EcoRadio

Category: Water

  • Warragamba dam spills over while Desal plant continutes to operate

    Minor flood warning as Sydney dam spills

    Updated April 20, 2012 08:19:52

    Spectators watch Warragamba Dam overflow Photo: Warragamba Dam in Sydney’s west, spills over for the first time in 14 years, March 3, 2012. (AAP: Mick Tsikas)
    Related Story: Big wet bears down on NSW
    Related Story: Overflowing Warragamba Dam forces power cuts
    Map: Richmond 2753

    The weather bureau has issued a flood warning for the Nepean-Hawkesbury Valley in Sydney’s north west, with the news that Warragamba Dam has started spilling over again.

    Water began spilling over the dam’s drum gates last night.

    When combined with water from the Upper Nepean, it is expected to result in a minor flood peak at North Richmond bridge later tonight.

    The Sydney Catchment Authority’s Ian Tanner says Warragamba’s drum gates will open to allow out more water sometime this morning.

    “It’s the central gate, there are two gates on either side, so there’s five gates all together,” he said.

    “It will let out a certain amount of water, if it can’t let out enough then the other four gates will open up.

    “We’re not expecting those four gates to open up because there’s not a lot of water coming into the dam at the moment.”

    Heavy rain again this week has caused flash flooding in Sydney and prompted hundreds of calls to the SES.

    The Greens say that, despite the heavy rain, Sydney’s desalination plant is still producing 14 million litres of water a day.

    Greens MP John Kaye says money is being wasted.

    “One month of desalination operation is about 1.1 million dollars at current rates,” he said.
    “That is 1.1 million dollars worth of water that will flow straight over the spillway and out into the Pacific Ocean.

    “It’s householders’ money that is being completely squandered.”

    The Warragamba Dam spilled last month, for the first time in 14 years.

    Topics:floods, richmond-2753

    First posted April 20, 2012 07:43:14

  • Germany’s careful toilet-flushing is a drop in the water-conservation ocean

    Germany’s careful toilet-flushing is a drop in the water-conservation ocean

    Germans are way ahead of Brits when it comes to saving water domestically. But politicians avoid the big issue: agricultural use

    • guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 April 2012 12.34 BST
    • Article history
      • Man in bath

      On average humans are responsible for 1.4m litres of water usage per year – that’s around 8,600 bathtubs. Photograph: Getty

      While Britain frets about the drought, Germany can’t get enough of saving water. Germans are good at saving water, so good in fact that they have created a problem for their canalisation system: many pipes are clogged with grease, excrement and leftovers because they aren’t being flushed sufficiently with water. Especially in the summer, gutters in German cities can reek horribly. In some parts of the country, water suppliers even have to flush their pipes artificially with hundreds of thousands of litres of water.

      We Germans have always been keen to be best in class when it comes to saving water. Our toilets have a special water-saver button for flushing after you have a wee, we switch off the tap when we brush our teeth, we try hard not to splash too much when we wash our cars. Last year Germany only used 124 litres of water per head per day – down from 144 litres in 1991. In Britain the current figure is 150 litres.

      That might be very impressive on Germany’s part, and shaming on Britain. But the real question is whether small gestures like that really make a difference. In the long run, the few drops you save when drinking, cooking, flushing or washing up are of little importance.

      It is products, not activities that waste most water. Making a a 200g bag of crisps uses 135 litres, a beefburger 2,400 and a steak 4,000. A cotton T-shirt gulps up 4,100 litres, a brand new car as much as 450,000.

      Of course you can argue with the details here – there are always slightly greener alternatives. But you can’t argue much with the so-called water footprint which shows how carelessly we treat Earth’s most valuable resource. On average, every person on this planet is responsible for an incredible 1.4m litres of water usage per year: that’s 8,600 bathtubs with 160 litres of water each. Ninety per cent of this is employed in agriculture: that’s where proper water-conservation needs to happen. But apparently politicians care little to do anything about it, be it in London, Berlin or Brussels.

      It’s quite possible that there will be more frequent drought warnings in the future. National governments will have to find ways of dealing with the problem. The first step might have to be a fight with the farmers, industrialists and lobbyists, and not just those on their doorstep.

      And there are plenty of proposals on the table that politicians should consider: be it a water tax, whereby those who used rivers to cool their factories will have to cough up, using agricultural subsidies as rewards for careful water usage, or a water limit across the industry. Instead, environment secretary Caroline Spelman seems to be focusing on telling ordinary people to have fewer baths.

      Her German counterparts, who pride themselves on their teacher’s-pet reputation, are no better in that respect, by the way. Angela Merkel may have listened to environmentalist concerns once she realised that popular opinion in Germany was against nuclear power. But she doesn’t look keen to boost her green credentials any further. It’s the same across the globe: politicians like giving people the feeling that they are doing something good for the environment when they turn off their taps. But sadly that’s not enough. In the long term, feel-good environmentalism won’t save the planet.

      • Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree

  • States and scientists oppose Murray plan

    States and scientists oppose Murray plan

    AAPUpdated April 13, 2012, 4:04 pm

    The Gillard government is facing stiff opposition from the states and scientists to a draft management plan for the Murray-Darling Basin.

    Three of the four basin states have rejected the plan, which aims to restore the health of the ailing river system by stripping 2750 gigalitres from irrigators and local communities and returning it to the environment.

    On Friday, NSW joined Victoria and South Australia in opposing the plan, saying it failed to take into consideration the triple bottom line of economic, social and environmental needs.

    Deputy Premier Andrew Stoner described the plan as an insult.

    “We’re not going to sign up to a plan that rips huge amounts of water out of our irrigation communities … and which has the potential to kill country towns,” Mr Stoner told reporters in Sydney on Friday.

    Earlier, Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu took aim at federal Water Minister Tony Burke for failing to include the states in negotiating the plan.

    “He’s got to actually bring the states along and bring the communities along with him, and I’m not sure that he’s done that,” Mr Baillieu told reporters in Canberra.

    Meanwhile, a coalition of 60 scientists from universities across Australia also slammed the plan.

    Wetlands expert Richard Kingsford said a major concern was a lack of transparency about reducing the proposed cut to water entitlements from between 3000 and 4000 gigalitres to 2750 gigalitres.

    Professor Kingsford also was troubled by the plan to boost groundwater extraction to as much as 2600 gigalitres annually.

    The Australian Greens jumped on the scientists’ comments, saying they were the strongest indication yet that the draft plan had failed to address the problems of the river system.

    The party called on Mr Burke to reject the proposed groundwater extractions, while requesting the Murray-Darling Basin Authority release modelling of 4000 gigalitres for environmental flows.

    Authority chairman Craig Knowles warned that diverting 4000 gigalitres to the environment could result in towns and homes being moved to avoid inundation.

    “It’s not the volume of water, it’s what you do with the water – it’s about how you manage it,” Mr Knowles said.

    Mr Burke called on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to make clear the coalition’s position on the draft plan.

    “Mr Abbott has been telling people who want less water for the environment not to worry because he won’t support a bad plan,” he said.

    “Then he tells those who want more water returned to the rivers to not worry because he’ll only support a good plan.”

    Mr Abbott said basin reform had been implemented by the coalition when it was in government.

    “I’m not sure that it has always been very well handled by the current government,” he told reporters in Canberra.

    He refrained from commenting on the draft plan before seeing what changes might be made by the authority.

    “Let’s see what they come up with, and then there will be a strong and sensible response from the coalition,” he said.

    A 20-week consultation period allowed by the authority ends on Monday.

  • Irrigators urge Murray barrages upgrade

    Irrigators urge Murray barrages upgrade

    By Will Rollo, ABC Rural

    Updated April 12, 2012 09:28:05

    Irrigators want barrages upgraded to fight salinity Photo: Irrigators want barrages upgraded to fight salinity (Alan Herath: user submitted, file photo)
    Related Story: Murray campaigners hope for water compromise
    Related Story: Scientists find groundwater ‘flaw’ in Murray plan
    Related Story: Knowles chips SA over Murray plan reticence
    Related Story: Save Murray levy goes for some
    Related Story: Report puts value on Murray-Darling draft
    Related Story: Acidic drought scars easing along Murray
    Related Story: Weatherill says review rejects Murray water plan
    Map: Goolwa 5214

    Irrigators are calling on the South Australian Government and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to upgrade barrages at the lower lakes, near the Murray mouth.

    The barrages were built stop salt water from the Southern Ocean spilling into the Murray.

    Recent stormy weather has pushed salt water into Lake Alexandrina, because the barrages were not closed in time.

    Colin Grundy, the last irrigator on the Murray at Mundoo Island, wants all the gates on the barrages automated.

    “[I want] to stop the sea coming back in and putting salt water back into the lakes, which is lifting the EC (electrical conductivity) level of the lakes,” he said.

    “They (gates) need to be automated because if you could just push a button they’ll shut, or if they do it automatically with salinity meters and level meters, they can do it automatically by themselves, which would even be better.”

    Audio: Push to upgrade Murray barrages(ABC News)

     

    Topics:salinity, murray-darling-basin, rivers, environment, water-supply, water, water-management, irrigation, rural, goolwa-5214, renmark-5341, adelaide-5000, sa

    First posted April 12, 2012 09:20:46

  • ATMOSPHERIC WATER GENERATOR (REPEATED)

    Atmospheric water generator

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    An Atmospheric water generator (AWG), is a device that extracts water from humid ambient air. An AWG operates in a manner very similar to that of a refrigerated dehumidifier: air is passed over a cooled coil, causing water to condense. The rate of water production depends on the humidity, the volume of air passing over the coil, and the machine’s capacity to cool the coil.

