Desalination Plant @ Pt Hughes

[aarron 29]

Hi guys,Just had this sent through from spotter @ Compleat Angler Wallaroo and thought it may be of interest.

[brenton 637]

Lets hope these chumps do their homework but i fear the worst {SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif cheers brenton

[Ranger 48]

A green MP/Environmental Lawyer and a Marine Ecologist/Lecturer in biology, both coming in to speak on the impacts of a desal plant.I'd suggest these guys have done their homework, and they're far from chumps.No way I'd make it to Moonta on a Thursday arvo, but it'd be interesting to hear what they have to say! I'd personally like to hear more if anyone here is planning to head up there.I wont make my mind up for or against desal plants, coz like most, I simply don't know enough about them to make an educated decision, and it's guys like this green mp and marine ecologist who I'd like to give me the benefit of their know-how!All I really know at this stage is that we need water, and desal plants seem to be one viable way of getting that water, plus that there could be environmental risks from desal plants.I've got plenty of questions:What are the risks involved to the environment?Why was Pt Hughes chosen as a favoured site?How much is it gonna cost?Who's gonna pay for it?How much water are we gonna get from it?Where's that water gonna go?How much is that water gonna cost?What safeguards will be in place to protect the environment?What contingency plans will there be should things go pear shaped?Were other sites considered, and if so, why were they rejected?How many will be employed?What benefits will it bring to the community?And I'm sure if I thought about it, I'd have a hundred more questions to fire before I'd make my own mind up either way!Yep, I like fish and the environment, but I like water too! I just want to get facts, without hype, spin and bias, from either side of the fence, but it seems pretty difficult to get that these days!

[Compleat Angler 72]

Ranger I have forwarded you questions to those involved and hopefully they can give you some answers.Spotter

[Ranger 48]

Groovy! Thanks mate! I'll be interested to hear BOTH points of view on this one!

[samboman 319]

Is it a Pt Hughes because of the new " The Dunes" resort and Greg Norman golf course? Because to keep that course in top condition will take ALOT of water .......And of course it is a very fast growing areaSambo

[fishnfreak 0]

Yes I imagine that the Desal plant will be directly feeding the golf course, at the same time buggering up an entire ecosystem, all so some rich businessmen can hit around a little white ball

[alanh 6]

Need to ask where all the power is coming from to run the proposed desal plantsSa hasnt got any spare power now and the mining industry wants heaps now as wellNeed to ask about the kill of micro -organisms most of which will be fish larve from the breeding species of spencer gulfScientists are saying the kill will be enough to interupt the life cycle of these species-snapper whiting garfish prawns tommies all of which breed in spencer gulfAll doom and gloom if they go ahead

[spog61 0]

I've been working with de-sal plants on offshore oil rigs for years & regardless what the experts say the brine rich discharge will be a problem in any gulf waters. I'm not against them I just think they should discharge to open seas to minimize any localized salinity increase.

[samsson 0]

good point on disposing of the left overs from the desal. plant,? is there a use for salt? Using pumps and pipes, how far out does it need to go to stop it coming in again? Using ships to dump it, how much cost is added to the finished product ? I don't know the area but is a wind farm viable to drive the plant? Hey fishnfreak may be put a wind farm fan on the 5th fairway and call it a man made hazard. {SMILIES_PATH}/grin.gif

[Compleat Angler 72]

If anyone else has any questions or comments on the Desal Plant at Port Hughes could you please post them to this forum before 5pm on Thursday.I am unable to go to the meeting but I will forward these posts onto the people running this meeting.RegardsSpotter

[Ranger 48]

Spotter, I have one more question in addition to the other's I've already posed.I'd like to know if we can get a copy of the "Environmental Impact Study" to check out before we make our minds up either way. They have to prepare one, and if all is above board, there shouldn't be any reason why it's not up for public scrutiny.Is "Szopen" a member here yet guys? He's worked in the water industry overseas, and he knows quite a bit about all this stuff, and could open all our eyes to the ins and outs plus pro's and con's.

