Time for Bradfield's scheme?

[brian ross]

The Bradfield Scheme is supposed to alleviate drought. So why has it been rejected so many times?

[The Mechanic]

Good to see you supporting Pauline Hanson Brian.. i just knew you’d see sense sooner of later...

https://m.facebook.com/watch/?v=380390582799192&_rdr

[brian ross]

If you believe I am supporting Hanson on anything, I have a nice, shiny, bridge, also designed by Mr. Bradfield for sale. You will be required to undertake disassembly, yourself, though, Mechie.

Pauline Hanson couldn't find her own arse with a map and both hands. She is a fool and it shows in her statements.

The Bradfield scheme has been overhyped. It is technically impossible to do what it claimed it could do and what Hanson claims it would do.

[Wally Raffles]

Is the original Bradfield Scheme the same as what Hanson has referred to as a Hybred Bradfield Scheme?

Hanson for effect just fires out what she believes are well-known mantras as though she knows and has thoroughly researched them. Remember the claim of the conspiracy she asserted was basic to Pt Arthur? She read a short blue book she said. It must be true.

She is unaware that the ideas she steals like Bradfield do not stack up.

[Juliar]

What confounds the Bradfield critics is that water flows every so often into the dead center of Australia. This usually coincides with the el Nino and la Nina cycles.

This is precisely what the Bradfield Scheme plans to do.

All that is required is to build dams to capture the huge amount of rain that falls when the water flows into the dead center of Australia and then just release it as required into the Great North Food Bowl.

[brian ross]

What Bradfield failed to do was accept that the rate of evaporation was greater than the amount of rain that would fall and be directed to the inland of Australia. He based his scheme on European rivers, not Australian rivers. He failed to accept that his scheme would not change the climate. Read the article in the original post, it points to the criticisms of the Bradfield scheme.

Personally, I'm much more interested in opening a channel from Port Augusta, northwards to Lake Eyre. It would deliver substantially more water to the region, than Bradfield envisaged. Lake Eyre lies below sea level so the flow would be naturally into the lake. Evaporation from there, might increase the rainfall on the Murray-Darling system.

[Serial Brain 9]

https://www.onenation.org.au/pauline-ha ... australia/

Pauline Hanson Calls for Construction of Bradfield and Ord Schemes to Drought Proof Inland Australia

29 January, 2019/3 Comments/in New South Wales, Pauline Hanson, Queensland /
Video Transcript:

Paul Murray: Let’s finish off here with the very serious situation of what’s happening in the Murray-Darling, where yet again another example of the huge collection of fish that have died. Now again, this is one of those touch points where if you spend three hours talking about it you can’t get across all elements of this issue. But in and of itself, again, the Greenies believe that it is anyone who uses water to take care of their properties, to make sure that they can have any form of produce that is ruining the rivers, whereas, the minister responsible for regional water, Niall Blair in New South Wales, well, he makes a fairly good point which is, it’s difficult to flush through river systems when no rain is falling at all.

Niall Blair: There’s nothing that anyone has been able to point to, no scientists, no locals. No one has been able to point to anything else that could prevent something like this other than fresh water coming into the system, and we just don’t have that, and unfortunately with the weather conditions, the hot weather, and then the sudden drop in temperature, and the rain overnight, we’ve seen another fish kill today.

Paul Murray: Now, Janine, I’m not pretending that what is happening isn’t terrible. It’s a terrible thing to see, but it does make fairly obvious logic here that for water management, you need more of it falling from the sky.

Janine Perrett: Yes, I agree with that, but the word you said was management, it wasn’t just relying on God. There is management of this water system, and the question is, has there been mismanagement? Yes, you need water, but have they taken too much out? I don’t know, and I’m like maybe Pauline and some others who don’t want to believe the scientists. I’m happy to let the scientists from all sides get together. What I would love in this, is for once, this is a bipartisan issue. For goodness sake, can’t … Forget the Greens, because they’re out there. Why can’t Labour and Liberals get together, agree on a report, and at least say, it’s going to be somebody else’s problem on it? There has to be. We tried to do it with the Murray-Darling. It might prove to be simply a drought issue, but we need both sides to agree to look at it properly.

