To divert or not to divert
Friday, July 27, 2007 at 10:32AM In Australia, access to adequate fresh water has been a dream. Individual state governments don't all agree with the current federal government's proposed plan to take control of the major Murray-Darling River system. The federal government's intention is supposedly to better control and distribute the water. Citizens get views through media about how politicans from each side view water plans.
Historically, when governments took steps to control this water system, again during periods of severe drought, the consequences nearly led to the city of Adelaide losing its water supply. Underground waterways reacted to the surface manipulation of water by human beings. The result was anything but desirable. Luckily, that catastrophe didn't evolve to the worst case scenario.
Questions have been raised as to whether or not the government should intervene at all. Nature has a way of finding its own balance. As it stands,a large percentage of the Murray Darling River is used by industry in part because of government contracts which offered free use of natural resources. Agriculture is another big user of this fresh water resource. People use it for drinking water and for leisure activities.
The big question is, would it be wise to interfere with Nature and how it supposedly re-establishes its own balance? Would it make more sense to focus not on struggling to control what little fresh water still exists, but rather, to continue to shift attention ot desalination technology which is already a priority for Western Australia? NSW and Victoria are thinking seriously but have yet to confirm plans for and commit to build desalination plants.
If you think about it, the money which could be spent to fight a legal battle to control the Murray-Darling River could be better spent on other prospective solutions to the underlying problem. Desalination plants have benefitted other parts of the world greatly already. As we evolve away from a confrontational mentality, we may be better off. To divert mindsets from conflict-oriented to solutions-oriented is key.
Reader Comments (4)
This is an interesting topic. I confess to knowing not a single thing about fresh water in Australia but was interested in what you are saying. I also struggle with whether or not it makes any sense to try to "fight" with nature rather than proactively work towards alternative solutions. I had no idea desalination plants existed much less that they were a serious topic of debate. Could you tell me more?
You may be interested to learn over 7500 desalination plants exist worldwide and that ~60% of those exist in the Middle East. Australia could be considered an 'arid country' based on its annual rainfall. You may like reading on desalination strategy Down Under: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11134967
It can be very surprising to investigate the origins of fresh water in your own region and how many millions of litres are taken from river systems and other sources. In Australia, the vast majority of fresh water resources is used for irrigation in agriculture and siphoned for use in industry (like mining or cooling systems in power plants). New ways of thinking on water use and conservation could have benefits for the individual as well as industries.
Take Venus as an example. It shows one possible outcome for Earth should greenhouse gas build-up spiral out of control. While unlikely, it is possible that natural events could lead to such an end, even without our help.
So I don't think nature's ability to restore balance is a good argument against influencing nature ourselves. But the likely detrimental results of our interference *is*.