Moving water long distances: Grand schemes or pipe dreams? - Department of Water
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
WATER
for the
FUTURE
Moving water long distances:
Grand schemes or
pipe dreams?
Table of Contents
The idea: moving water from I love a sunburnt country,
northern Australia to A land of sweeping plains,
southern Australia 3
Of ragged mountain ranges,
How would water be diverted Of drought and flooding rains.
and moved? 6
Dorothea Mackellar (“My Country”)
Where would the water come from —
and is there enough? 9
Dorothea Mackellar’s famous poem captures
Is moving water from the north our love of Australia’s landscape. But, it also
to the south possible? 13 captures one of our greatest challenges: how
Proposals for moving water 14 to manage our water. Australia is the driest
inhabited continent,1 and its rainfall varies
What does all this mean? 21 greatly from year to year and place to place.2
Water for the Future 22 This means that our water supplies can be
scarce and unreliable.
Alternatives to diverting water —
what else can we do? 23 Water management is sometimes a
Glossary 27 controversial topic in Australia — one that
generates strong debate and big ideas.
Moving water long distances:
This publication looks at one of these big
Grand schemes or pipe dreams? ideas: moving water long distances from
Published by the Department of the Environment, northern to southern Australia. It covers
Water, Heritage and the Arts the possible costs and benefits of various
GPO Box 787 options, as well as other alternatives for
CANBERRA ACT 2601 securing water supplies.
ISBN is 978-1-921733-06-2
© Commonwealth of Australia 2010
Information contained in this publication may be
copied or reproduced for study, research,
information or educational purposes, subject to
inclusion of acknowledgement of the sources.
Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction
and rights should be addressed to Commonwealth
Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s Department,
Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600
or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca
The views and opinions expressed in this publication
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
those of the Australian Government or the Minister for
Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts or the
Minister for Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Water.
While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure
that the contents of this publication are factually correct, 1 Living with Drought (www.bom.gov.au/climate)
the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the
accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not 2 Bureau of Meteorology average annual,
be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned seasonal and monthly rainfall and rainfall variability
directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, (www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages)
the contents of this publication.
Printed in Australia on recycled paper.
2
The idea: moving water from northern Australia to
southern Australia
News reports often show farmers in southern
Australia battling drought, while the towns
and cities of the north are inundated
with ‘flooding rains’. About 70 per cent
of Australia’s runoff occurs in northern
Australia,3 and climate research predicts
that water scarcity in southern Australia will
intensify.4 These facts, along with the
existing water pipelines across the country,
have led people to suggest that water
could be harvested from rivers, streams
or storage dams in northern Australia,
Yellow Water Lagoon, Kakadu National Park, NT
and transported south, using trucks, (John Baker & DEWHA)
ocean tankers, canals or pipelines.
Key facts
• Moving water long distances is costly, • Much of northern Australia can be
energy intensive, and can have described as ‘annually water limited’.
significant environmental, social and This means that in general, more
cultural impacts. water is lost every year through
• Using water that is locally available evapotranspiration than falls as rain.6
is generally more cost effective than • Most rainfall in northern Australia
transporting water long distances. falls near the coast, not in river
Current studies show that local headwaters, and runs off to the sea.
options, such as water conservation, • The landscape across much of
desalination and recycling, cost the north is gently undulating and
around $1–2 per thousand litres; at a low elevation, presenting few
a supply from 1500 kilometres (km) opportunities for surface water
away would cost around $5–6 per storage such as dams.
thousand litres.5
3 Australian Water Association (2007), Water in Australia
Facts & Figures, Myths & Ideas (www.awa.asn.au)
4 CSIRO Murray–Darling Basin Sustainable Yields
Project (www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
5 Australian Water Association (2007), Water in Australia
Facts & Figures, Myths & Ideas (www.awa.asn.au)
6 CSIRO Northern Australia Sustainable Yields Project
(www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
3
Has it been done before? The longest of these (from the Murray River)
In particular circumstances and places, is the 356 km Morgan to Whyalla pipeline,
pipelines can be a useful way to improve built in 1944. It can transport 206 megalitres
the availability and reliability of our water (ML) of water a day. Pipelines have also
supply. Significant infrastructure projects recently been built in response to drought;
that transport water have previously been a 105 km pipeline moves water from the
undertaken. However, none have been on Stirling Dam on Western Australia’s Harvey
a scale that would move large volumes of River to Perth.7
water for such a distance as from northern
to southern Australia.
Past large-scale projects include the early How much water?
1900s 530 km Kalgoorlie Goldfields Litre (L): the volume of water
Pipeline, and the 1960s Snowy Mountain in one-thousandth of a cubic
Hydro-Electric Scheme. Many shorter metre. One litre weighs about
pipelines also exist in Australia. For example, one kilogram.
pipelines carry water from the Murray River Kilolitre (KL): 1000 litres or one
in South Australia to other parts of the state. cubic metre of water. One kilolitre
weighs about one tonne.
Megalitre (ML): one million litres
or 1000 cubic metres of water,
weighing about 1000 tonnes.
An Olympic swimming pool holds
at least 2500 cubic metres or
2.5 ML.
Gigalitre (GL): 1000 million
(or one billion) litres of water
or one million cubic metres.
One gigalitre of water weighs
about one million tonnes.
Sydney Harbour holds more
than 500 GL.