[brenton 637]

I still reckon there chumps {SMILIES_PATH}/grin.gif ECO this ENVIRO that...what it boils down to in alot of these scenarios is someone pays a fee to get a report on this or that and if in the end the recommendations don,t suit the investor then that report is scrapped and another commissioned.What consultant is going to go against the "required" outcome if he,s going to get 200k for the "right" result and the promise of more work in the future {SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif By the time the horrible truth is realised he's sitting up on the Gold Coast in his million dollar pad and has wiped his hands of the whole matter with no consequences whatsoever. cheers brenton

[Ranger 48]

I still reckon there chumps {SMILIES_PATH}/grin.gif ECO this ENVIRO that...what it boils down to in alot of these scenarios is someone pays a fee to get a report on this or that and if in the end the recommendations don,t suit the investor then that report is scrapped and another commissioned.What consultant is going to go against the "required" outcome if he,s going to get 200k for the "right" result and the promise of more work in the future {SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif

These reports can't just be scrapped or cast aside!These EIS's are performed by "independant" authorities. Places such as SARDI (South Aust Research & Development Institute) who have their own reputation on the line amongst the scientific and professional community worldwide. Have you ever seen, known or heard of a biased or untrue report come from SARDI?I'd bet my left testicle, and the right one too for that matter, that the findings of the EIS are true, correct and reliable, and THESE are the consultants who will not bend to a desired outcome, coz they don't get paid $200k for the "right" result to then bugger orf to the Gold Coast. These consultants are on a fixed salary and their findings are closely scrutinised by every professional in the business.Have ya ever seen the one done prior to the dredging of the port river, explaining the reason for the chosen dumping site of the two preferred, the marine biota logged in the area, the bottom composition/substrate, the influence of tides, how it would affect marine life, the effects on rec and pro fishing, the prawning industry, the ongoing monitoring, the contingency plans, etc, etc, etc. Are ya aware that SARDI is still actively monitoring that area some 4 years later?A lot goes into these independant studies, and they bring to light many issues that us mere mortals wouldn't even consider. Issues which can be pretty handy for us to know when it's happening in our back yard.Check this out as an example of what's involved in an EIS: http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au:82/pdfserve/ ... report.pdfIt'll open your eyes to a lot of things you probably didn't know, and give you a real insight into what goes on. Then try to find someone who is qualified to stand up and dispute those findings or argue against them.Brenton, don't think I'm bagging you, but I'd really like you (and everyone else) to take a few minutes to sit down and really read through that report, then come back and tell me if you still honestly believe it wouldn't benefit us all to see one of these on the Pt Hughes site before making our minds up on the issue.After all, how much do ANY of us here know about the marine life in the area of Pt Hughes and the effects of the brine outflow on it? Shouldn't we at least listen to the scientific experts, or read what THEY have to say on the matter?In fact, even if you dont, I'd still like to see it, coz I know bugger all at the moment, and it'll help ME understand a bit more about these desal plants and the effects on our environment. After all, it seems they're earmarked to be going up all around the state, and I'd rather know a little bit more NOW before they go up, rather than sitting back whinging about any ill effects later and asking "why weren't we told about this?"Maybe we wont be able to stop them going up. Hell, maybe we wont even want to stop them going up! After reading it, I might decide I'm in favour of desal plants, and the benefits outweight the downfalls. As far as I'm concerned, any knowledge is good knowledge, and I can't think of a better way of finding out the unbiased truth!

[spog61 0]

For the last 4 yrs I've been working off the west coast of Africa just north of the Congo river mouth, this river from memory has the 2nd or 3rd largest discharge of freshwater in the world. As our rig moves up & down the coast the visible effect of varying salinity levels is quite obvious in regards to marine growth on platform legs & our own hull. The Congo discharges into the east Atlantic (a huge body of water) & is subject to consistent high current flows up to 5 knots add to this that we operate in an area between 45 - 80 km offshore and 100 - 200 km north of the mouth, this info helps to appreciate how much such a proportionally small amount of fresh water can affect such huge area, so you'd have to ask yourself what would be the effects of a proportionally small amount of high salinity discharge have on it's environs. For my money the best location for plants would be at the tip of each peninsular where a least the currents of the passage would aid in diffusion, also these locales are ideal for wind generation as I feel they should be stand alone facilities & not put further drain on our already overloaded power infrastructure. Further to this the residents of the lower peninsulas might finally get a decent water supply, lower Yorkes I know has many supply issues.

[Compleat Angler 72]

Thank you all for you comments. They are all very interesting.I have passed them on to those concerned but if you have any more please post them before 5pm tomorrow (Thursday)Spotter

[szopen 0]

I know it might sound wrong but that desal plant will probably be a tiny wee thing so environmental impact will be very small. How many households in the area would be supplied? Industry?

