Sensational-Adelaide.com

Actually Aidan, our reservoirs are at less than half of capacity, 46% according to SA Water and they have been lower than usual for the past 2 years or so. The last 6 months in Adelaide have been the 2nd driest on record is and reality is that if we dont get decent rainfall soon, we will need the desalinated water. So stop making things up, you and the Liberals need to stfu and stop complaining and face facts. The desalination plant needs to be turned on now, even at quarter capacity or so, to safeguard our water supplies just in case the situation gets worse.

Waewick wrote:

Aidan wrote:

Waewick wrote: both sides of politics are screwing this up.

Really? I'm no fan of the Liberals, but a slightly exaggerated statement of a valid point does not amount to screwing this up.

turn it on and leave it on.

That would be a waste of electricity. We don't need to resort to desalination when there's plenty of water in our reservoirs.

it is all about the states opinion on it. right now the Liberals are stigmatising the plant rather than pointing out that it is a required piece of infrastructure.

Stigmatising it??? All they seem to be doing is pointing out the folly of building it to full capacity to begin with, rather an the more sensible option of building full capacity pipes (so that it could easily be upgraded) but half capacity RO infrastructure.

sure, Labor stuffed everything else up, but now we have it, turn it on and leave it running and stop taking water from the Murray.

The point is we don't currently need to turn it on and leave it running in order to stop taking water from the Murray.

In regards to electricity, now we know that wind farms have no health impact - build a few more

We can't assume that wind farms always have no health impact. But we should build more anyway. However, until our power generation mix is such that we would be unable to reduce fossil fuel use by turning the desalination plant off, we shouldn't leave it running when it's not needed.

[Shuz] wrote:Actually Aidan, our reservoirs are at less than half of capacity, 46% according to SA Water and they have been lower than usual for the past 2 years or so. The last 6 months in Adelaide have been the 2nd driest on record is and reality is that if we dont get decent rainfall soon, we will need the desalinated water. So stop making things up, you and the Liberals need to stfu and stop complaining and face facts. The desalination plant needs to be turned on now, even at quarter capacity or so, to safeguard our water supplies just in case the situation gets worse.

It has indeed been a very dry summer and we haven't been taking water from the Murray, so the lower than usual reservoir levels are unsurprising - but Myponga, which isn't Murray fed, is 80% full. It's raining here today, and there's likely to be a lot more rain through winter. Labor and SA Water concur the plant is on track to be mothballed, so I see no reason to disbelieve it. When we need more water we can turn it back on, but right now we don't.

Aidan wrote:

Waewick wrote:

Waewick wrote:A to Labor for old news.

Really? I'm no fan of the Liberals, but a slightly exaggerated statement of a valid point does not amount to screwing this up.

it is all about the states opinion on it. right now the Liberals are stigmatising the plant rather than pointing out that it is a required piece of infrastructure.

Stigmatising it??? All they seem to be doing is pointing out the folly of building it to full capacity to begin with, rather an the more sensible option of building full capacity pipes (so that it could easily be upgraded) but half capacity RO infrastructure.

The point is we don't currently need to turn it on and leave it running in order to stop taking water from the Murray.

I'm not even going to bother about trying to break down a multi quote quote

but sure, we can talk about the folly of building it, rather than spending the money on upgrading water infrastructure to minimise wastage, but that is a forgone conclusion.

From what I understand, the cost between mothballing it, and keeping it running are negligible, but I would love to see the facts.

but still, we have built it, so use it, get the community to adjust to the change and move forward - what you are proposing is like building a one way freeway....

and as for Wind farms, unless humans grow wings and develop an insatiable desire to fly into turning propellers, Wind Farms are safe - every credible report backs that up - they aren't going to all of a sudden turn deadly.

Myponga is one dam out of about 20 or so that support the entire Adelaide water network. Get a grip.

[Shuz] wrote:Myponga is one dam out of about 20 or so that support the entire Adelaide water network. Get a grip.

Out of 10 actually, but you miss my point: despite the low rainfall we had, the reason our reservoir levels are so far below capacity is that we haven't been taking water from the Murray. And reservoir capacity is big - we're not in imminent danger of running out of water if the desal plant is turned off!

Just curious, after reading through this discussion, what is actually involved in 'turning it on when time comes'? Is it as simple as turning it on and it starts to produce clean water, or does it take several months (cleaning, permissions etc)

Waewick wrote: I'm not even going to bother about trying to break down a multi quote quote

but sure, we can talk about the folly of building it, rather than spending the money on upgrading water infrastructure to minimise wastage, but that is a forgone conclusion.

From what I understand, the cost between mothballing it, and keeping it running are negligible, but I would love to see the facts.

