Desalination Plant

[smithy]

Maybe those who also rely on the Murray (NSW & Vic) should be practising storm water harvesting too- back into the Murray &/or their own reservoirs.
The Murray requires a National approach, SA on it's own can't save it.

Primary Producers aside, I can assure you Punk that there are many shack owners who don't give a rats about the water restrictions.

[FlyingHigh]

Storm Water Harvesting is the option I'd like the Government to develop.
Pump the water through a series of purifiers, back up into our reservoirs, where nature can take it's course.

Where is this storm water every one is talking about ?(not looking for a fight how do u harvest what doesn't fall from the skies)
Havent seen much rain in Adelaide in how long ?
The last shower we had here the top couple of millimetres of soil/sand was damp .

I guess it depends on the capacity of the system, but I don't think it takes a lot of rain to get an adequate supply. Especially if the system is extensive. And if we do get a wet winter (or spring) that will be more for it.

Yes, MickyJ, it is dry around this time of year, and maybe we would need to draw on the Murray for a few weeks, but there for the rest of the year there is no reason why Adelaide can't be self-sufficient through stormwater plus increased awareness of water conservation.

[Swamp Donkey]

I too think there could be massive implications for the marine ecology (although I am no expert). Why are they so readily ignoring this?

This is the main issue Quichey, but Mr "I have to have my name on it" Rann refuses to consider the ecological implications of having both desal plants. Particularly for the Whyalla plant, which will return the saline brine to the upper reaches of Spencer Gulf, in an area which doesnt have sufficient flushing to dilute the brine, thus the salinity increase in this area will be ecologically catastophic. The effects on marine organisms will be enormous. The most publicised impacts need to highlight the impacts on key fishery and ecotourism-important species suc as the giant Cuttlefish which attract thousands of people to the area to view the only known breeding site for this species in the world and also the commercial and recreational Snapper fisheries. SA snapper catches are highest in Nthn Spencer Gulf and the increased salinities will greatly effect spawning success and settlement of juveniles in these important nursery-like regions, which will effect the abundance of adults available for the fisheries, both recreational and commercial.

I cannot believe the ignorance shown by our Government on this issue. It is a convenient remedy that will just shift the focus from a lack of water to a massive ecological problem, something that Mr Rann is happy to let the next Governement deal with!! Tool!

[Q.]

Good summary Swampy.

If anyone wants to do further reading:

http://ffc.org.au/Desalination.html

There is also a link in there to a scientific study into the ecological footprint of desalinisation plants.

[oldfella]

I can not understand why they are not harvesting the salt by on moving the brine to the existing salt pans near Salisbury & Port Wakefield roads intersection or having it as part of the new desal plant

or could not the heat from the cement factory & power station at osborne be used to boil off water to reclaim salt from strong brime solution

Value adding to produce a product for sale using waste heat.

[Swamp Donkey]

I can not understand why they are not harvesting the salt by on moving the brine to the existing salt pans near Salisbury & Port Wakefield roads intersection or having it as part of the new desal plant

or could not the heat from the cement factory & power station at osborne be used to boil off water to reclaim salt from strong brime solution

Value adding to produce a product for sale using waste heat.

I dont think you understand just how much salt will be produced. While this may utilise some of the salt, the volumes produced by this process will be enormous and far far far exceed the demand for salt. If the brine was pumped offshore in a region such as the southern coast which is high energy, the dilution process would be much quicker and impacts will be reduced significantly as opposed to releasing it within the Gulfs, in which it would sit and accumulate constantly.

[The Yetti]

Does anyone know how many desalination plants there are world wide?
I know Israel has a few as do some of the other Middle East countries.

One would hope that our Government has seen the impact on the marine enviroment of those plants and have a bit of an idea.

We can always come up with a reason to stop development ....my goodness we had people complaining about the wind generators saying that dumb birds will fly into them etc.
SA is the driest state on the driest continent on earth.

Can I ask a dumb question.
Why do we want to divert the storm water running into rivers and creeks and then running out to sea and therefore harvest it, YET we need to keep the Murray flowing into the sea and not harvest it all.

bring on the 1956 flood, fill everything up and we can forget about it, do nothing AGAIN and then start the whole thing over again. PS The Murray stopped flowing in 1971. We had gnashing of teeth, pollies walking across the empty Murray mouth promising the world. Ithink Chowilla dam was the go then instead of a weir. 1973 great rains and it went a2way!!!!!37 years later we still rely on rain across the nation.

Build the Desalination plant

[Q.]

Furthermore to the detrimental ecological effects the desal plant will have, building one still doesn't solve the problem of the dying River Murray.

[Booney]

Furthermore to the detrimental ecological effects the desal plant will have, building one still doesn't solve the problem of the dying River Murray.

It could.

The only way The Murray can be saved is by rain fall and we cant make that happen. We could restrict the amount of water the primary producers up stream use but most in the Riverland are onyl on single figure %age allocations now. ( Some on as little as 5% ).