[pescados 1]

For what it is worth, back in 1972 I worked at Cape Lambert ( part of Point Sampson penisula)50 km north of Dampier in WA building an Iron Ore peletising plant.Needless to say comforts of home were none including mains water.So a desal plants was used on a small scale and the quality of water produced was far superior of the " Murray Riesling " we get out of out taps here.In addition for the time I was there, guys were fishing of the jetty and we could not detect any degradation of anything in the water there due to brine.Maybe it might on a bigger scale !!However all the brains who designed atom bombs, machinery , planes etc etc one would think it should not take that much of an effort to find a solution on what to do with the brine ?They could pipe it to the salt fields at dry creek ??ykmv.

[Big Ian 0]

I know it might sound wrong but that desal plant will probably be a tiny wee thing so environmental impact will be very small. How many households in the area would be supplied? Industry?

The said desal plant will need to be of a decent size as its to provide all the water for a golf course! which the last time I checked use a mountain if the stuff to stay green. {SMILIES_PATH}/shocked.gif plus they want to use the water for the associated development and housing in the area as well I think!

[Compleat Angler 72]

Hi all,I have just had some information dropped into me regarding the meeting held last Thursday night that I was unable to attend.Responce to questions posted on Strike & HookRe: Desalination...what are the impacts?Community Information Forum @ Moonta 22/5/08Mark Parnell - Greens MLC & Dr Toby Bolton, Marine Ecologist.Dr Bolton's concern centering on lack of scientific study on the effects of desalination. "There are no long term studies, no experts in this field and few peer-reviewed studies," he said. "Pilot studies pick a small patch of ocean and are short term. They are not looking at whole of the gulf effects. Toxicology experiments in a beaker are not the same as the impact in the sea and there can be what we call a cascade effect on marine ecosystems - change one element and it may influence many others in unexpected ways." "We are embarking on a massive experiment - the effects of which wiill be seen by future generations. We are making risk based assesments based on poor knowledge."Port Hughes was chosen due to development of The Dunes Greg Norman designed golf course.Financially and environmentally cost could be considerable.Future generations could pay dearly. The amount of water likely to be obtained from the proposal was mentioned at 1.5 megalitres per day for the development use to water a golf course.No figure on water cost - desalination is the most energy intensive way you can imagine to produse water, unless it is by way of 100% new renewable energy - e.g. solar, wind.Coundil singed off on the preferred site of the developer, they entered discussions with the developer. There was no consultation with the community who had considerable concern - a petition was circulated earlier in the year which obtained nearly 1700 signatures.More details are reported in the YP Country Times, 27/5/08 www.ypct.com.auAdditional information relating to desalination and South Australia Gulfs ecosystem may be found at www.ffc.org.au/Desalination.htmlThank you to those people who showed interest in this matter. Good fishing to you all.

[Ranger 48]

Now let me get this into some sort of perspective of my own, coz I'm a pretty simple sorta bloke!A professional with a doctorate in marine ecology is telling us "There are no long term studies, no experts in this field and few peer-reviewed studies," and that "We are embarking on a massive experiment - the effects of which wiill be seen by future generations. We are making risk based assesments based on poor knowledge."Given the little I know on this subject, I would take this person's word as gospel, UNLESS someone with equal qualifications could dispute his remarks, and I figure, if there was someone to dispute it, they woulda also been at this meeting to put their side of the arguement forward.Then to add salt to the wound, we are told that this project must go ahead, with the sole aim of watering a golf course!Now I aint no expert on water or the environment, but we've just gone through a drought, where we are all faced with severe water restrictions, and are informed that there's more to come! We can no longer water our gardens, wash our cars, hose down our boats, etc, and we need to conserve every drop of water we can for essential needs. Meanwhile plans are on the table to build a desalination plant! NOT to add water for the essential needs of the community, but simply to create 1.5 megalitres of water per day, which is gonna go solely to keep a golf course green! {SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gifNo-one knows what long term effects this will have on the environment, and no-one is willing to release costs for the project or tell us who's gonna be paying for it. The residents against the idea have been ignored, and yet the local council considers this to be a good idea and they've chosen to go ahead with the plan! {SMILIES_PATH}/shocked.gifI would guess that this only means the council considers the wants and prestige of a few sportsmen far more important than the wishes and needs of the community. I hope this golf course turns out to be the shining light which is gonna propel the area forward into the 21st century with great joyous overflowing!Don't worry about a thing local residents! Ya may not have enough water to fulfill your own needs, you might be living in a dry and barren dust bowl, your stock may well have to be sold, your crops non-existant, and your envorinment destabilised, but hey, you're gonna have a nice green golf course if ya can afford to use it! Chances are YOU'LL be paying for it too! {SMILIES_PATH}/wink.gifI don't think it takes a brain surgeon to work out which side of the fence I now stand on!