That may be true lf the financial cost (because of the contracts we're locked into) but it certsinly isn't true of the environmental cost.

but still, we have built it, so use it, get the community to adjust to the change and move forward - what you are proposing is like building a one way freeway....

NO IT IS NOT!

I presume (since you're repeating something a state Labor minister said earlier this week) that rather than what I'm proposing, you mean what I say should have been done. But that's quite unlike a one way freeway, for two reasons: firstly, freeways are as much about connectivity as they are about capacity. The Southern Expressway makes journeys such as Hallett Cove to Willunga a lot faster and shorter as well, bu tthe benefits are unavailable to those going in the wrong direction. The desalination equivalent of that would be to build the plant but fail to upgrade the reticulation system so that many people would be denied the benefits.

The second reason it's unlike our one way freeway is that when it was built, we failed to install the extra bridges needed to upgrade it to two way. There was never any suggestion of not building the pipe capacity into the desalination plant from the start.

The expressway comparison was a soundbite designed to shift the blame and remind the public that the Libs' track record is even worse than Labor's. As a soundbite it works well; as an argument it doesn't.

And if I'm wrong in my presumption and you really are criticising turning it off when it's not needed (even though SA Water and both sides of politics are proposing the same), I really can't see any resemblance whatsoever to a one way expressway. Its more like turning the lights off when it's not dark!

and as for Wind farms, unless humans grow wings and develop an insatiable desire to fly into turning propellers, Wind Farms are safe - every credible report backs that up - they aren't going to all of a sudden turn deadly.

I didn't say they were deadly. But there's no proof that the noise and vibration they produce never has health effects, and I regard that as a claim so extraordinary that it demands extraordinary proof.

you are right, I am criticising turning it off, simply because I believe it is needed and a better alternative than pulling water from the Murray.

I don't know the environmental impact of desalination plant, I assume they knew that before they started, I do know the environmental impact of pulling water from the Murray and that isn't great.

Just curious, do all you experts here actually pay for water?

Aidan wrote:I didn't say they were deadly. But there's no proof that the noise and vibration they produce never has health effects, and I regard that as a claim so extraordinary that it demands extraordinary proof.

Have you read the past two year's of reports into this? There are no negative health effects from noise and vibration. It has been conclusively investigated and shown to be so.

monotonehell wrote:Have you read the past two year's of reports into this? There are no negative health effects from noise and vibration. It has been conclusively investigated and shown to be so.

Mild Querulent Paranoia (or idée fixe) is a mental condition that can trigger real health effects. The catalyst being nearby wind farms (or anything else you don't want in your neighbourhood) coupled with nutter activists. Dr Wayno.

monotonehell wrote:

Aidan wrote:I didn't say they were deadly. But there's no proof that the noise and vibration they produce never has health effects, and I regard that as a claim so extraordinary that it demands extraordinary proof.

Have you read the past two year's of reports into this? There are no negative health effects from noise and vibration. It has been conclusively investigated and shown to be so.

No, i haven't read the past two years of reports into this - I'm an engineer not a doctor. I have read enough about it to know that epidemiological studies have not found a link, and that there is strong nocebo effect. But attributing it all to that seems rather lazy from an engineering viewpoint.

Contrary to what you say, noise and vibration can have health effects. I wouldn't want to live under the path of many low flying aircraft, and I'd be wary of living too near a busy road. Wind turbines have two additional factors that could exacerbate the situation: firstly persistence, because most of them are constantly on. Secondly in some (probably rare) cases they cause buildings to resonate, greatly amplifying the effect. And unlike traffic noise, the sound produced doesn't vary much, so when resonance occurs it's a very big problem (unlike traffic noise where the occasional vehicle causes resonance but soon passes, and most vehicles don't have that effect).

Hooligan wrote:Just curious, do all you experts here actually pay for water?

yep, my water bill is just fraction of my bloody sewage charge which has gone up more then my water bill.

Waewick wrote:you are right, I am criticising turning it off, simply because I believe it is needed and a better alternative than pulling water from the Murray.

Why do you believe it is needed even though the government, the opposition and SA Water say it isn't? Our reservoirs are nearly half full, we're just entering the wet season, and the fact that we've got a desalination plant which we can use on demand means that we dont have to hold so much water in reserve. At the moment we neither need to take water from the Murray nor desalinate it to supply Adelaide.

I don't know the environmental impact of desalination plant, I assume they knew that before they started, I do know the environmental impact of pulling water from the Murray and that isn't great.

The environmental impact of pulling water from the Murray depends on how much watrr is in the Murray to begin with. If there are big floods in NSW, for example, pulling water is the most sensible course of action if there's not enough water to fill our reservoirs locally.