Time for Bradfield's scheme?

[brian ross]

Cods, I agree with your sentiment but there are scientific facts that cannot be overcome.

Bradfield's scheme was based upon conditions in Europe, not Australia. He used the incorrect amount of evaporation in making his determinations. Unless you want rivers to be covered over, evaporation will occur. There will be no or little water left by the time it reaches Lake Eyre. Australia is a dry continent and with Climate Change it is likely to become drier. We could be much better off addressing Climate Change, reducing CO^2 and Methane production and trying to reduce the temperatures which we will experience.

thats history brian....if we can put a man on the moon....we can do this...I dont care what you say its all about MONEY....how can we waste a giod given resource like rain water year in year out when animals crops fish and people are dying....its reckless beyond words..

Yes, it is all about money, Cods. So, how much should a cup of water cost? $0.10? $0.50? $5.00? $10.00? $100.00? It is all up to you, how much are you prepared to spend? You willing to accept that cost? You prepared to pay the higher taxes?

Of course, this completely ignores the problems of evaporation...

[billy the kid]

When I saw this thread, I immediately thought..."its not April Fools Day is it...."
Someone please explain to me why anyone with half a brain would want to live in the middle
of Australia.....
That's what the thread is about isn't it...correct me if Im wrong.....
Pumping water into central Australia would only be for future residents would it not......

Otherwise why do it...why even fkn talk about it...
In any case, our incompetent politicians couldn't handle a project of such magnitude...
Why dont they pump water into Death Valley USA...
Answer...its too fkn hot.....no-one wants to live there....
Honest to god, if our politicians cant handle the water crisis in the Murray Darling, due to incompetence, how
could they possibly handle the construction of a water pipeline into the middle of Australia....
Total waste of time even talking about it.......

[Bobby]

When I saw this thread, I immediately thought..."its not April Fools Day is it...."
Someone please explain to me why anyone with half a brain would want to live in the middle
of Australia.....
That's what the thread is about isn't it...correct me if Im wrong.....
Pumping water into central Australia would only be for future residents would it not......

Otherwise why do it...why even fkn talk about it...
In any case, our incompetent politicians couldn't handle a project of such magnitude...
Why dont they pump water into Death Valley USA...
Answer...its too fkn hot.....no-one wants to live there....
Honest to god, if our politicians cant handle the water crisis in the Murray Darling, due to incompetence, how
could they possibly handle the construction of a water pipeline into the middle of Australia....
Total waste of time even talking about it.......

You could also use that water to irrigate crops closer to the coast
especially during droughts.
If it's not needed them it could be sent to lake Eyre.

[Outlaw Yogi]

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

Big ask, yes. But "technically impossible"? .. I digress.
I reckon it's just a matter of getting one of those big arse multi head boring machines .. like those used in mining/tunnelling and bore a tunnel through the Great Divide (alleviating having to pump water over the range).

Islamic State had one in Syria and were building tunnel networks they could drive cars in.

As for the evaporation issues cited in a later post ... Well with open channels you might be right, but I'm sure you've heard of pipes.

[brian ross]

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

Big ask, yes. But "technically impossible"? .. I digress.
I reckon it's just a matter of getting one of those big arse multi head boring machines .. like those used in mining/tunnelling and bore a tunnel through the Great Divide (alleviating having to pump water over the range).

Islamic State had one in Syria and were building tunnel networks they could drive cars in.

As for the evaporation issues cited in a later post ... Well with open channels you might be right, but I'm sure you've heard of pipes.

Pipes. Yes, much more expensive and they have a lower capacity than open channels/canals.

Boring machines would work for relatively short tunnel lengths. However, they tend to add expense to a project. Now, if you were suggesting that they should bore a tunnel from the eastern side of the mountains to Lake Eyre you might be on to something but again, that all adds cost and complexity to the project, as well as time required. Then you would need to line the tunnel to prevent seepage out from it, which again adds cost and complexity and time to it.

Suddenly this starts to become a great deal more complex and expensive than what Bradfield was proposing, right?