    The device is very useful for locations where pure drinking water is difficult to obtain or impossible to have, as there is always water in the air. NB (Can be powered by solar or wind power)

     

     

    Variations of this device have been used by the US Army to provide fresh drinking water for troops because of of the cost of flying fresh water in. They were usually mounted on trailers and powered by diesel fuel.

     

     

    Collecting water from the air has been a practice for some 2,000 years, in the form of “air wells” in Middle Eastern deserts, and later in Europe. Around the 1400s, we see water-collecting Dew Ponds, and later the Fog Fences, which have for hundreds of years have been used in Europe to collect clean water from the air. In the early 1970s, Melvin Littrell began producing water from the air with a system that did not need a compressor. Through this development, the creation of the first real Atmospheric Water Generator was produced. In 1990, Littrell patented the system’s technology as an AWG or atmospheric water generator.

    They are available in various sizes and styles, ranging from domestic systems that produce 32 oz. a day to all-electronic units producing 75 liters per day with compressors, and finally to commercial applications that can produce from 35,000 to 109,000 gallons of water each day.

    [edit] Principle of operation

    The principle of operation remains similar for most manufacturers except the WPG. The AWG is essentially a conventional dehumidifier that condenses water from air. A compressor circulates refrigerant through a coil or chiller array. A controlled-speed fan pushes air over the water reaction area and condenses the water. This water is then passed into a holding tank.

    The rate at which water can be produced depends on relative humidity and ambient air temperature and altitude. Relative humidity is the amount of water vapor present in the air at a given temperature at a given time. AWGs become more effective as relative humidity and air temperature increase. As a rule of thumb, AWGs do not work efficiently when the temperature falls below (35°F), the relative humidity drops below 40%, or at high altitudes (above 4000 feet). If the ambient air has passed through an air conditioner, much of the water vapor has already been removed. In the winter, with a heater on, most of the humidity is lost, leaving little for the AWG to produce.

    [edit] Optional AWG features

    AWG features vary depending on the manufacturer. In order to meet stringent FDA standards and NSF, most systems are coupled to one or more advanced filter systems (including an UV light chamber) before being stored in stainless-steel holding tanks. A list of optional features typically found in AWG systems would include:

    • An air filter to help prevent dirt from accumulating on the surface of the coil
    • An automatic level switch placed in the generator’s holding tank to shut the machine off when the tank is full
    • Hot and cold stainless-steel storage tanks that allow water to be served heated or chilled
    • The so-called “split system” is a two-part system. Designed by Prof. James D. Vagarasoto in 1991, the two-part system allows the user to place the generator in a location of high humidity and serve as a tabletop unit that dispenses hot or cold water. These systems eliminate the adverse effects of most older-style atmospheric water generators, as they heat the area where the generator is placed. In the summer, air conditioning system remove most of the humidity, so the conventional AWGs don’t work very well because they are humidity-driven.

     

    Last Updated ( Thursday, 11 June 2009 12:20 )

  • Scientists find groundwater ‘flaw’ in Murray plan

    Source ABC NEWS

    Scientists find groundwater ‘flaw’ in Murray plan

    Updated April 05, 2012 09:17:59

    Scientists warn irrigators will not get their supply Photo: Scientists warn downstream irrigators will not get their supply (Landline)
    Related Story: Acidic drought scars easing along Murray
    Related Story: Report puts value on Murray-Darling draft
    Map: SA

    The Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists says it has found more flaws in the Murray-Darling Basin draft plan.

    It has made a detailed analysis of the plan’s increased use of groundwater and says extracting an extra 2,600 gigalitres from the ground almost cancels out what will be put back into the river system as surface water.

    Environmental engineer Tim Stubbs said that would be bad news for South Australia in particular on the Murray’s lower reaches.

    “That’s water that will no longer be there to move through the ground and actually provide the base flow or the flow in dry times, through the rivers and the creeks,” he said.

    “If you’re an irrigator or the environment or anyone that relies on that downstream flow, if it’s taken before it reaches you then your not going to see it.

    “There’s a good chance you’ll see the reliability of your entire entitlement grossly eroded away as this water’s taken out of the system upstream.”

    Topics:murray-darling-basin, rivers, water-supply, water-management, water, environment, federal—state-issues, irrigation, rural, research-organisations, research, activism-and-lobbying, government-and-politics, sa, adelaide-5000, goolwa-5214, renmark-5341, australia

    First posted April 05, 2012 08:41:40