Fw: Solar power used to purify bore water

[Denis Wilson]

Dear AWN Google Groups members and Friends

 

This looks like an interesting development for outback Australia, especially in the Great Artesian Basin districts.

I would be interested in Brigid's opinion on this, as she lived at Mt Isa for some time.

 

Cheers

 

Denis
www.peonyden.blogspot.com

 

Solar power used to purify bore water

By Stephanie Fitzpatrick

Posted 1 hour 28 minutes ago

• Map: Dajarra 4825

Researchers are using solar technology to purify bore water in a north-west Queensland town.

Dajarra, south of Mount Isa, has had issues with the quality and taste of its bore water for several years.

Researchers from the University of Queensland have set up solar panels on the roof of the community hall to see if it will purify the water.

Spokesman Dr Lance Newey says the team is trialing the technology, and hopes to use it on other buildings in the town.

"Essentially you flow the bore water into solar panels which capture sunlight, which heats the water," he said.

"Then this particular technology separates out the very heavy chemical water from that water which is more purified as it undergoes a heating process."

---

[Fergus Hancock]

I have seen someting similar on the New Inventors. It isn't very radical technology to make and is, better still, very cheap to mass produce. In the Hunter Valley, (and of course, throughout the MDB) the constant carping that brackish to saline groundwater is 'valueless' (guess by whom?) has given greater access from government to mine through and take the stuff for free. That groundwater is valuable; I know of three coal mines in NSW operating belt press and miniature RO filtering to recycle brackish gruondwater for reuse through the underground mining system, thus reducing the need to extract from the river system of the Hunter and Nepean catchments. Guess what; all those are owned by Xstrata; it (with BHP Mt Arthur Ops) are the ONLY outfits to look seriously at water efficiency as a primary driver for business operations. Therefore it is available and worth the investment in cost-benefit terms for the biggest industrial operator water users in Australia. SO - why aren't they ALL using it? Is water still too cheap to take from rivers and other surface waters? Or are the mining operation engineers still in the 19th century? Fergus --- On Sun, 15/8/10, Denis Wilson <denisw...@bigpond.com> wrote:

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Australian Water Network" group. To post to this group, send email to australian-w...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to australian-water-n...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/australian-water-network?hl=en.

 

[Rosemary Nankivell]

Hi Dennis and Fergus.

The National Water Commission recognises that all aquifers are interconnected.  Crusty old farmers have always know that a river is only as full as the aquifers that feed into it.  This groundwater may not have fiscal value but the environmental value to the surface water aquifers is huge.  A recent EIS for the establishment of the Chinchilla gasfield in Queensland talks of this interconnectivity recognising that there will be at least a  70m drawdown on potable aquifers near the well head and decreasing within a 25 km radius.  There are suggestions on how to "make good" to the farmers - extend their bores, truck in water.  And fo goodness sake, don't worry about it as natural recharge will commence once gas extraction ceases and outer aquifers will recharge after 125 years!!!

Regards

Rosemary Nankivell

[Fergus Hancock]

Rosemary - At least the NWC recognises the importance of the Liverpool Plains, Namoi and the MDB. It has no recognition of severity of the the situation in the Hunter, Latrobe, Nogoa, Nepean/Cataract/Georges, Dawson, Burdekin catchments, to name a few. As gas projects have extended into the Hunter Catchment (Murrurundi, Cuan, Merriwa, Bulga and Gloucester Basin), to where open cut mining has not dared to tread, the inter-linkage of issues and need for high level, rigorous management responses has to occur for all catchments. The 120 year recharge figure for the Chinchilla should be compared to predicted recharge of the Hunter porous rock aquifer system; anywhere from 80 - 350 years, depending on the interlinkage of aquifers and capture of surface/river flows to replenish the depletion of local and cumulative groundwaters. Considering the connectivity between ground/surface waters, and the at present unknown level of groundwater contribution to surface flows, I would have thought this was critical to management of 'State's water rights'. Fergus --- On Mon, 16/8/10, Rosemary Nankivell <yp...@bigpond.com> wrote:

[Rosemary Nankivell]

----- Original Message -----

From: Fergus Hancock

To: australian-w...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 5:43 PM

Subject: Re: {Australian Water Network:2480) Fw: Solar power used to purify bore water

Rosemary - At least the NWC recognises the importance of the Liverpool Plains, Namoi and the MDB. That is good news - what evidence?  It has no recognition of severity of the the situation in the Hunter, Latrobe, Nogoa, Nepean/Cataract/Georges, Dawson, Burdekin catchments, to name a few. As gas projects have extended into the Hunter Catchment (Murrurundi, Cuan, Merriwa, Bulga and Gloucester Basin), to where open cut mining has not dared to tread, the inter-linkage of issues and need for high level, rigorous management responses has to occur for all catchments.  Absolutely

The 120 year recharge figure for the Chinchilla should be compared to predicted recharge of the Hunter porous rock aquifer system; anywhere from 80 - 350 years, depending on the interlinkage of aquifers and capture of surface/river flows to replenish the depletion of local and cumulative groundwaters.

Considering the connectivity between ground/surface waters, and the at present unknown level of groundwater contribution to surface flows, I would have thought this was critical to management of 'State's water rights'.  why do you think nothing has ever done here - is it because there was never any perceived need? and how do we push for it?

[Fergus Hancock]

It's not really my job to defend the NWC; however, it is developing tools to account for groundwater take by mining (the Univeristy of Queensland is expanding a tool I developed for the Hunter 5 years ago, and it being redeveloped into a predictive assessment tool by a NSW consultancy), linked to a GIS (using NOW data), and reported to the BOM (my reports are purely internal at the moment). Perhaps after the election, whichever side forms the next Federal government, things will be clearer.... eg. will the NWC survive? Will its functions override State governance? Will the fight between Federal and State governments be resolved? Will full accounting for, and recognition of protection to surface/ground water connectivity be established throughout all jurisdictions? The answers to these and many other quesitons, appear to be.... coming on a boat near to you!

[Rosemary Nankivell]

Fergus I don't expect you to defend NWC! Clearly we need as much knowledge as we can possibly get.  Is there a possibilitiy that NWC will be done away with? ( I am a very plain speaker  - so I expect on email it is much much worse.) cheers Rosemary