Kalgoorlie goldfields water supply scheme, Merridinon, WA
(Peter Mitchell & DEWHA)
7 Government of Western Australia (2003),
Securing our water future: a state water strategy
for Western Australia (www.water.wa.gov.au/
PublicationStore/first/41070.pdf)
4
The Snowy River Scheme and other mountain rivers diverted by
The Snowy River Scheme is a major the scheme, are severely degraded.
river diversion and a successful large- The reduction in flow has impacted
scale infrastructure project. A system greatly on aquatic fauna and flora;
of reservoirs, aqueducts and tunnels temperature regimes have changed,
captures water from the upper reaches triggers for fish breeding have been
of the Snowy, Murray and Murrumbidgee removed, and the lack of flushing water
rivers, diverting it for use in irrigation and flows has resulted in a loss of habitat.
electricity generation. Almost the entire
Pools have filled in as organic material
flow of the Snowy River is diverted west.
and nutrients have accumulated.
Legislation to begin the scheme was
Sediment build up in the middle reaches
passed in 1949, and it was completed
of the river has destroyed habitat and
in 1974.
changed the flow pattern of the water,
Australians are proud of the Snowy and seawater intrusion in the lower
Scheme. It helped to shape our history, reaches now affects local landholders
with thousands of new migrants many kilometres upstream from the
beginning their life in Australia working river mouth.10
on its construction. The Snowy Scheme,
Scientists estimate that to return
one of the engineering wonders
the Snowy River to a healthy state,
of the world,8 increased the availability
its flow should be returned to a minimum
and reliability of water in the west;
of 28 per cent of its original level. In 2002,
this allowed the development of
the New South Wales, Victorian and
irrigation-based farming.9
Commonwealth Governments signed
Despite the significance of the Snowy the Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes
Scheme, it is important to recognise its Implementation Deed. This outlines a
environmental impact. The scheme has process to return 21 per cent of average
reduced the Snowy River headwaters to natural flow to the Snowy River over
around one per cent of their original flow. 10 years, with the option of increasing
The upper reaches of the Snowy River, this to 28 per cent after 2012.11
8 Ghassemi F and White I (2007), Inter-basin Water 10 Pendlebury P, Erskine W, Lake S, Brown P, Pulsford
Transfer: Case Studies from Australia, United States, I, Banks J, Nixon J (1996), Expert Reference Panel
Canada, China and India. International Hydrology Environmental Flow Assessment of the Snowy River
Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. below Jindabyne Dam. Unpublished report to the Snowy
9 Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Authority (1993), Genoa Catchment Management Committee, Cooma.
Background information Snowy Mountains Scheme. 11 Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed.
Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Authority, Cooma. 3 June 2002, Section 7.
5How would water be diverted and moved?
Pipelines A report to the Western Australian
The most commonly suggested method of Government about piping water from the
transporting water is through a concrete and Kimberley to Perth found that it was not an
steel pipe, running either above or below the economically viable option. The cost of water
ground. Regular pumping stations would be transported through a pipeline or canal,
required to maintain the pipeline’s flow over a in that instance, would be between 100
long distance. and 200 times more than normal prices
for bulk water.12
Pipelines minimise the amount of water
lost to evaporation, because the
water is not exposed to air or sunlight. What about gas pipelines?
Pipelines can also help to maintain water Many people see long gas pipelines,
quality. However, the water may still need and wonder why similar pipelines
to be treated at both the source and at the aren’t built for water. Although water
end point, with any treatment processes is much less expensive than gas,
adding to the significant energy and it is much heavier, and therefore
greenhouse costs of piping water. requires much more energy to move.
A pipeline from the north to the south of For example, you can buy a nine
Australia would rate among the longest water kilogram (kg) cylinder of gas for about
transfer projects in the world. Some people $30 from your local service station
have suggested that pipelines could supply and easily carry the gas home.
water to towns and agriculture along the way, But imagine that you decided to buy
for irrigation, native vegetation, or town and water instead. For $30, assuming
community water supplies. The economic, you paid the same price as you
environmental and social costs of pipelines pay for water from the kitchen tap,
and other water transport options all vary, you’d have to transport about
depending on factors such as the amount 42 000 L of water — enough to
of water to be diverted, and the path the fill a backyard swimming pool!
pipeline would take.
12 WA Department of Premier and Cabinet (2006),
Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley
(www.water.wa.gov.au/PublicationStore/first/64772.pdf)
6Trucking and shipping water
Trucks or ocean tankers could be used to
transport water from the north to the south.
These options would have large operational
costs and energy requirements, and would
generate large amounts of greenhouse
gases. Trucks are often used to transport
water to towns in times of drought.
However, this is only viable as a temporary
water supply option and when carting over
short distances.
Canals
Some people have suggested that water Kimberley rangelands and coastline, WA
could be transported long distances across (Dragi Markovic & DEWHA)
Australia by canals, which are open channels
cut through the land. A small slope can Canals lose water through leakage and
be enough for gravity-fed movement of evaporation. A 3700 km long canal from the
water through a short canal. However, as is Kimberley to Perth could lose 93 GL per year
the case for pipelines, pumping would be to evaporation, and a further 125 GL per year
required to move water through canals over to leakage, even if the best lining techniques
longer distances. are used. To account for these losses, such
a canal would need to draw at least twice as
A canal needs to follow the contours of the
much water as is needed for consumption.
land. This means it tends to be much longer
than a direct pipeline. For example, a direct To prevent seepage and minimise friction,
coastal route from the Kimberley to Perth canals are often lined with concrete.
is 1900 km long, but a canal would have to Fencing may also be required to help
follow a 3700 km long route. A canal would minimise water contamination, or to provide
also need to pass over or under roads, safety barriers. These factors add to the
rivers and other obstructions. See Figure 1 expense of canal construction. Canals leave
for the length of other options. a lasting and permanent mark on the land,
and they change and disrupt natural
water flows.13
13 WA Department of Premier and Cabinet (2006),
Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley
(www.water.wa.gov.au/PublicationStore/first/64772.pdf)
7Figure 1: Diagram comparing distance of some proposed and existing projects to
transport water
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
8Where would the water come from —
and is there enough?
