What should the water level be at this time of the year in Eucumbene Dam? 30%, 50%, 100% or empty?

I believe that the Wentworth group have suggested unless the dam levels are not reduced then major flooding in SA will occur after this winter rains and snow fall melt.

My question is did any releases have any affect on previous flooded areas downstream - if not then what is the problem?
As it takes weeks if not months to get downstream, Blowering to Wagga could take 15 days.

Blowering dam should be much lower at this time of the year, there is no buffer at all for winter storage and any rain is causing overflows and how safe are the dams?
It has been suggested that not very and there are concerns being voiced - Tumut has 8 minutes to evacuate.

It must be very difficult to manage water systems when there is conflicting interests - saving water for future usage and buffering against possible flooding.
One thing is certain that it will never be right.

Data for Murrumbidgee is at
http://www.mirrigation.com.au/
And the Snowies
http://www.snowyhydro.com.au/lakeLevels.asp?pageID=47&parentID=6

PeterA,

Snowy Hydro was designed so it could potentially relieve flooding and store water during the type of flood event that occurred early December.

But instead of setting the tunnels so water was transferred east to Lake Eucumbene, the water managers set the trans-mountain tunnels so water was flowing at over 80 cubic metres per second towards the already swollen Murray and Murrumbidgee catchments... for nonessential electricity generation.

On the Wednesday in question, the operational plan shows 6,912 megalitres was released from Lake Eucumbene and power stations set for electricity generation

[Deleted for abuse.]

Ho Hum
"propaganda hack for the IPA" Dear! Dear! Are you so unsure of your own arguments that you need to fling dirt around in the hope that something will stick?

Come now, surely you can think of something relevent to the actual argument. The point about the Snowy Cop maximising its own profits had promise - now you need to find something to back with with, or suggest a solution..

Graham as per my email to you, I request that the above comment be deleted:

"After all you are a propaganda hack for the IPA which recommends that all government activities should be privatized, and that corporations should be essentially free to maximize their profits"

I am not, and have never been, a propaganda hack for the IPA.

And I'm not, and never have been a conservative or advocate for free markets. I'm a utilitarian libertarian.

I didn,t think that those dam levels ever changed, excess water goes straight through, and on to the murray after the Hume dam was full. There's hydro power at the hume to. Other than that the hydro water is recirculated back to the higher dams at night. last year the murray commission was calling for water from the snowy system to make up water for the murray.

Jennifer, what makes you think that hydro electricity is non-essential? Snowy Hydro was only able to sell the electricity because the National Electricity Market deemed it WAS required. Sure it may have been possible to replace the clean hydro electricity with electricity from fossil-fuel power stations but that adds to our burgeoning greenhouse gas problem. What is more important? Storing water for a future (non-) rainy day or saving the planet?

The style of hydro 'management' revealed in the article beggars belief!

Surely at a time when environmental flows in the form of floods were already occurring naturally in the Murray, Murrumbidgee, and Darling river systems, and Lake Eucumbene at the top of the system was only around 30% full, the thing to do would have been to deploy available NSW off-peak thermal generation capacity into the night time pumping of water BACK uphill from Talbingo, upstream from Blowering, to Eucumbene. As I understand it, much of this NSW off-peak thermal capacity otherwise goes unsold.

As I have always understood it, there was always intended to have been a pumped-storage capability built into the Snowy scheme. Why isn't it in use?

Snowy Hydro Corporation would not in the end have been out of pocket. It would still have been able later to generate hydro electricity to meet peak demands at premium prices whenever it eventually did release the conserved water for whatever purpose, into the Talbingo and, downstream, Blowering, dams.

The article does raise the same question as to the conflict of interest between water conservation and electricity generation on the one hand, and provision for flood mitigation on the other, as was starkly revealed in the effectively legislatively forced mis-management of the Wivenhoe dam that seemingly converted an otherwise minor flood into a major one for Brisbane.

For heaven's sake, all generating entities are government corporations. What sort of abdication of responsibility by governments stops them from all being on the one page in a matter like this?




It is worth remarking somewhat tangentially to this article, upon the importance and public service rendered by blogs like Jennifer's in getting these sorts of apparent scandals out into the open. Viewers should be made aware that Jennifer's blog, together with OLO itself, as a participant in 'The Domain' internet advertising package brokered by OLO, is one of the victims of a campaign aimed at depriving such sites of advertising revenue.

Viewers can read more about that here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11583&page=0

What a tragedy that vilification of Jennifer Marohasy takes the place of a rational discussion.
For old people such as myself it is easy to remember the reason for the Snowy Hydro scheme. As she says it was for flood relief as well as electricty generation.
However, like most factors of life outside capital cities, the Green (Party as well as NGO's) philosophies have taken precedence over sensible cautious management.
Here in Victoria we have well over two million hectares of burnt out bush because Senator Bob Brown and his misguided clan refuse to recognise the value of cool or planned or prescribed burning in autumn and spring.
Across the world, misguided individuals insist that humans are altering climate across the globe. More Green rubbish, based upon the success of Lysenkoism in Josef Stalins era.

Forrest there is a pumped hydro facility in the Snowy scheme but it’s at Tumut 3. It can have no impact on Lake Eucumbene of course which is some 900 m higher. Your suggestion of a new pumped hydro facility from Blowering to Eucumbene could have merit but best of luck convincing the Greens.

Commercial in confidence.

GET IT!

You dumb clucks.

CEO
Snowy Hydro

This mischievous rubbish has already been debunked on Jennifer's own blog. Additionally both Snowy Hydro and the NSW Office of Water have shot this down.

Jennifer has cited no evidence that water was released from the Snowy Scheme into flooded areas, let alone that it exacerbated flood impacts.

All Jennifer can demonstrate is that water has been transferred out of Eucumbene Reservoir - several steps removed from releasing water into a flooded Tumut River.

Jennifer, please quit spreading this unproven, malicious slur.

I take particular notice of river levels, and there has been no untoward flows into the murray river. All water flows can be accounted for, and seen coming for a considerable time before it reaches the murray system.
The two major reservoirs feeding the murray are well looked after and regulated.

Lies, Damned Lies:

we won't reveal details Commercial in Confidence lies