Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Very nice Rain here today

I seem to remember that when Ernie as talking piping the water from the North-West, it was on a downward slope with limited pumping stations involved.
I've never had anything to do with these ideas specifically but the general principle applied to most water pumping schemes is to use gravity for as much of the horizontal distance as possible, containing the pumping to a smallish area near the source.

Plenty of examples of that eg the Shoalhaven scheme (part of Sydney's water supply) as per following diagram. Water is 130km from Sydney (measured in a straight line) where it enters the scheme (bottom left of the diagram) and it's still 100km from Sydney where it leaves the scheme at the top right. So the scheme only moves it 30km horizontally but it does raise its elevation by 621.2m vertically and that's the key to making it work. Gravity and natural river channels then takes it the rest of the way - and those cost absolutely nothing.

Same basic principle for most bulk water movement schemes.

1738475030847.png
 
Also would be good to settle the ash that we have here at the farm from the fire from last Monday. Nothing worse that stinking acrid ash smell.
 
Haven't we debunked this before?

Isn't energy to pump water 1000's of Kms is way higher than decel?

As for irrigation surely there is still room in the Kimberly's for further expansion?
As I said in the last post on this subject , times change, priorities change and technologies change.

If the pipeline had been built and the gas pumping had been used, now 20 years later we would probably be changing the gas pumping equipment for solar supplied electrical pumps and the cost would be minimised.

Times change and technology changes, but people's lack of vision doesn't and opportunity is lost.

Maybe the whole of the West coast would now be irrigated, with renewable energy and agriculture down the West coast would be flurishing, who knows.

Meanwhile we put in desal plants, the first one the smallest is 80MW, I think the second Binningup is double that and I have no idea as to the size of the Alkimos one, but you can bet it is bigger again.

That is a lot of pumping power, but our politics just thrive on destroying opposition ideas, even if it is to the detriment of the countries future.

A fly in fly out future isn't sustainable, we need to develop the North, despite Sydney/Melbourne focused politicians, who seem to be more concerned about their futures than those they are supposed to be representing and that isn't party specific.
 
Last edited:
...but our politics just thrive on destroying opposition ideas, even if it is to the detriment of the countries future.
This is the most distressing thing. In this regard, Australia has lost a multitude of truly gargantuan opportunities, from finance, technology, manufacturing etc

It shows up in our world ranking in the complexity of economies (95 or 98 IIRC) which, all things considered is absolutely abysmal and unforgivable.
 
This is the most distressing thing. In this regard, Australia has lost a multitude of truly gargantuan opportunities, from finance, technology, manufacturing etc

It shows up in our world ranking in the complexity of economies (95 or 98 IIRC) which, all things considered is absolutely abysmal and unforgivable.
Tribal politics and pissing rights, overides Australia's future every time. Lol
 
This is the most distressing thing. In this regard, Australia has lost a multitude of truly gargantuan opportunities, from finance, technology, manufacturing etc
The Shoalhaven Scheme I posted the diagram for has never been finished by the way.

The original design was done in the 1960's and it was decided at the time to build it to a level adequate for the medium term needs of Sydney with completion in 1977.

The present scheme has a small dam on the river, and two sets of pumps for each of the three stages of pumping. This was the minimum to be reliable, so no single pump failure would take the whole thing out, but results in a mis-match of flow rates between the stages.

To be equal the second stage needs 4 pumps, installation of which was always planned as a second stage project along with building another dam upstream. So more water to pump, and more ability to pump it. It would approximately double Sydney's total water storage capacity.

In the year 2000 government permanently scrapped the second stage.....
 
Last edited:
As SA was mentioned, this may be relevant.


"It's better to have a desal plant and not use it, rather than to need it and not have it."

The same applies to a lot of things, like energy storage perhaps?
 
The Shoalhaven Scheme I posted the diagram for has never been finished by the way.

The original design was done in the 1960's and it was decided at the time to build it to a level adequate for the medium term needs of Sydney with completion in 1977.

The present scheme has a small dam on the river, and two sets of pumps for each of the three stages of pumping. This was the minimum to be reliable, so no single pump failure would take the whole thing out, but results in a mis-match of flow rates between the stages.

To be equal the second stage needs 4 pumps, installation of which was always planned as a second stage project along with building another dam upstream. So more water to pump, and more ability to pump it. It would approximately double Sydney's total water storage capacity.

In the year 2000 government permanently scrapped the second stage.....
@Smurf1976 Don't you just love Governments that have little to no forward thinking.
Appears the planning is there but nothing after that of any consequence.
 
Top