Proposals to transport water from northern During the wet season, the north can
Australia vary, but they all rely on excess receive extreme rainfall from thunderstorms,
water being available for extraction. This monsoon depressions and cyclones. For a
depends on a range of factors, including: few months each year, more rain falls than is
• the reliability of rainfall across lost to evaporation. This rainfall accounts for
northern Australia around 65 per cent of Australia’s total water
runoff. The north’s annual runoff can occur
• the current and likely future availability
over just a few days. Most of this water runs
of water in northern Australia
to the sea, but some plays an important role
• the current and potential future uses of in the annual recharge of aquifers (geological
the north’s water resources formations that hold groundwater).15
• the practicality of capturing and storing
water before being diverted, and When people hear that a large amount of
Australia’s rainfall runs off into the ocean,
• environmental, cultural, economic and they sometimes think that this water
political considerations. is ‘wasted’. However, it is important to
remember that this water is vital to the
Rainfall in northern Australia health of ocean ecosystems and estuaries.
Rainfall patterns in northern Australia are very Also, because rainfall in the north is highly
different from those in southern Australia. variable, both within each year and from
The seasons of the northern Australian year to year, estimates of annual average
tropics can be loosely divided into two rainfall for the north can be quite misleading.
distinctly different periods — wet and dry. A single extremely wet year can dramatically
increase the long-term average.16
During the dry season, which lasts up to nine
months of the year, there is little or no rain.
In fact, in many parts of northern Australia,
evapotranspiration is higher than rainfall for
most of the year.14 Water scarcity can be
an issue for communities and ecosystems.
People living in the tropics use dams
and bores for their water supply to cope
with these unreliable and seasonal
rainfall patterns.
14–16 CSIRO Northern Australia Sustainable Yields
Project (www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
9Rivers and catchments in
northern Australia
Northern Australia has the largest area
of unregulated rivers and catchments
(those without dams or water extraction)
in Australia. Most estuaries are in a near
pristine condition, because human land
use has had minimal impact, and pests
and weeds are not widespread.17
Mangroves, Anjo Peninsula, Kimberley coastline, WA
Floods are vital ecosystem events that (Dragi Markovic & DEWHA)
flush nutrients into the near-shore marine
environment and provide on-shore breeding
grounds for marine creatures. When water
flows over riverbanks and across floodplains,
it fills hollows and pools that persist
throughout the dry season. This sustains vital
ecosystems that provide refuges for birds
and animals until the next wet season.18
Large amounts of runoff can also trigger
waterbirds to breed, and fish to spawn
and migrate.19
Kimberley rangelands and coastline, WA
(Dragi Markovic & DEWHA)
The health of northern ecosystems has
direct economic implications for the value
of northern fisheries. Just one of these,
the Northern Prawn Fishery, is worth
up to $164 million per annum.20
17 Woinarski J, Mackey B, Nix H and Traill B (2007),
The Nature of Northern Australia: Natural values, Flatback Turtle hatchling, Cape York, Qld
ecological processes and future prospects. (Kerry Trapnell & DEWHA)
ANU E Press, Canberra (epress.anu.edu.au)
18 CSIRO Northern Australia Sustainable Yields Project
(www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
19 National Land and Water Resources Audit,
Australian Catchment, River and Estuary Assessment
(2002) (www.anra.gov.au/topics/coasts)
20 Australian Fisheries Management Authority
(www.afma.gov.au/fisheries)
10The Ord River and Lake Argyle
Lake Argyle, on the Ord River in Western
Australia, is often cited as a potential
source of water for southern Australia.
It has a capacity of 10,700 GL (about
21 times the size of Sydney Harbour).
However, the Western Australian
Government has shown that if the planned
expansion of the Ord River irrigation
scheme takes place, then the Ord River
will be close to fully allocated.21 The current
environmental flows, including annual
floods, are essential to maintain the health
and integrity of the local environment,
Ord River, near Kununurra, WA
including the internationally recognised (Michelle McAulay & DEWHA)
Ramsar wetlands, located in the lower
reaches of the Ord.
Storing water in northern Australia Managed aquifer recharge requires the
Virtually all rivers in northern Australia are presence of a suitable aquifer in which
intermittent. This means that they do not flow to store water. The best aquifers can
in the dry season. Water supplies in northern store and move large volumes of water,
rivers vary greatly depending on the season because increasing the storage volume
and from year to year. Very large amounts reduces the costs of recovering the water.
of storage are required for proposed water However, managed aquifer recharge
transport schemes, to even out supply, involves pumping costs to get the water
and to guard against multiple years of to ground level.
below-average rain.
There are two main options for providing this
storage capacity: storing water in aquifers,
in a process called ‘managed aquifer
recharge’, or constructing dams.
21 WA Department of Water (2006), Ord River Water
Management Plan, Water Resource Allocation
and Planning Series Report No. WRAP 15.
WA Department of Water, Perth. (www.water.wa.gov.au/
PublicationStore/first/70582.pdf)
11Many aquifers in northern Australia are The possibility of constructing large dams in
‘fill and spill’ aquifers. They recharge with northern Australia is limited by geographical
the wet season rains, and then release and climatic constraints. Ideally, a dam is
water during the dry season. Fill and spill constructed in a steep valley, where the
aquifers have limited storage capacity, surrounding hills create a bowl to hold the
because they fill to capacity during the wet water. This produces a deep reservoir,
season rainfall. This leaves little or no space which minimises the amount of water lost
to capture and store any additional flows. to evaporation. The landscape across much
Water from these aquifers allows rivers to of the north is gently undulating and at a
continue to flow through the dry season low elevation. This means that steep valleys
each year. These perennial river systems, are rare, and usually of high ecological and
which support endemic ecosystems cultural value.