Perhaps the desal plant could not only provide water to the metro area but also be used to flood the Lakes in the Coorong and bring the water levels back up.

As it has been said, this is a 1 in 1000 year drought and The Murray has seen a few of those in its time so lets build the Desal plant for us and let nature take care of The Murray. Perhaps as I said above we can help it a little.

[Q.]

But why destroy one ecosystem to save another? Is it because the destruction of the marine habitat won't be as visible and we can easily forget it's happening, unlike the very obvious death of the Murray Basin.

I don't like the implications of a desal plant, I'd rather see harvesting of water by other means and having that pumped into the basin if necessary.

[leftlegger]

Yeah, this thread has confirmed my worry.
I'm going to see if there are any action groups that will take the Govt to task on this, and join up.

[Swamp Donkey]

Does anyone know how many desalination plants there are world wide?
I know Israel has a few as do some of the other Middle East countries.

One would hope that our Government has seen the impact on the marine enviroment of those plants and have a bit of an idea.

We can always come up with a reason to stop development ....my goodness we had people complaining about the wind generators saying that dumb birds will fly into them etc.
SA is the driest state on the driest continent on earth.

Can I ask a dumb question.
Why do we want to divert the storm water running into rivers and creeks and then running out to sea and therefore harvest it, YET we need to keep the Murray flowing into the sea and not harvest it all.

bring on the 1956 flood, fill everything up and we can forget about it, do nothing AGAIN and then start the whole thing over again. PS The Murray stopped flowing in 1971. We had gnashing of teeth, pollies walking across the empty Murray mouth promising the world. Ithink Chowilla dam was the go then instead of a weir. 1973 great rains and it went a2way!!!!!37 years later we still rely on rain across the nation.

Build the Desalination plant

On January 2008, 13080 desalination plants existed worldwide, so yes it has been a common remedy to a lack of freshwater for human use and nobody is disputing this. My major concerns are not based on whether or not the idea will work, it is the placement and the consequential ecological impacts of the plant if they were placed in the proposed sites. As mentioned earlier these sites could not be more "unsuitable" in terms of recieving adequate flushing to remove the brine. So my arguement is that yes, we would greatly benefit from a desal plant in SA, however I think they are just making the convenient decisions in terms of its placement.

Here is some more interesting reading:
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstrea ... Plants.pdf

Just a thought, 100 years ago, water was not an issue, either was the hole in the ozone layer. Given that over 13000 desal plants now exist and appear an instant remedy to solve the ongoing water problems around the world, when will there be "too many" desal plants? is that possible? At our current rate in 100 years there will be millions around the world and surely there will be some ecological impacts by that time!

Wind farms are a completely different situation, there are no impacts what so ever with wind farms. The occasional bird flying into the turbines is not a valid reason to justify their removal. A stupid comparison. We're talking about complete ecosystems with the Desal plants, not the occasional loss of individuals.

In terms of catching storm water, there is a balance, in that yes the water courses and river and estuaries rely on flows for ecological health, but the main focus of this issue in SA is the vol of water that is lost down the Torrens when it floods. The Torrens is a river that be diverted and the water releases can then be controlled to maintain ecological health. At the moment this river floods and dries floods and dries and we dont capitalise on the floods.

[Booney]

But why destroy one ecosystem to save another? Is it because the destruction of the marine habitat won't be as visible and we can easily forget it's happening, unlike the very obvious death of the Murray Basin.

I don't like the implications of a desal plant, I'd rather see harvesting of water by other means and having that pumped into the basin if necessary.

What water are you going to harvest?

[Q.]

But why destroy one ecosystem to save another? Is it because the destruction of the marine habitat won't be as visible and we can easily forget it's happening, unlike the very obvious death of the Murray Basin.

I don't like the implications of a desal plant, I'd rather see harvesting of water by other means and having that pumped into the basin if necessary.

What water are you going to harvest?

Whatever annual rainfall we do actually get.

I should clarify that it is the proposed locations of the desal plant that makes it unacceptable.

[Zelezny Chucks]

Swampy, in your opinion, would it be a better alternative to place it somewhere outside of the Gulf??

[smithy]

v

Furthermore to the detrimental ecological effects the desal plant will have, building one still doesn't solve the problem of the dying River Murray.

These taken from Mypolonga today.
You will notice 2 pictures with willows mid stream.
They have fallen in the river from riverbank "slumping" or landslides from the banks drying up too quickly and not getting its moisture back.
This has happened a few times the past 2 months and is happening far more regularly as days go by.
Cracks are now appearing under shacks meaning that the days are numbered before they slide into the river also.
To answer Booneys question, DWLBC scientists suggest that even after 5 years in a row of above average rainfall, the river will only recover to a reasonable state.
The first picture showing the depth meter you may not be able to see, but near the top where the 4 metre mark is, shows the level of the 1956 flood.