JF & Individual,

Yes, projects in which money, technology and nature 'combine' are surely bound to be winners, save for managerial incompetence. A series of dams, reservoirs, pipelines, over that low central Queensland mountain range, to divert water from north-flowing rivers southwards would be a good example. Would it be possible to fit turbines into the piping systems to partly generate electricity to pump the water up-hill when necessary ? or of course, through tunnels.

Watching Michael Portillo's daily SBS program on railways (so it seems), I was struck by a Welsh scheme for moving slate down a hillside, on a double track with no engine: two carts connected by cable; the up-hill cart gets loaded with slate, the brake is carefully turned off so the loaded cart moves down-hill on its track, pulling the other cart up-hill by its weight, on its track. Then it, in turn, gets loaded, back down, etc. Brilliant: technology and nature combined !

I get the idea that there is plenty of water flowing into the Gulf, there'll never be a shortage of it. So as well as draining the low-lying areas along the Gulf coast for more effective utilisation, excess water can be taken over the central range into the southern rivers. So that way, both the north-facing slopes AND the southern areas can be managed and populated. Betoota may flourish again and take its rightful place as the Jewel of Western Queensland !

Joe

If I get this right Loudmouth, it appears you have just invented perpetual motion.

You are going to use turbines to harness the flow of pumped water in a pipe to generate the electricity to pump that water.

Sounds wonderful.

"Watch out Phil! Watch out Phil! Bandit at 12 o'clock high."

Pop pop pop pop pop pop ..........

"Gotcha ya Red Baron. Roger Roger fellows .....job well done ..... let's head back to the carrier."

loudmouth2,

My opinion is that Wet season rain could be harvested high up in the Great Dividing Range in vicinity of the Gregory Range. Taking a controlled amount of water off the top of the catchment with not reduce rain runoff into rivers downstream. A vast amount of water flows wasted into the Gulf of Carpentaria. The high up harvested water could flow southward in aqueduct high up, winding and almost level and following the range contours. Aqueduct need have only a very slight fall. Special deep narrow aqueduct will cause the water to flow because filling to the top of the duct guarantees the water will tumble down all the way to the Murray Darling catchment beginning, inland from Fraser Island Q.

Some Australian east coast rivers also waste vast amounts of water into the ocean. Controlled amounts of that water could also be harvested high on the eastern side of the range and sent by aqueduct tunnels into the main aqueduct on the western side of the range.

Yes, water can be stored and then used in turbines for hydro electric pumping of other water, in round figures, a one metre diameter turbine flow can generate power to run a five-hundred millimeter pump 24/7 until water runs out.
The 500mm pump in conjunction with solar and off peak coal power could take east coast city nutrient loaded wastewater inland for cotton and grazing and drought proofing, to help farmers and exports.

All the aqueduct (except in tunnels) should be steel on steel piles, which would assist the mining and steel industries.
Old gas pipelines and their corridors could be harnessed. New gas pipe could be part of the deal, old gas pipes like moomba to Sydney have already passed their use by date. Inland electric power grids already exist and could be expanded to connect more solar from Auistralia's almost cloudless inland.

individual,

Your view shows hope for the future. Sorry I did not include your name in my reply to loudmoth2. My web connection is not good out here in remote catchment of the Paroo River. I rushed to send while there was signal.

I find some bureaucrats are genuine and helpful while others are not. It is the latter that deter progress by the genuine ones.

As for evaporatiion/precipitation inland, I read a report about the Bradfield scheme that discounted that. The cost of pumping was another problem, whereas anyway I propose aqueduct and no pipes or pumps to transport the main flow into the Murray Darling system.

There is more at the following link (if you have not seen it previously). Note Index F, Fairfax.
http://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20160615042127/http://agwhitepaper.agriculture.gov.au/supporting-information/published-submissions-green-paper

There is more that I have not included. I dont want to feed the bureaudroid consultants too much.

a report about the Bradfield scheme that discounted that.
JF Aus,
The Bradfield Scheme on its own would not impact much but once off the ground, the more water becomes present in the present arid areas, the more precipitation will occur. We already have Lake Argyle in the North & if Lake Eyre & other, smaller basins become permanent, a change is inevitable. As I stated many times before, this must be seen as future planning not as a quick buck investment & that's why this needs to be a Govt project. Private entrepreneurs have no interest in long term, they want their profits now ! More water in the interior will bring prosperity in both economy & environment ! We already have proof that interior Australia once had vast lakes & it it my view it needs them back.
Too much of the ground water has been taken & it's high time we start to replenish it before it gets too low & we also need to take the pressure off the coastal regions.