(unique ecosystems found only in that
area) and provide tourism and fishing The best place to build a dam is usually
opportunities, also have high spiritual and in the upper reaches of a catchment.
cultural significance for Indigenous and However, in northern Australia, unlike the
non-Indigenous people. Water from these Murray–Darling Basin, most rain falls near
aquifers is not generally available for the coast and not in river headwaters.
transport elsewhere. Rainfall in the upper catchments across
inland northern Australia is generally
In some locations where water resource lower and more sporadic than along the
planning processes are underway, such northern coast, and potential losses through
as the Katherine and Douglas–Daly evaporation are high.23
areas of the Daly region in the Northern
Territory, computer modelling of water There are few opportunities to increase
supplies indicates that current groundwater surface water storage in northern Australia,
allocations may be approaching the limit of and any existing opportunities have
recoverable extraction.22 already been identified by state and
territory governments.
22–23 CSIRO Northern Australia Sustainable Yields
Project (www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
12Is moving water from the north to the south possible?
Lakes Argyle and Kununurra (Michelle McAulay & DEWHA)
When considering any proposals to move Environmental issues vary depending on
water long distances, decision-makers the location of the water source, the water’s
must weigh three key sets of issues: destination, and the mode of water transport
social, economic and environmental. used. Any long-distance transport of water
could lead to the transfer of exotic species
Social considerations include the existing from one place to another. The reduction
value that water has for local communities in available water at the source may affect
and others, the views of landholders river flows and wetlands; this could alter
who might be affected by construction of the composition and populations of plants
infrastructure, the value of the employment and animals, and have a large impact on
that such schemes may create locally, ecosystems. All methods to transport water
and the longer-term consequences that also involve the use of energy, and therefore
diverting water might have on future produce greenhouse gases.
regional development.
A range of studies, discussed below, have
Economic considerations include the extent investigated proposals to transport water
of existing infrastructure and construction from higher to lower rainfall areas. All these
costs of any required infrastructure, studies have concluded that proposals
the energy costs of transporting the water, to transport water typically have very
and the comparison of water transport costs high economic, energy, social and
with those of other water supply options. environmental costs.
13Proposals for moving water
Proposals to transport water long distances north to the south of Australia (Figure 2).
are not new. Since the late 1800s, people These include transporting floodwater from
have been suggesting ways to move water north-eastern coastal rivers across the Great
across Australia. Dividing Range and into the Murray–Darling
Basin, or down the east coast to supplement
In 1938, Dr John Bradfield, respected urban water supplies. Others have suggested
engineer and designer of the Sydney Harbour that water from the north-west of Australia
Bridge, presented a plan to the Queensland — such as from Lake Argyle and the Ord
Government. Bradfield proposed diverting River in the East Kimberley — could supply
water from northern Queensland coastal population centres in the south of Western
rivers across the Great Dividing Range into Australia, or be redirected through Lake Eyre
central Australia. to the upper Darling River and then into the
This proposal, known as the Bradfield Murray–Darling Basin.
Scheme, has inspired many other
suggestions for redirecting water from the
Figure 2: Map illustrating common proposed routes for pipeline/canal
CL
CL A
Legend
A -1
A
-2
P-
U
-S
A
CL A-3
Proposed
CL
Existing DARWIN ● CL A -4
CL A
-S UP-B
CL A -5
CL CL
A A -6
-7
CL A-8
CLA-10
CL
●DERBY Northern Territory ● CAIRNS A -S U
P-C
● FITZROY
-9
BROOME ●
A
CROSSING CL
CL
A
●TOWNSVILLE -11
PORT HED LAND Kimberley
Kimberley to
to
●
Perth
Perth Scheme
Scheme HUGHENDEN ● CL
2
A -1 2
3
u te
u te 3
Ro CL A -1
te 1
Ro
● MT LONGREACH ●
● Queensland -1 4
Rou
CARNARVON A
NEWMAN ALICE SPRINGS CL
● BIRDSVILLE Clarence River Scheme
● ROMA
Western ● BRISBANE
MT Beattie - Bradfield
GERALDTON ● MAGNET
Australia
Scheme
●
● ● LEONORA
MOREE ●
South Australia New South Wales ●COFFS HARBOUR
●KALGOORLIE
PERTH● ● BROKEN HILL ● DUBBO
SYDNEY
Australian
● ● ●SEYMOUR
Victorian North-South Pipeline
ESPERANCE Capital Territory
ADELAIDE ● ALBURY GO
UL
BU
Kalgoorlie Goldfields Pipeline Victoria
● RN
RIV
KILLINGWORTH
ALEXANDRA
●BROADFORD ER ● ●
●
DALWALLINU ● YEA
● KALGOORLIE MELBOURNE
ER
N
SOUTHERN
●
R IV
GLENBURN
CROSS ●
ON
MERREDIN ● W E
Tasmania
HE R
PERTH ●
●TAMMIN
YAN YEAN KINGLAKE
RESERVOIR
●
AC
●●MUNDARING S
●HOBART YARRA GLEN
SUGARLOAF
0 200 400 600 Kilometers RESERVOIR ● ●HEALESVILLE
ER
YA RRA RIV
●
14Diverting water from the north- The report concluded that introducing water
west of Australia from the Kimberley into Perth’s water supply
In 2006, the Western Australian Government would at least double the average household
made a detailed study of proposals to water bill. Water prices for Western Australian
bring water from the Kimberley to Perth.24 metropolitan residences in 2009–10 ranged
The study examined transporting water by from 64.3 c/KL to 177.9 c/KL (depending
pipeline, canal and ocean transport. on the volume of water used).25 These costs
are considerably less than the cost per KL of
The feasibility of these options was any of the transport options described in the
compared using the following measures: report (see Table 1).
