Individual,
There is a big word once put to me at KPMG. "Contemporaneously" is the word. It means all at once at the same time.

Evidence indicates need for ocean ecosystem water management the need is critically urgent.
Therefore water harvesting and aqueduct south, as being discussed here, should all be developed together at once during say a 2 to 3 year period.
e.g start at both ends and in the middle and in between at the same time with different contractors and work crews. It can be done.

It must be done because there is also need to stimulate pockets and purses and the economy.
Such stimulation can not be done if people earn money slowly over a 10 year period. If they can earn 10 years of salary in 7 years they are better off because the cost of living total is less.

So lets say construction can be really sped up by contemporaneous works with crews working 12 hour days with a salary to also entice hard work - get it done on time contracting and construction.

There could be a lot of quick bucks from construction and from politicians buying up land where water will be known to be available.

I think benefits from watered food and fibre production could go on forever.

This planet is getting very populated by humans and already there are AFFORDABLE food supply sustainability problems.

As for tunnelling I think that could occur to send some of the water through/under the Great Dividing Range to top up coastal rivers where and when needed, if possible.

Such water harvesting aqueduct would need to almost follow the western side of the range.

I don't think people can be forced to move inland. But be sure many would go farming and trading and exporting.

Natural aquatic/marine life could come back to the Coorong.

"Contemporaneously"
JF Aus,
Well, that word encapsulates all that is so wrong in modern society. It totally ignores forward planning which of course means that no possible future problems are given consideration, hence the mess we're in now.

Individual,
I agree however I think most of that mess is happening in the same period of time but not on the same project. Without the same focus.
Different government agencies presently have to compete with each other for scarce resources.
Individuals often have self interest.
Ego and jealousy are also very destructive.
There is need for teamwork with the same goal.

There is need for teamwork with the same goal.
JF Aus,
A non-military national service of two years for everyone a few days after their 19th birthday will ensure this mentality snowballs.

From poverty to pipelines, I guess there is some connection?
That said, the Bradfield scheme has been unearthed and rejected several times, as prohibitively expensive. However, a viable alternative that might move as much water to the south and west; might be to build a dam, and then use gravity, to inject surplus northern water into the Great Artisan Basin, via a much more affordable, much shorter pipeline.
Given the Basin goes from far northern Queensland, to northern SA; a project like that, could distribute reliable water over the length and breadth of a vast arid area.
If the agricultural projects were under-glass or relied exclusively on underground applications, huge food or bio-fuel production increases could be envisaged, and well worth any reasonable outlay!
Rhrosty.

Rhosty,

Using the artesian basin is a good idea if it would work. It's already a virtual aqueduct but it's covered with sand and stones. So water runs through from one end to the other but slowly in order to seep through. Then it would have to be pumped and lifted up and out.

There are some good photos of big aqueduct overseas but I can't post them up on this site.
Cost of aqueduct here would have to be linked to ocean and water ecosystem management infrastructure.
All water ends up in the ocean and it should go back in a healthy condition without sewage nutrient overload - pollution dumped in it.

I think the big future for bio fuel is to feed algae with sewage nutrients from cities and big towns instead of dumping it in rivers and ocean.

Campbell Newman inspected an algae biofuel plant yesterday but they are not using sewage nutrients to my knowledge. Besides Qld is way behind development because algae is already being used for fuel overseas. However Qld may end up a winner with a more viable system.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/algae-blooms-as-a-future-fuel-20130409-2hj6o.html

Put it this way. There is more new business and employment and export potential is a big and sustainable water supply project that there is in another $30 billion NBN.