News 
 State News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 Services 
 Vic water pipeline plan 'fundamentally flawed' 

Vic water pipeline plan 'fundamentally flawed'

08 Jun, 2009 04:37 PM
NEW evidence of the dire health of Victoria's irrigation district has cast fresh doubt over whether the controversial north-south pipeline from the Goulburn Valley will deliver as much water to Melbourne as promised.

The Victorian Government expects to save 225 billion litres a year, later increasing to 425 billion litres, by reducing losses from the food-bowl irrigation system in the state's north.

But preliminary estimates for 2008-09 from Goulburn-Murray Water indicate that only 343 billion litres will be lost this year — a record low reflecting impoverished flows through the leaking irrigation channels.

Critics said the continual decline in water losses raised serious questions about whether enough could be saved for the Government to pipe 75 billion litres annually to Melbourne.

Only a fraction of water lost to seepage and evaporation each year is expected to be recovered under the Government's Foodbowl Modernisation Project.

The first-stage plan to save 225 billion litres and share it among the farmers, rivers and Melbourne assumed losses would continue to average about 900 billion litres a year, as they had for the past century.

Losses have been less during the past decade's drought, averaging 690 billion litres.

Just six months ago, Premier John Brumby predicted losses would be about 500 billion litres this year.

Ken Pattison, a member of the Plug the Pipe campaign opposing the pipeline and a former director of Goulburn-Murray Water, said it was a "physical impossibility" to make the savings the Government had promised.

"The assumptions they based the project on are proving to be fundamentally flawed," he said.

"It is always going to be mostly an open channel irrigation system, and there will be these fixed losses where nothing can be done to save them."

The manager for Environment Victoria's healthy rivers campaigns, Juliet Le Feuvre, said it is unlikely the Government could fulfil its promise for Melbourne's supply if worst-case climate change predictions were to be fulfilled.

"Modernising the irrigation system is obviously a good idea, but savings should go back into river systems," she said.

The dwindling water savings possibilities reflect a huge drop in the amount of water supplied to farmers and communities by Goulburn-Murray Water.

It estimates it delivered only 578 billion litres this year — less than a third of the average of the past 15 years.

At times Goulburn-Murray Water did not run up to 30 per cent of the 6300 kilometres of irrigation channels under its control.

The north-south pipeline is planned to take water from the Goulburn River near Yea, over the Great Dividing Range and into Melbourne storages.

Government spokeswoman Lidija Ivanovski yesterday expressed confidence that Melbourne would get its promised share of water once the first stage of the foodbowl project was finished in 2012.

"This $2 billion investment by state and federal governments, Melbourne water users and farmers is a vote of confidence in the future of irrigated agriculture during a period of climate change and drought," she said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Water thieves never prosper.
Posted by cynic, 8/06/2009 12:52:29 PM
This pipeline will provide enormous benefit to Victoria as a new tourist attraction. We will have the largest and most expensive wombat tunnel in the world, allowing our furry little friends to commute between Yea and Sugarloaf with no fear of ever getting their feet wet!
Posted by Y.G. Mystic, 9/06/2009 9:58:25 AM
Am I correct in assuming that somewhere this pipe will have to go over higher ground e.g somewhere along the pipeline will be a higher elevation than either the inlet or outlet? If this is so, then the pipe will have to be filled to enable water to be pumped out into Sugarloaf. Has anyone taken the trouble to estimate how many megalitres of water is needed just to fill this pipe before any water is delivered to the reservoir?
Posted by richo, 9/06/2009 8:31:18 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
03 June, 2009
01 June, 2009
POLL
Q: Should the Senate reject the federal Government's proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) legislation?

Yes, reject it: the Senate should vote against the legislation passed last week by the House of Representatives.
(62.7%)

No, vote for it: the legislation should be passed by the Senate.
(11.6%)

Postpone it: Senate should wait till after Copenhagen Summit.
(25.7%)

Total Votes: 723
Poll Date: 08 June, 2009

Most popular articles

ELDERS NEWS MREC FW



 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...