• how much energy would be required
The report also found that water could be
to transport the water
supplied by desalination for less than a
• how reliable the water supply would be quarter of the cost of any of the proposed
• what quality of water would be methods of diversion from the Kimberley
provided, and (see Table 1).
• the estimated cost.
Table 1: Costs and energy requirements of water transport options from the Kimberley
to Perth based on 200 GL/year delivery, compared with the cost of water from the
Kwinana desalination plant
Desalination Pipeline Canal Tanker Water bag
Energy consumption
(kilowatt hour per 4.5 5.8 3.7 10.5 8.6
kilolitres delivered)
Greenhouse gas
produced (million tonnes
0.9 0.6 0.5 2.0 1.6
of carbon dioxide per
year equivalent)
Capital cost (billion) $0.387 $11.9 $14.5 $6.2 $5.3
Unit cost of water
(per kilolitre to nearest $1.20* $5.10 $6.50 $5.00 $5.00
10 cents)
Based on ‘Table of comparative issues and values’ Western Australian Department of Premier and Cabinet (2006).
Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley; p 10.
* Estimate based on supply of 47 GL of water per year from the Kwinana plant, including operating costs.
24 WA Department of Premier and Cabinet (2006),
Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley
(www.water.wa.gov.au/PublicationStore/first/64772.pdf)
25 Water Corporation 2009-2010 Rates and Charges —
Metropolitan Residential. (http://www.watercorporation.
com.au/A/accounts_rates_metro_res.cfm)
15Diverting water from the
north-east of Australia
The Bradfield Scheme
(and variations of the scheme)
for the Murray–Darling Basin
The original Bradfield Scheme, submitted
to the Queensland Government in 1938,
proposed that floodwater from the coastal
rivers of north Queensland be diverted
across the Great Dividing Range and into
inland river systems. The scheme aimed to
increase the amount of water available to
Crocodile, Yellow Water Lagoon, Kakadu National Park, NT support agriculture and grazing in central
(Michelle McAulay & DEWHA) Queensland. The original proposal relied on
gravity to move water from one catchment
Environmental impacts to another. More recent surveying indicates
The study found that there was relatively that an extensive array of pipelines, pumps
little information available to estimate the and diversion tunnels would be required to
environmental impacts of moving water from achieve this outcome.
the Kimberley to Perth. However, it noted that
as well as the impacts of obtaining water from When the Bradfield Scheme was reviewed
the Kimberley, there would be environmental in 1947 by WHR Nimmo, Chief Engineer of
issues in moving the water to Perth by any the Stanley River Works, more information
of the methods suggested. These include had become available. Bradfield was found
the production of greenhouse gases in the to have overestimated the amount of water
construction, transport and treatment of the available from the Tully, Herbert and Burdekin
water, and the impact of canals or pipelines rivers by about 250 per cent. It was also
on the land and local ecosystems. found that water could not be diverted by
gravity from the Burdekin catchment to the
Social impacts Flinders catchment.26
Consultation showed that the local
community did not want Kimberley water
to be seen as a free or wasted resource.
The community argued that there should be
greater support for development within the
region, and a better understanding of the
cultural and environmental significance of
local water resources for local people.
26 Ghassemi F and White I (2007), Inter-Basin Water
Transfer: Case Studies from Australia, United States,
Canada, China and India. International Hydrology
Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
16The then Northern Australia Land and
Water Taskforce met with Queensland
Government officials in September 2007
to discuss this proposal and the findings
of a preliminary feasibility assessment.
The preliminary assessment concluded that
while such a scheme may be technically
possible, it would not be economically,
environmentally or practically feasible.
Additionally, the outstanding natural values of
the wet tropical region of north Queensland
have been recognised in a World Heritage
Norman River near Gulf of Carpenteria (Deptartment of
listing, which includes parts of the Tully and
Foreign Affairs and Trade — Overseas Information Branch) Johnstone rivers. Based on this advice,
the Taskforce agreed to not consider this
In 1982, Cameron McNamara Consultants proposal further unless it was supported by
were commissioned by the Queensland the Queensland Government.
Government to undertake a study that
reviewed the feasibility of the Bradfield
Scheme. This study found that it would be
possible to irrigate around 72 000 ha of land
west of the Great Dividing Range, at a cost
of more than $3 billion.27
At the 2007 Water Summit, the then
Queensland Premier asked whether water
could be diverted from rivers in north
Queensland to recharge the Murray–Darling
Basin. He proposed that this could be done
by extending the Bradfield Scheme to divert
water into the Warrego River, a tributary of
the Darling.
