Actually Bazz, this is where solar pumps could be of great benefit.
We have many places throughout Australia where copious amounts of pure clean water are running out to the ocean. By use of solar pumps we could capture some of this water and pump it to usable places. The Intermittent nature of solar (or even wind) is not a problem in this application. Sure we'd have to do the numbers, but I reckon the way we're going it might become essential. I never understood why we are building desalination plants that require their own coal fired power station when we could be sucking water from somewhere else for next to nothing. It kind of shows that the new globull religion of money is king!

Oh pelican, you have hit the nail right on the head with that one.

I wonder how long it will take humans to figure it out.

Logic dictates there is a point of overconsumption that works directly against the welfare of human beings and the environment on which they depend.

Oh Dear, Oh dear, Oh dear.

Its only a matter of time.

Brave new idea,s are needed quickly and with-in the next 50 years if possible.

TTM

<<It is because economists, in the main, are indoctrinated into the myth of eternal expansion and growth as the only way to maintain and structure economies. Posted by pelican, Monday, 27 September 2010 10:38:00 AM>>

I disagree. To have a sensible discussion we need to distinguish growth in output in absolute terms and growth in output in per capita terms (i.e. productivity). A classical prediction of economic growth theory is that higher population growth will reduce per capita output and real wages. On the other hand more recent arguments (Cordon) relate population growth to productivity gains to be had through an expanding domestic market. These gains are mainly relevant for non-traded goods (which do not have an international market to reap the benefits of scale economies) .

The Productivity Commission in its 2006 in a report entitled “Economic Impacts of Migration and Population Growth” concluded (in part) that it is "unlikely that migration will have a substantial impact on income per capita and productivity", arguing

<<Some effects of migration are more amenable to measurement and estimation than others. Effects that cannot be reliably measured or estimated might still be significant.
• Positive effects from additional skilled migrants arise from higher participation rates, slightly higher hours worked per worker and the up-skilling of the workforce.
• Some of the economy-wide consequences lower per capita income, such as capital dilution and a decline in the terms of trade.
• The overall economic effect of migration appears to be positive but small, consistent with previous Australian and overseas studies.>>

For full report see http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/9438/migrationandpopulation.pdf,
Particularly chapter 3.

One aspect the report does not mention is that more people can increase the production of new ideas and raise the rate of technological innovation. This would be a plus for productivity, at least for Australia and perhaps globally if Australia is providing greater opportunities for innovation than would otherwise be available to migrants.

Sensible discussion anyone?