Paul Murray: Well, Pauline, why do you think this is happening?

Pauline Hanson: All right. You haven’t got enough water flowing through the system. What I’ve been pushing for is the Bradfield Scheme that comes from North Queensland, the Herbert, Tully, and the Burdekin Rivers, to actually direct it inland. Flood inland Queensland, flow down to the Murray-Darling, and run it through. What they’ve done, and I’ve been on three-day tour from bus from Victoria through New South Wales, to the mouth of the Murray-Darling, it has been mismanaged terribly, they’ve actually sold off the water. You’ve got international interests that are owning the water.

Janine Perrett: Yes.

Pauline Hanson: You’ve got an organisation, the Murray-Darling Management, has gone from 10 people up to over 300 people managing that. They’ve had the wetlands that they closed down in South Australia. There’s so much I can tell you about it. The wrong decisions that they’ve made. The Bradfield Scheme was priced. The last price they had was $9 billion, put that in, build the Bradfield Scheme. Water inland Queensland. Bring it from the Ord, water inland, Australia from the Ord Scheme as well, and bring water inland and flush out our river systems. That’s it. That’s what I’d be doing.

Paul Murray: It’s interesting though, Richo, where as important as this issue is, I can feel a certain eye glaze that kicks over because we’ve heard debates in and around Murray-Darling for a bloody long time here. People like Tony Burke, even Malcolm Turnbull at one point in time have all had some form of involvement in all of this. Just on the specifics though, of what the New South Wales Minister’s saying, how credible is it to say, I think correctly, but what do you think? If it doesn’t rain, it’s hard to move water around?

Graham R.: I agree. I don’t think there’s any magic wand you can wave over this, or silver bullet, or whatever, I just don’t think that that exists. I think the only solution is rain, and we’re just not getting any of that. It’s a terrible thing to watch, and I wish there was a fix, but I’ve not read of, or heard of a proper fix, so I’ll-

Janine Perrett: Well, at least Pauline’s got an idea. We’ve got floods up in North Queensland, instead of wasting $10 billion on an inland rail, boondoggle, perhaps we could have an inland irrigation system.

Graham R.: Turning rivers back the other way, is not as easy as it sounds.

Paul Murray: The Field … Bradfield, I think-

Janine Perrett: Would cost money.

Paul Murray: ..that the Bradfield Scheme’s not going-

Rowan: But if Pauline’s-

Graham R.: That might be viable.

Rowan: Pauline’s solution is putting forward … you’re using man’s ingenuity-

Janine Perrett: Exactly.

Rowan: -to put more water into the river, rather than having, which the Greens and Labour, and the liberals unfortunately, are just trying to shuffle around the money, the water will be there. Can I just very quickly say, that I think the problem is the number of avocado farms to feed a lot the smashed avocado pate’s in the inner-city Green’s electorate, so …

Paul Murray: Well, if that’s Aussie produce I’m more than happy.

Pauline, thank you very much, along with Richo, Rowan and Janine. I’m looking forward to it again next week.

[brian ross]

Hanson couldn't find her arse with both hands and a map, let alone understand what the Bradfield scheme would need in order to be built, Serial. It would not "drought proof" anything. She is an idiot and it shows.

[Juliar]

Things is getting fair dinkum now as NSW Govt allocates $25 million to study the implementation of some version of the Bradfield Scheme.

Already it is being partially implemented up in Nth Qld.

See video discussing it here with Peta Credlin and NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/ ... 94ab02e98e

Now that the LUNATIC EXTREMIST GREENIES are totally discredited it would be a good time to proceed.

[Juliar]

Despite the Lefty naysayers things have come a long way in the design of the Bradfield Scheme since its inception to a more practical system.

Using the ABC as a "reliable" source is pretty dodgy as the ABC pre ITA was very pro Greeny which meant it was against any and all developments in Australia.

See it all here

http://landshape.org/category/bradfield-scheme/