27 Ghassemi F and White I (2007), Inter-Basin Water
Transfer: Case Studies from Australia, United States,
Canada, China and India. International Hydrology
Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge;
cost estimated in 2002 prices
17South-East Queensland water grid Northern New South Wales
In 2007, the Queensland Government Proposals similar to the Bradfield Scheme
commissioned a report on a proposal to have also been suggested for the coastal
transport water from the north-east of rivers of New South Wales. A review of 22
Australia by diverting water from the coastal catchments found that only nine had
Burdekin River to south-east Queensland.28 western boundaries on the Great Dividing
Range. Even though diverting some of these
To estimate the costs and timeline of the nine rivers was technically possible, the cost
proposal, the report looked at similar was too high to justify construction.29
construction projects and estimates from
construction suppliers. The report considered Later, proposals were raised for inland
the variability of local ground conditions; water diversion from the Clarence River.
the costs of the pipeline crossing roads, However, none of these proposals for the
railway lines, rivers and creeks; and the need Clarence River were supported by cost–
for pumping stations. The final estimate benefit analyses or environmental and social
included the cost of providing road access impact assessments.30 The Clarence River
and power to pumping stations, and ongoing basin is unique in that it lies in a transition
operation and maintenance costs. It did not zone between temperate and tropical flora.
include the cost of water treatment.
According to the Queensland Government,
sourcing water from the Burdekin River
would, at minimum, quadruple south-east
Queensland’s residential water bills.
Water from the Burdekin would, by 2026,
cost $7700 per ML if pumped on a
continuous basis, and up to $374 000 per
ML if pumped only once in every 50 years.
In comparison, providing water through
desalination was estimated to cost between
$2500 and $3500 per ML. Construction
of the pipeline was anticipated to take
28 Qld Department of Natural Resources (2007),
6–10 years from design to commissioning.
Direct Connection Pipeline: Burdekin to South-
East Queensland (www.derm.qld.gov.au/water)
29–30 Ghassemi F and White I (2007), Inter-Basin
Water Transfer: Case Studies from Australia,
United States, Canada, China and India.
International Hydrology Series, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
18This makes it a region with high biodiversity
values. A 1999 Healthy Rivers Commission
report argued that any proposal to divert
significant quantities of water out of this river
basin would pose significant risk to the health
of riverine ecosystems, and the activities and
values those systems support.31
In 2003, an analysis of 23 options to divert
water inland from the Clarence River was
undertaken by Hunter Water Australia.
The study estimated that the final delivery
cost to irrigators for diverted water
would range from $163 to $2807 per ML Birdllife on the Diamantina River, SA
(approximately 10 to 200 times greater (Paul Wainwright & DEWHA)
than the existing irrigation costs).32
Flooding the Lake Eyre Basin Because of this, the basin is an area of
Since the late 1800s, there have been calls high conservation significance. It supports
for various schemes to artificially fill Lake wetlands such as the internationally
Eyre, in the hope that this would increase recognised Coongie Lakes, along with
local rainfall. grasslands in the Astrebla Downs National
Park and deserts in the Simpson Desert
The Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO have National Park. The combined ecological and
carried out statistical analyses and climate economic impacts of flooding Lake Eyre are
modelling to assess the likely impact of likely to be significant.
large permanent inland water surfaces on
Australian rainfall. The study found that ‘there
was no evidence that large-scale permanent
water surfaces in inland Australia would result
in widespread climate amelioration’.33
The Lake Eyre Basin is one of the world’s 31 Ghassemi F and White I (2007), Inter-Basin Water
last unregulated wild river systems. Transfer: Case Studies from Australia, United States,
Canada, China and India. International Hydrology
The vegetation of the basin reflects the Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
patterns of arid and semi-arid regions, 32 Hunter Water Australia (2003), Financial Appraisal
which rely on variable water flows. of Water Options. Newcastle, Australia.
In: Farmhand Foundation 2004, Talking Water:
An Australian Guidebook for the 21st Century
(http://www.farmhand.org.au/press.html)
33 Hope PK, Nicholls N, and McGregor JL (2004),
The rainfall response to permanent inland water
in Australia. Australian Meteorological Magazine,
53:4, 251–262.
19Other water diversion schemes Transporting water from Tasmania
As well as proposals to divert water from
Sugarloaf North–South Pipeline
northern Australia, suggestions that water
The Sugarloaf North–South Pipeline
could be transported from Tasmania to the
was proposed as part of the Victorian
mainland have been made. In March 2008,
Government’s Our Water, Our Future plan.
the Council of Australian Governments
It involves a 70 km pipeline connecting
agreed to extend the CSIRO work on
the Goulburn River, near Yea, to the
sustainable yields and water availability
Sugarloaf Reservoir north-east of Melbourne,
in the catchments of the Murray-Darling
to supplement urban water supplies.
Basin and northern Australia to Tasmania.
Upon completion, up to 75 GL of water
per year will be delivered to Sugarloaf The Tasmanian Sustainable Yields report,
Reservoir. Construction commenced in released in January 2010, found that climate
2008, and the first water was delivered to change is expected to reduce rainfall
Melbourne in February 2010. and runoff in Tasmania over the next two
decades.34 By 2030, the projected impact
On 12 September 2008, the Minister for the
of climate change on rainfall will be a 3 per
Environment, Heritage and the Arts approved
cent reduction under a median future climate
the Sugarloaf Pipeline Project subject to a
(ranging from an increase of 1 per cent to
number of strict conditions for the protection
a decrease of 7 per cent under wet and
of matters of national environmental
dry extremes). The reduction in rainfall is
significance under the Environment
projected to lead to a 5 per cent reduction in
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
runoff under a median climate (ranging from
Act 1999, specifically listed threatened
an increase of 1 per cent to a decrease of
species and ecological communities.
10 per cent under wet and dry extremes).
The Department of the Environment,
Water, Heritage and the Arts is monitoring This report provides critical information
compliance with these conditions. needed to underpin statutory water
management planning in Tasmania and will
assist in ensuring that any development of
Tasmania’s water resources is sustainable.
34 CSIRO Tasmania Sustainable Yields Project
(www.csiro.au/partnerships/SYP.html)
20What does all this mean?