[spog61 0]

And here's me thinking councils were there to represent the best interests of it constituents, this is the epitome of arrogance.Well written post Ranger

[bruce 0]

Thanks Spotter for your valuable feedback, I am another who is extremely concerned about the impacts this plant will have on the pristine waters of Hughes Bay, and have only just come up to speed with all these goings on. Will be watching and contributing with interest to any further public consultations. Cheers

[spog61 0]

Just had another thought! I wonder how much pesticide, herbicide, phosphate etc will leach into adjacent waters from predominately intensive golf course green keeping maintenance????

[Guest dabilda]

From what I understand it takes 3 litres of sea water to make 1 litre of drinking water. The remaining 2 litres pumped back into the ocean containing 33% more salt than it used to.If they intend to produce 1.5 megalitres a day of drinking water, that would suggest they will be pumping 3 megalitres a day of 33% higher salted water.With the current drought, little or no fresh rain/storm water entering the sea to counteract this higher salinity, what are we handing future generations??It's a bloody disgrace.WAKE UP you morons in parliament before you totally destroy our environment.

[Big Ian 0]

A professional with a doctorate in marine ecology is telling us "There are no long term studies, no experts in this field and few peer-reviewed studies," and that "We are embarking on a massive experiment - the effects of which wiill be seen by future generations. We are making risk based assesments based on poor knowledge."

I would have thought that there would have been many studies done on desalination and its waste brine on the enviroment, probably not in Australia but surely in the middle east. Kuwait for example has been desalinating water for around 30 years as has Saudi Arabia and many other middle east countries, many of which are also situated on a gulf, surely there are some studies on this, but then again what does he mean by "no long term studies" While I dont think 30 years is anywhere near enough time for the total effects of these sorts of plants to be known, surely the effects must have started to be shown and studied.Did'nt we read this week in the paper that past decisions here have killed 95000 hectares of sea grass in Gulf St Vincent thats 950sq kilometres of our fishing grounds changed forever {SMILIES_PATH}/embarrassed.gif but thats for another post. (stuff me I nearly hijacked myself in one post)Do we want to change that gulf irreparably as well?, for a few elitist's to play golf I think not.Lets protest loudly.plus isnt golf for people that cant fish anyways? so they wont care if they screw the enviroment.

[spog61 0]

plus isnt golf for people that cant fish anyways? so they wont care if they screw the enviroment.

Plus golf can be played anywhere there's enough space, so why do they have be by the sea side. Save the sea side for those that rely on it for their water based activities.I also think that there will be little benefit for the local economy as golfers tend to wine, dine & party in their own club house & seldom patronize other establishments, especially at the upmarket end of the scale. {SMILIES_PATH}/angry.gif:(" title="Angry" />

[Ranger 48]

I would have thought that there would have been many studies done on desalination and its waste brine on the enviromentWhile I dont think 30 years is anywhere near enough time for the total effects of these sorts of plants to be known, surely the effects must have started to be shown and studied.

