COM: Port Stanvac Desalination Plant | 100gL | $1.8b

[Cruise]

wow, you got your finger on the pulse!!!

[skyliner]

As I said on my last post on this thread, there had to be some truth in the original document that was posted. I believe also inferring to wait and see. Well, here it is, the desal plant is to go ahead. Good insurance for SA. Also a growing Adelaide needs it - the demand will increase. Doubling Mt Bold also a top idea. Now let's hope it all happens.

Rhino indicated (on this thread) that he could not understand why QLD did not bring the water down from the north to SE QLD. Unfeasable and would take too long. With Brisbane facing serious trouble,shorter term and less expensive solutions were needed. Watching all the carry on here in Brisbane has opened my eyes to priorities and getting on with the job at hand.

BTW - top work Duke!

ADELAIDE - DON'T KNOCK IT!

[crawf]

Great News, knew the media release would include a desalination plant

[Bulldozer]

So the lying rat bastard finally crawled out of his hole!

Too little, too late. The lying that we have heard from Rann and Maywald over the last couple of weeks is disgusting and blatant.

Maywald: You have to use buckets because you can't be trusted with drippers.
Rann: John Howard made us ban outdoor watering.

If they have even a shred of decency they would resign.

[UrbanSG]

Although I agree something has to happen in regards to water infrastructure I am just wondering how we are going to afford this. There are already a huge amout of projects proposed and under construction costing billions. Where does this spare $2billion + come from? Debt financed? Not sure how much Federal money will be contributed. I thought the State Budget was already maxed out?

[Bulldozer]

Although I agree something has to happen in regards to water infrastructure I am just wondering how we are going to afford this. There are already a huge amout of projects proposed and under construction costing billions. Where does this spare $2billion + come from? Debt financed? Not sure how much Federal money will be contributed. I thought the State Budget was already maxed out?

It comes from the $300 million profit that SA Water makes every year. Guess Foley's going to have to find something else to make up for the shortfall in general revenue. I suspect the figures quoted are severly overstated as well. Perth's plant was less than half a billion if I remember correctly.

Of course though, Rann was saving this as an election stunt so he could drop it on the Liberals and have his mate Rudd ride in to save the day. Hence why they say they're not going to make a decision for some weeks yet.

[stelaras]

[
It comes from the $300 million profit that SA Water makes every year. Guess Foley's going to have to find something else to make up for the shortfall in general revenue. I suspect the figures quoted are severly overstated as well. Perth's plant was less than half a billion if I remember correctly.

Of course though, Rann was saving this as an election stunt so he could drop it on the Liberals and have his mate Rudd ride in to save the day. Hence why they say they're not going to make a decision for some weeks yet.

The cost of water will rise in anticipation of the DeSal plant. The rise in water which i would guess will come into effect once the announcment is signed off on will start immediately. SA Water will contribute a fair bit to this as will the Federal Government.

The cost of the plant itself will vary as to where it is built, how the brine will be dealt with (pumped to sea, pumped to salt pans, etc etc) but hte biggest cost will be where the power is to come from. Other than Pelican Point and Port Stanvac, any other location will need its own power station to operate it. The SA power load is always skewed in favor of residential power (thats why we have power outages) so if the plan is to connect to the existing grid, then the requirements of infrastructure builds to support this are factored into the price.

Im not sure how the government is thinking, but if they want to double the size from 50GL to 100GL sometime into the future, then the only option would be to build a power station close to the site.

WA has a better "Grid" so to speak, so the power (baring any renewable energy source that may be considered) is already there to connect the DeSal.

[rhino]

A dedicated power source close to the desalination plant would have to be the preferred option wouldn't it? If it's a renewable source, such as using current flow through Backstairs Passage to turn turbines, then so much the better.

[UrbanSG]

Still that $300 million is already spent everywhere else but water! I still don't see where the money will come from without cancelling or scaling back other projects or going into substantial debt.

[Norman]

I hope the DeSal plant will be powered by renewable sources, like Wind or Solar.