When it comes to climate and water, Although water transport projects may
Australia is a country of extremes. be technically possible, every study so
The challenge we face is to manage our far has found that such projects would
scarce water resources, in our shared have high energy, economic, social and
interests, over the long term. environmental costs.
As water becomes scarcer, it becomes a Building and maintaining the infrastructure
more valuable and expensive commodity. required to move water is expensive, and a
However, if water prices become high large amount of energy is required to pump
enough to make a long pipeline or canal water over long distances. Water transport
economically viable, then alternative projects also remove water from ecosystems
water supplies such as desalination at the source; combined with moving water
will also become economically viable. through the landscape, this has a substantial
Using the water we have more efficiently, impact on the environment. The social costs
and developing new local water supply are high for those communities who will lose
sources — particularly those that rely less water, and whose wellbeing depends on
on rainfall — are considered much better environmental health at the water source.
options than transporting water across
the country.
Mitchell-Lawley Rivers Region (Cathy Zwick)
21Water for the Future
Managing our water supplies will remain a
challenging task and a topic of much debate
in Australia. It is important to ‘think big’ about
the possibilities. But, it is also important to
evaluate the economic, environmental and
social costs of each option carefully. With
our diverse range of water supply options,
and careful consideration of how we use
our water, we can ensure a sustainable and
secure water supply for the future.
Water for the Future is an Australian
Government initiative to prepare Australia
for a future with less water. Weir on the Murray River, near Shepparton, Vic
(John Baker & DEWHA)
Water for the Future involves:
• taking action on climate change
• using water wisely
• securing water supplies, and
• supporting healthy rivers.
The initiative includes investing in updated
irrigation systems, helping households
to install rainwater tanks and greywater
treatment systems, supporting development
of alternative water supplies, and buying
water to return to the environment.
Irrigation canal, near Mooroopna, Vic (John Baker & DEWHA)
22Alternatives to diverting water — what else can we do?
A secure, reliable water supply is vital Under the Water for the Future Initiative
for Australia’s social, economic and the Australian Government is modernising
environmental wellbeing. Dam yields have Australian irrigation. The primary focus is on
declined over the past decade, and there is a the Murray-Darling Basin, where irrigation
risk of further declines in rainfall and runoff as activities are concentrated.
a result of climate change. We must find new
sources of water for urban supplies that are As part of Water for the Future, the Australian
less dependent on climate. Government has committed $5.8 billion to
increase water use efficiency in rural Australia
To improve the reliability of water supplies, through the Sustainable Rural Water Use and
governments are implementing planning Infrastructure program. This program’s key
practices that consider the merits of the rural water projects will support sustainable
full range of supply and demand options. irrigation communities, and save water by
These include water recycling, desalination, upgrading outdated and leaky irrigation
urban rain and stormwater harvesting, and systems. The water savings generated by
improving water use efficiency. this investment will be used to address over-
allocation, help restore river health, and help
Improving rural water irrigators meet the challenge of declining
use efficiency water availability.
The irrigation sector is the biggest user of
water in Australia. It accounts for around Improving urban water
two-thirds of all water use nationwide. use efficiency
Approximately 65 per cent of this irrigated Significant amounts of water can be saved
agriculture takes place within the Murray– by improving household water use efficiency.
Darling Basin.35 Irrigated agriculture provides The Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards
a wealth of food and fibre, which generates (WELS) scheme is a national program
billions of dollars in export income and established by the Australian Government
provides fresh food for Australian households. in partnership with all state and territory
governments. The scheme commenced
Despite the economic importance of irrigated mid-2005 and became mandatory for new
agriculture, the expected future drop in water products from 1 July 2006.
supplies due to climate change requires
greater water use efficiency for crops. The
amount of irrigation water lost to leakage
and evaporation each year is estimated to be
about the same as that consumed by all of
our major capital cities.
35 Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007), Water and the
Murray-Darling Basin — A Statistical Profile, 2000–01
to 2005–06 (Cat. No. 4610.0.55.007) (www.abs.gov.au)
23Approximately 10 600 product models
are registered under the scheme.
Work is underway to introduce minimum
water efficiency standards, and to examine
the scheme’s potential to include additional
products such as instantaneous gas
hot water services, combination washer-
dryers, evaporative air conditioners,
domestic irrigation flow controllers and
hot water re-circulators.
A 2008 study into the cost effectiveness of
the WELS scheme estimated that by 2021,
WELS label (Michelle McAulay & DEWHA) Australians could save up to $1 billion
on their water and energy bills by
The purpose of the WELS scheme is to: choosing WELS water-efficient products.36
• conserve water supplies by reducing This translates into potential Australia-wide
water consumption water savings of approximately 800 GL
(more water than is in Sydney Harbour).
• provide purchasers with information
on water use and water-saving Improved water efficiency will also reduce
products, and the energy used by products that heat water.
• promote the adoption of efficient This will result in fewer greenhouse gas
and effective water use and water- emissions. From 2005 to 2021, the WELS
saving technologies. scheme is projected to save more than
nine million megawatt-hours of energy
The WELS scheme requires products such and about six million tonnes of greenhouse
as washing machines, dishwashers, taps, gas emissions.
showers, flow controllers, toilets and urinals
to be registered and labelled according to
their water efficiency. This allows consumers
to make informed decisions about the water
efficiency of the products they purchase,
reduce their water consumption and save
money on water bills. The scheme also
enables industry to showcase their most
water-efficient products. 36 Chong J, Kazaglis A and Giurco D (2008),
Cost effectiveness analysis of WELS —
the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards
Scheme. Prepared for the Australian Government
Department of the Environment, Water,
Heritage and the Arts by the Institute for
Sustainable Futures, University of Technology,
Sydney (www.waterrating.gov.au/publications/)
24Reduce consumption
Piping water does not address all the adopting water-saving devices and changing
challenges of living in a relatively dry country. their patterns of water use. Many people,
Reducing our water use has an important especially those who rent, may not be aware
role in ensuring secure water supplies. Urban of how much water they are using in their
water users can reduce their consumption by household.37
What can I do to reduce my household water use?
