Thread: The Bradford Plan

Bradfield Scheme?

These articles and others suggest it is pie in the sky.
Will building the Bradfield Scheme to redirect water reduce the effects of drought?

The Bradfield Scheme Reborn? – Quadrant Online

Taking that water away would cause huge damage to the coastal environment.

The scheme was first suggested in the 1930s. It's primary function was to provide work for the thousands of unemployed in Australia. It gets dragged out of the bin every time there's a big drought.
Sadly, lots of people who should know better think of the water running out of the rivers as "going to waste", rather than as the lifeblood of the mangroves, and ultimately, the reef.

The Bradfield scheme from 1938 is, as you say, resurrected every time there is a severe drought in Eastern Australia.

Thoroughly debunked in 1947, it (and the various resurrected versions) was the product of visionaries from Sydney or Melbourne armed with small scale maps, guesses at river flow rates, wildly inaccurate evaporation rates, and wishful thinking.

The Bradfield Scheme is supposed to alleviate drought. So why has it been rejected so many times? - Fact Check - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Don't laugh, I know a couple of people who seriously believe that water from FNQ or Kimberly rivers could be easily piped south because it'd be going downhill all the way according to the map.

DL

Originally Posted by 350RRC

Don't laugh, I know a couple of people who seriously believe that water from FNQ or Kimberly rivers could be easily piped south because it'd be going downhill all the way according to the map.

DL

yesss?.....whats wrong with that?

gravity is better than pumping isn't it?