I too expected background data to be available!Being little men on this planet, it's difficult for us to obtain valid data we can trust, and that's why it's so difficult for us to make educated or wise decisions on these issues. Also why we tend to get pretty sceptical when we hear about them too!I don't know anything about this stuff, and I'm sure you don't know anything about this stuff. We can't get any sort of firm data to help us make decisions, so all that's left to us is to listen to those we believe ARE in the know, and make our decisions based on what little we can glean from that!Truth tends to get pushed aside when money V environment is a consideration, and when an agenda is being pushed, either by industry/development OR extreme greens, the truth tends to get swept under the carpet!Let's be honest, how much IS 1.5 megalitres per day in comparison to all the water in the gulf up there? Is it merely a drop in the ocean, or is it enough to cause significant change? I know that I cant fathom that sorta quantity. Is brine 1/3 saltier than the surrounding sea really gonna make much of a difference? I'M BUGGERED IF I KNOW, and with no studies or data to provide an indication, I don't think I've got any chance of finding out!What does that mean when they tell me more desal plants are due to be built around the state? Should I be concerned, or should I be thankful for the extra water?Should I be against the idea solely on the grounds of "percieved or possible risk" to the environment without proof, or should I be welcoming these desal plants as a breakthrough in the driest state on the driest continent where water really is a valuable resource.I recall when I was younger thinking about all the seawater, and wondering why we couldn't get the salt out to use the water!I think defeatist as it sounds, this desal plant is going ahead! The money, and the council have backed it, and they aren't gonna be turned away easily.Sure we'll sit here speculating as to the effects, and we'll say how bad it is, but at the end of the day, it's at Pt Hughes, rather right here in our faces, so for the best part most of us will have our 5 minute whinge and then do bugger all else.Those with the money to back these projects are aware of this, and I believe they expect a little resistance. A handfull of locals waving banners at the council office, a petition being passed around the local shops, maybe even 30 seconds on a current affair program! These little people get cast aside easily though, and within a few weeks their feeble protests lie forgotten and they return to the routine of their little lives.All that remains then is to wait, and see the effects first hand. There's either no problem and a mountain was made out of a molehill, or ya get a few residents and environmentalists saying "told ya so!" Either way, the project is completed, the money is rolling in, and the environment has suffered! No turning back then!Can I pose a question, just out of personal interest, to get an insight into how everyone else feels. If there was a severe water shortage in the area, and the plant was being built to save dying stock, provide drinking water and bolster household allocation, instead of watering a golf course, what would our reaction be then? What would we put first, the needs of the community, or the welfare of the environment?Would we say:a) bugger the environment, the people need water?Or would we sayb) bugger the people, they can move, coz the environment comes first?Bear in mind when making your decision, that we really don't KNOW what the risks to the environment are, if any!

[szopen 0]

I will write a bit more later.Just to put things into perspective:As I have said this will be a tiny plant, 1.5ML a day gives ~0.55 gigalitre a year.The plant proposed for Adealaide is supposed to be 50 giggalitre about 100 times bigger.

[Big Ian 0]

Ranger I might just know a little bit more than the average joe about de sal stuff but thats all.I have a good friend who is an engineer and also has a degree in environmental management ( I think that?s what it?s called)He studied this sort of stuff for his degree. We have spoken at length many times about the pros and cons for a desalination plant here in Adelaide.I was all for it before I learned some of the pros and cons, but I can tell you he is dead set against one here as he thinks we should reuse are storm water, as per the papers of late, only thing is we have been talking about it for the last 6 years.Some of the things to consider are the killing of the micro organisms in the water as they go thru the filter systems in a desal plant, not to mention the larger stuff sucked up the inlet pipes.Most desal plants use reverse osmosis to filter the water.This is a series of filters that get smaller and smaller until the final filter is so small that the only a water molecule H2O can pass thru it. when they desal water they also add chemicals to the water to kill algae ect on the filter membranes and use more stuff for cleaning of the plant ect. All this ends up in the waste brine.This is a simplified explanation but that?s effectively it.there you go.Cheers Ian {SMILIES_PATH}/grin.gif

[szopen 0]

Have a few minutes so some more info.Desal plant for 1.5 megalitre a day is very small.Even if we assume that it will run 365 days a year (watering the golf course in winter rains???) this will give an output of ~550 megalitres a year.When taking into account that natural evaporation rate of water from the ocean (pure water evaporating leaving all salt back in the sea) would be around 2 meters a year in our area it can be calculated that the impact of this desal plant would be less than natural evaporation that occures in a area of 500m x 600m of sea surface.A drop in an ocean.The not so big plant that I work in in Adelaide uses a fair bit more than 1.5 megalitre of water a day and it used to use a lot of more.

[Ranger 48]

Szopen, thanks for providing your input! I know that you DO know a lot about all this stuff, so I take your input seriously, and I listen when you speak.It's an interesting point saying:

the impact of this desal plant would be less than natural evaporation that occures in a area of 500m x 600m of sea surface.

That helps me to put things into perspective, and start to realise just how little we really are talking about by comparison.It's reassuring to know, and to help us unimformed draw our own conclussions and work out just where we stand on these sorta issues.Big Ian, I almost did Environmental Management or Natural Resources myself, but in the end I opted for Applied Science. Maybe on reflection one of the other two degrees woulda been more appropriate for me! {SMILIES_PATH}/tongue.gif

he is dead set against one here as he thinks we should reuse are storm water

I agree! I cannot understand why we cannot divert the 7 billion odd litres of water which runs out to sea each time it rains. I can only guess that the land value for catchment areas is considered too valuable, but it seems like a shocking waste to me!I'ver got a lot to say on this subject, but I've gotta nip out to St Kilda Tackle & Tucker to do a little sucking up for a project I'm working on, so maybe I'l;l come back to this when I have time later.