• Observe water restrictions. • Install aerators on taps.
• Check for leaks. • Consider using greywater from the
• Buy dishwashers, washing laundry on the garden.
machines and plumbing products • Consider investing in a front-loading
that have a high star rating under washing machine. It may cost
the WELS scheme. more initially, but will use less water
• Take shorter showers and install and detergent. Wash clothes in
a water-efficient shower head. cold water.
A normal shower uses 15–25 L of • Install a dripper system and a tap
water every minute, but a water- timer, and check hoses and taps
efficient shower uses only around for leaks.
seven L. A five-star WELS-rated • Use mulch on gardens to prevent
shower head can save an average water loss.
household more than $100 each
• Choose a drought-resistant lawn,
year on water and energy bills and
or consider alternatives such as
cut greenhouse gas emissions by
artificial turf.
up to one tonne per year.
• Install a rain water tank.
• Install a dual flush toilet that can
save you 50 per cent of water on
each flush.
37 Marsden J (2006), Securing Australia’s Water Supplies:
Opportunities and Impediments. A discussion paper
prepared for the Department of Prime Minister and
Cabinet (www.environment.gov.au/water/publications)
25Recycled water and greywater Another option for water reuse is using
Recycled (or reclaimed) water refers to greywater — water from the kitchen,
sewage that has been treated by a series laundry and bathroom (but not the toilet) —
of processes, such as micro-filtration, on gardens. Greywater reuse can occur at
reverse osmosis, oxidation and ultraviolet the household level, allowing all Australians
disinfection, to create clean water and even to contribute to managing limited
drinking water. Many countries with climates water resources.39
similar to ours and with limited fresh water
supplies use recycled water. In Australia, Desalination plants
recycled water has been used for decades Many states are investing in desalination
for watering parks and ovals, and for plants, because they can provide long-term
industrial use and irrigation.38 In some areas, water security.40
communities are discussing the possibility
of using recycled water for drinking water, Desalination plants remove salt and
usually described as ‘planned indirect impurities from seawater, and treat the
potable reuse’. This means that recycled water so it meets drinking quality standards.
water is returned to the local water source The most common method used for
(reservoir, river or aquifer), where it is stored desalination is reverse osmosis. This involves
and then collected and treated in the same forcing water through a membrane under
way as existing water supplies. high pressure. The advantage of desalination
is that water is available even in times of low
Recycled water can be less dependent on rainfall. However, desalination is expensive,
rainfall than many water supplies. It uses uses large amounts of energy and produces
less energy than desalination and reduces brine (water with a high concentration of salt)
the amount of nutrients (such as phosphorus as a byproduct.
and nitrogen), sediments, and contaminants
discharged to the environment. The Australian
Guidelines for Water Recycling provide a
national framework for managing human and
environmental health risks, and guidance
on how recycling can be done safely and
sustainably. While the introduction of recycled
water into drinking water supplies is a decision
for state governments, water managers and
38 National Water Commission (2007), Recycled Water
communities, recycled water for drinking fact sheet (www.nwc.gov.au)
needs to meet the requirements of the 39 National Water Commission (2008), Requirements for
Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, the installation of rainwater and greywater systems in
which are designed to protect public health. Australia, Waterlines report No 10 — November 2008
(www.nwc.gov.au)
40 For example, see Australian Water Association
desalination fact sheet (www.awa.asn.au) or the
National Urban Water Desalination Plan fact sheet
(www.environment.gov.au/water)
26Glossary
Aquifer Headwaters
A land formation that holds groundwater The source of a river or stream
Ecosystem Hydro-electric
A group of plants and animals interacting Electricity generated from the movement
with each other and the environment in of water
which they live
Managed aquifer recharge
Endemic The purposeful recharge of water to aquifers
Native and unique to a place, not occurring (underground reservoirs) under controlled
elsewhere conditions for subsequent recovery or
environmental benefit
Estuary
The part of the mouth or lower course of a Monsoon depression
river in which the current meets the sea tides An area of low pressure circulation (such as a
and is subject to their effects cyclone) in certain regions that results in high
levels of rainfall
Evaporation
Changing from a liquid into a vapour Over-allocated
For water, the planned removal of more water
Evapotranspiration from a river system than is available
Evaporation of water from the Earth’s
surfaces, including soil and water sources, Sustainable yield
and also from vegetation transpiration The level of water extraction from a
particular system which, if exceeded,
Groundwater would compromise key environmental
Water beneath the ground surface assets or ecosystem functions and the
productive base of the resource
Groundwater recharge
A hydrologic (water circulation) process in Surface water
which water moves downward from surface Water above the ground surface
water to groundwater
27MORE INFORMATION
More information about Water for the Future visit www.environment.gov.au/water
An electronic version of this booklet is available on the website.
To order printed copies of this booklet call 1800 218 478
or email: Waterinformation@environment.gov.au
Images
Front cover: Kakadu National Park, NT (Ian Oswald-Jacobs & DEWHA)
Back cover: East Alligator River, Kakadu National Park, NT (Michelle McAulay & DEWHA)
Purnululu National Park, Kimberley, WA (Colin Totterdell & DEWHA)
Daintree River National Park (Colin Totterdell & DEWHA)You can also read