[crawf]

Remember guys that two new power stations are going to be built north of Adelaide

[skyliner]

Concerning funding questions for the desal/Mt Bold plan - it's funny how QLD is spending $9bn on water and SA is going on about $1.5Bn. SE QLD population may be closing on double the Adelaide population but in SA terms that puts water spending at proportionately $3bn - yet they are spending $9bn. Likewise, they are spending $82bn on infrastructure - much of it coming federally - I can't see how the federal gov't can hold out on assistance with Adelaide. I recall Howards $10bn water plan for the Murray outlined in the couple of months - surely assisting Adelaide with the desal would constitute a logical implememtation of part of the $10bn to save the Murray.

ADELAIDE - SENSATIONAL!

[Bulldozer]

The BHP plant will have a 700MWe (I think) gas turbine generator built with it as they're going to need a helluva lot more power for ODX and Olympic Dam is aleady the state's largest consumer of electricity!

Rounding up to 5kWh/kL (I read the other day that the latest RO plants in Israel and Singapore do it with 4.2kWh/kL) and assuming 100% availability of a 50GL/pa plant, we're looking at a load of around 30MW if my calculations are right. That's a drop in the ocean (har har) and transmission of power will be a non-issue.

Edit: Found a couple of pages with some details of the Perth plant. I'm guessing that the proposed plant for Adelaide would be similar. I think the most interesting details are the intake and outfall specs.

http://www.water-technology.net/projects/perth/
http://www.water-technology.net/project ... specs.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=11134967

[crawf]

Concerning funding questions for the desal/Mt Bold plan - it's funny how QLD is spending $9bn on water and SA is going on about $1.5Bn. SE QLD population may be closing on double the Adelaide population but in SA terms that puts water spending at proportionately $3bn - yet they are spending $9bn. Likewise, they are spending $82bn on infrastructure - much of it coming federally - I can't see how the federal gov't can hold out on assistance with Adelaide. I recall Howards $10bn water plan for the Murray outlined in the couple of months - surely assisting Adelaide with the desal would constitute a logical implememtation of part of the $10bn to save the Murray.

ADELAIDE - SENSATIONAL!

SA is going to spend over $2.5bn on water

[rhino]

Well, Mike Rann is rather adamant that the desalination plant will not be powered by nuclear energy.

CRAIG BILDSTIEN, CITY EDITOR
September 13, 2007 02:15am

THE State Government has been urged to run its proposed Adelaide desalination plant on nuclear power.
International expert Professor Leslie Kemeny said nuclear power plants were "uniquely suited" to seawater desalination.
"If South Australia wants a plant with minimum greenhouse gas emissions, you should eventually go nuclear," he said.
"It is the answer to desalination."
Professor Kemeny, a founding member of the International Nuclear Energy Academy and former consultant to resource giants Western Mining and Hamersley Iron, was yesterday one of three speakers at an Adelaide nuclear energy forum sponsored by the Property Council.
Council executive director Nathan Paine attacked Premier Mike Rann for "refusing numerous requests" to explain why he had ruled out nuclear power in SA.
Opposition Leader Martin Hamilton-Smith addressed the forum, as did the chairman of the Federal Government's 2006 Review of Uranium Mining, Processing and Nuclear Energy, Dr Ziggy Switkowski, and international anti-nuclear campaigner Dr Helen Caldicott.
Dr Switkowski said the nuclear power debate would "go on the backburner" for a long time if Labor won the next federal election.
He said a Rudd Government would stifle the debate, even though he said Australia had to consider the nuclear option if it wanted to "decarbonise" the economy, yet still improve living standards.
This was despite the fact national demand for energy would double by 2050, as would greenhouse emissions at a time when more and more countries around the world were introducing nuclear power.
Thirty-one countries now operate 443 nuclear reactors, generating 15 per cent of global electricity needs.
Mr Rann yesterday stood by his refusal to consider nuclear power. "We've already ruled out nuclear power for South Australia," he said. "It would massively increase the cost. It's the last thing we need."