The first point is irrelevant, and this quote from Australia Institute report says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arapiles
"I wonder how much they paid for this inquiry?"
It would be interesting to see what political institutions the Australia Institute is affiliated with.
Quoted from a Bigbjorn post--
I wonder what the residents of the Queensland coastal areas would think when their water disappeared inland leaving them with a trickle. The Snowy River Valley was virtually destroyed by taking the natural flow inland and was only partially returned quite recently.
Huh?? I was talking about Townsville water,, which is a very small part of coastal QLD,, and they wouldnt miss it anyway...
The Snowy scheme is only a tiny part of what would be required to turn the North Queensland rivers inland. The Snowy is a nice little hydro-electric scheme by world standards. We bang on about it because it was a source of national pride and something that had never before been attempted here.
Who cares about the Snowy scheme? Your last sentance is enough of a reason to attempt it,,
Then, when all this water is running down the western rivers what are we going to do with it? Grow millions of tons of irrigated grains to sell into a glutted world market? Millions of tons of sugar? No, already too much of that. Water livestock? No, the water will cost too much to raise cattle and sheep.
No.. all I was after is a tree lined waterway,, but we have to start somewhere,, flowing rivers bring people.
to waste all the Norths water is to waste our greatest resource ...
sugar? really? [bigrolf]
[QUOTE=Arapiles;2888528]China ... the highways I've been on in China were empty. And that was on the highway to the Great Wall.
In relation to producing facts, you pretty much already did it! As you say, the basic issue is that it's not near anything so transport is always going to be a problem.
The other issue is that as far as I'm aware, none of the Ord water is used other than locally. Someone suggested piping it to SA and Victoria, but that would be a very, very long pipe.
You know I almost missed the opportunity to point out to you that the transport infrastructure was always going to be a problem, but it was assumed that private enterprise would invest in that infrastructure when the business model showed a profit could be made from the venture. Unfortunately, government lost interest in the ORD when mining ramped up revenue. No incentives or money was invested in the project to carry it forward. The water of the Ord was never meant to be piped anywhere, but used for local agriculture. What perhaps has gone past you is, if the Ord was allowed to develop to it's full potential, the cotton irrigators relying on the Murray/ Darling water could have moved to the Ord, and all that irrigation water could have flowed back into the system. Makes me wonder why a national interest wasn't part of the Murray / Darling fiasco. Money in the back pocket, perhaps?
Unfortunately transport and processing of any cotton grown on the Ord would still have been an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by bob10
Good reply, Pedro. Makes you wonder how much Mexicans know about QLD , and our rivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro_The_Swift
I agree. but if the cotton gin, mentioned in my post, comes to fruition , the only problem is transport of the finished product. Still an issue, but not insurmountable. Where oh where are the people of vision in government?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arapiles
Who gives a rats , it is an island continent! My state is better than yours , couldn’t give a ****.Quote:
Originally Posted by bob10
Seems the W.A. government has come on board , with post harvest value adding, processing and marketing options for pulse products. The Ord is definitely moving ahead, and is an asset that must be nurtured. Another State moving ahead. If QLD and WA can only get the rest to catch up, this country would be powering on.
Ord River Irrigation Area pulse product and market research project - Grower Group R&D Grants Program | Agriculture and Food
It would be good to see the Old be successful.
How would turning coastal rivers inland relate to the Old?
Turning the rivers wouldn't create another Ord, it would just send more water down inland waterways over a vast area.
We need a plan. [ everyone needs a plan] . I don't think the idea is to turn coastal rivers inland. That would not work, without being detrimental to the environment of the coast. For example, river flows are necessary for the prawning industry, to get those prawns out of the rivers. [ So I've been told ] We need a plan to divert water in times of massive monsoon events, to storage somewhere [ leave that to the experts] to be used for irrigation. Could also be used for flood mitigation. No one has ever said the rivers should be permanently diverted. The excess diverted to storage, then used for irrigation, much like a second Ord scheme, would work for me. The storage would probably be the easy part, getting the stored water to where it was needed, not so easy. However, nothing worthwhile is easy. We should at least try.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscoMick