I watched my neighbor yesterday washing her dog. She turned on the yard tap flat out and left it running for a good hour and a half. Of every bucket full of water that came out that tap, about 3 drops would've gone into the dog washing while the rest ran down the path (which is angled so the water doesn't run off onto the lawn) around the corner of the house, onto the road and down the stormwater drain. I was tempted to say, why don't you just fill your bath and put your dog in that - like I do, but water isn't really a problem here.

My solution - government subsidises people getting rainwater collection equipment (gutters and tanks) fitted to their houses in monsoon areas across northern Aus. It would all be excess water to us as it currently goes straight to sea. It could then be collected annually and sold wherever they like to offset the cost of the additions. Even a 5000 litre tank per house in Darwin isn't a huge amount of water but it's better than none. Oh and a 5000 litre tank would be overflowing about 3 weeks into wet season

Darwin has heaps of water and very few people, so why not use the water? A 5000 litre water tank costs about $1200 and stores about $2 to $3 of water.

Donut King · 09-01-2008, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Cairns and all that keep getting heaps of rain on the news.

What about De-cellination plants or what ever they are called?

They use desalination here on Hamilton Island for a large part of the water supply, and as far as I know its very inefficient, takes 100L of seawater to make 20L of drinking water, and even then the water is the worst tasting garbage I've ever had to drink.

An installation to supply a city vs a small island is likely to be a bit different, but it will no doubt be a similarly inefficient process.

Gammaboy · 09-01-2008, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Why don't they make a massive pipeline from a place like QLD that always gets flooded with a massive amount of rain? Rather than stealing it from people even even less water?

Makes perfect sense, I mean, we're only on level 6 water restrictions.

Daymoe · 09-01-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

Makes perfect sense, I mean, we're only on level 6 water restrictions.

No need to get picky, Cairns got 140mm of rain over 24 hours, which is 140mm more of rain than i got.

Anyway about those plants, maybe they can get some people working on their efficiency levels?

Gammaboy · 09-01-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

No need to get picky, Cairns got 140mm of rain over 24 hours, which is 140mm more of rain than i got.

Anyway about those plants, maybe they can get some people working on their efficiency levels?

Yep. and maybe someone can invent time travel.

troppo · 09-01-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xbgs351

Darwin has heaps of water and very few people, so why not use the water? A 5000 litre water tank costs about $1200 and stores about $2 to $3 of water.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with using water if/when I want to. Maybe it's just that old habits die hard, but I also don't like seeing perfectly good water being washed out to sea while so many are complaining about not having any.

As for cost, the price will go up with demand, this stuff is cleaner than bottled mineral water (which I tested @ 20 ppm contamination v's rainwater @ 6 ppm)

Gammaboy · 09-01-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troppo

rainwater @ 6 ppm)

Good clean air up there I assume?

Daymoe · 09-01-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

Yep. and maybe someone can invent time travel.

Stop trying to bait me.

Gammaboy · 09-01-2008, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90sFTW

Stop trying to bait me.

I'm not trying to. I'm merely pointing out that short of some amazing breakthrough that breaks the laws of physics, what you are suggesting is very very difficult to achieve.
And then there's the question of what to do with the salt, a natural by product of desalination (big hint, there's no c in it!)
And by saying i'm trying to bait you suggest I give a flying brown duck about the outcome.

Daymoe · 09-01-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

I'm not trying to. I'm merely pointing out that short of some amazing breakthrough that breaks the laws of physics, what you are suggesting is very very difficult to achieve.
And then there's the question of what to do with the salt, a natural by product of desalination (big hint, there's no c in it!)

Did i suggest an amazing breakthrough? Now to quote myself:

Quote:

Anyway about those plants, maybe they can get some people working on their efficiency levels?

I don't see me mentioning anything about "amazing breakthrough that breaks the laws of physics". I said maybe they can get people working on improving efficiency.

Considering they have a plant up and running, i think they know damn right what to do with the salt.

;)

NC1183 · 09-01-2008, 08:36 PM

De-Sal isn't just water in-efficiant it also takes huge amounts of energy. Last i heard, ALL of eastern Australia is stuggling with base-load power generation.

The federal government and state governments need to put the foot down on all the irrigators stealing water. I know they need it to grow the food we eat and the clothes we wear, but i live in what was once the biggest cotton and wheat growing regions in Australia and i think they use and waste to much water.

DanXR6T · 09-01-2008, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NC1183

The federal government and state governments need to put the foot down on all the irrigators stealing water. I know they need it to grow the food we eat and the clothes we wear, but i live in what was once the biggest cotton and wheat growing regions in Australia and i think they use and waste to much water.

Oh oh OH!!! I'll refrain from fuelling this fire as it is off topic.

troppo · 09-01-2008, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

Good clean air up there I assume?

Probably, but that particular test was out of my sister's rainwater tank in Adelaide in early '02.

BFYOOT · 09-01-2008, 10:13 PM

i think all the major cities need to look in their own backyards first before pumping water from other areas. just look at storm water, and how much gets washed out to the ocean every time it rains. sure it may not be drinking quality like that, but it must be easier to make it cleaner than it is to turn salt water into fresh..........

rodderz · 09-01-2008, 10:16 PM

I was up at Mt Beauty last week and wondered why the Kiewa River was running like it was in flood...the current was bloody huge.

Apparently they are using more water coming from the river to produce more electricity to send to Melbourne, because of the problems at the Gippsland power station.

If they use too much water though, the will be stuffed up there if there's a fire like the last few years where the pondage was used for the water supply

superroo · 10-01-2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanXR6T

Also 75,000 megalitres isn't THAT large an amount of water, about the size of the average water resevoir here in QLD.

Ok it's not that much water, but's it's alot to pull out of a dam thats already near empty.

The pollies seam to do stupid things in regard to the water at eildon. First they spent alot of money to fix the dam wall so they could get it back up to 90+%, but now they are going to pump so much water out of it that it isn't going to get back up to even close to that level.

It's really disapointing. I rember skiing at bonnie doone many many moons ago, now futer generations will only get to ride motor bikes there :(

Cheers