[squidley 0]

[i'ver got a lot to say on this subject, but I've gotta nip out to St Kilda Tackle & Tucker to do a little sucking up for a project I'm working on, so maybe I'l;l come back to this when I have time later. gee you working on sponsership for free hotdogs now {SMILIES_PATH}/tongue.gif

[szopen 0]

In my opinion desal plants are the really last resort solutions for water supply.Not so much for environmental reasons but for the cost and energy use ones.Storage of water and recycling of used water should be a priority.As to the general situation here I will risk another strong statement.To somebody relatively new here it seems lika a lot of brainwashing has happened regarding the water situation here.Ever heard about this rainy and foggy city of London?Annual rainfall (approx):London: 750mmAdelaide: 600mmSydney: 1000mmMethinks that rainwater storage (dams on the rivers) has not been built here in sufficient quantity a while ago and now attention is being diverted from this issue by various water restrictions and programs.Plus the recycling of water issue.If water was a bit above 2$ per kL here it would make economic sense for me to put a RO plant at work and reduce water use by a bit more than that desal plant in Pt Huges is going to be capable of producing. This would actually reduce environmental impact of industry not add extra problems.

[niftrev 2]

Some very good replies posted here.Firstly let me say I am not against desalination plants but I do have concerns about where they are proposed to be built. I believe there is a legitimate need for them when after all we are the driest state in the driest continent.I too would have thought that with more than 7,500 desalination plants worldwide (I believe) we could draw some fairly conclusive assumptions about what detrimental effects one would have on our environment.

Mark Parnell - Greens MLC & Dr Toby Bolton, Marine Ecologist.Dr Bolton's concern centering on lack of scientific study on the effects of desalination. "There are no long term studies, no experts in this field and few peer-reviewed studies," he said. "Pilot studies pick a small patch of ocean and are short term. They are not looking at whole of the gulf effects. Toxicology experiments in a beaker are not the same as the impact in the sea and there can be what we call a cascade effect on marine ecosystems - change one element and it may influence many others in unexpected ways." "We are embarking on a massive experiment - the effects of which will be seen by future generations. We are making risk based assessments based on poor knowledge."

Maybe an explanation for the lack of long term studies is simply because of the uniqueness of our two gulfs in that they both experience dodge tides (very flat neap tide) and this occurrence is rather rare. I assume other desalination plants around the world don?t have to deal with this problematic concern. Unfortunately it appears that the favoured sites for South Australia?s desalination plants are going to be built within our confined gulf regions. I only hope the powers that be, have taken this fortnightly event into account. Like many others, my concern is the increased salt levels and the other chemicals that are used in the desalination process. Surely it is not difficult to assume that if these by-products are pumped into the gulfs and are allowed to accumulate there, then the end result can only be detrimental to the ecology within them. Dr Toby Bolton, Marine Ecologist said

"We are embarking on a massive experiment - the effects of which wiill be seen by future generations. We are making risk based assesments based on poor knowledge."

I'm glad the desalination plant proposed for Port Hughes is quite small then.I guess the proposed desalination plant to be built at the site of Port Stanvic was purposely selected for economic reasons (storage of water). At least this site is further away from the mangrove breeding grounds of the other proposed site of the Port River. I'm sure there would be a greater chance of it flushing out of the gulf and fresh seawater recirculating back there than in the upper reaches of the Gulf of St Vincent.With the one entrance confinement of our gulfs I cannot see the sense of a desalination plant being built near Port Bonython though, when it could just as easily be built somewhere on the west coast where the likelihood of higher salinity accumulation would be of a lesser degree. Mark Parnell - Greens MLC & Dr Toby Bolton, Marine Ecologist. said

No figure on water cost - desalination is the most energy intensive way you can imagine to produse water, unless it is by way of 100% new renewable energy - e.g. solar, wind.

A gas or coal power plant will be required as solar and wind generation could only be used as auxiliary to one that produces power constantly. {SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif??? PS.I couldn't care less about a green golf course myself, but everyone to their own. They just better hope they don't stuff up the fishing.niftrev[/color:17147qyk]