DOCSLIB.ORG

Hume Dartmouth Dams Operational Review Response May 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hume Dartmouth Dams Operational Review Response May 1999 HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW REFERENCE PANEL Hume and Dartmouth Dams Operations Review Final Report MAY 1999 HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW REFERENCE PANEL Hume and Dartmouth Dams Operations Review Reference Panel FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE MURRAY-DARLING BASIN COMMISSION MAY 1999 i HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW REFERENCE PANEL Published by Hume and Dartmouth Dams Operations Review Reference Panel Postal Address: c/- MDBC, GPO Box 409, Canberra ACT 2601 Office location: c/- Murray-Darling Basin Commission, 2nd Floor, 7 Moore Street, Canberra City, Australian Capital Territory. Telephone: (02) 6279 0100; international + 61 2 6279 0100 Facsimile: (02) 6248 8053; international + 61 2 6248 8053 E-mail [email protected] Website http://www.mdbc.gov.au Map on cover: © Commonwealth of Australia 1985 Series R754, 8225-1 ALBURY, VICTORIA AND NEW SOUTH WALES, Edition 1-AAS, Royal Australian Survey Corps 1985, reproduced with the kind permission of the Director of Strategic Military and Geographic Information. Remainder of Publication © Copyright Murray-Darling Basin Commission 1999. This document may be reproduced in whole or in part, provided that the information in it is not sold for commercial purposes and its source is acknowledged. Dissemination and discussion of the document is encouraged. For further copies and assistance contact the Reference Panel at the above address. ISBN 1 875209 77 8 DISCLAIMER This document is the work of a fully independent Panel, reporting to the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. The report has not been influenced or directed by the Commission, nor at the time of printing has the Commission considered or adopted its recommendations. ii HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW FOREWORD This report represents a significant achievement Environmental Sustainability. The Panel listened in the development of a consensus between to all views and spent time visiting areas of parties advocating what are, on the surface, concern, with itineraries and presentations irreconcilable objectives for the management of arranged entirely by the local interests. The a precious and finite resource – the waters of Reference Panel, in fact, drove and shaped the the Upper Murray system. entire review and, I think it fair to say, has in In early 1997, in response to the concerns of the process created an ownership of the issues. floodplain landholders below its two major The Panel firmly believes that any process of headworks, the Murray-Darling Basin natural resource management that involves Commission began a review of the operations of tradeoffs will never succeed properly unless the Hume and Dartmouth Dams. At that time, few powers-that-be recognise and support such were confident that a consensus would be community ownership. In this case, the achieved within the Reference Panel that had Commission commendably adopted a hands-off been created as part of the review process. stance, provided adequate resources, and Two vital factors however were at play – allowed the Panel the time it needed to feel Information and Inclusion. comfortable with the developing outcomes. Information – The Panel attempted wherever So, what were these outcomes? possible to describe situations by means of factual First, a word of warning. The operations of and, preferably, quantified information. This Hume and Dartmouth are complex and required the time-consuming creation of a daily sophisticated. Also, intuition is not always a time-step river flows model, the quantification of reliable indicator of operational outcomes. What economic outcomes, and the development of follows is a greatly simplified set of the Panel’s indicators to attempt to predict the major findings. To read this in isolation would be environmental outcomes. The largely successful potentially misleading. The reader is encouraged aim was to minimise argument about how ‘good’ to read the full Final Report and its companion or ‘bad’ a particular scenario was, by having Options Paper to understand the many factors at numerical measurements of the outcomes. play and their complex inter-actions. Because no reliable formulas yet exist which In the reach of the Mitta Mitta River below describe ecosystem response to river flow Dartmouth Dam, it was found that the present changes, the Panel found it necessary to develop harmony and pre-release rules are generally a comprehensive set of flow parameters which appropriate. The Panel’s work has shown could be viewed as surrogates for environmental however that there is scope to reduce the outcomes. In general it was agreed that flow environmental and economic impacts of patterns which more nearly represented natural Dartmouth Dam by a modified and more patterns were the most desirable. variable flow regime with no discernible impacts The Commission also helped by being entirely on consumptive users. open and thus created a growing trust in the As elsewhere along the rivers, the Panel process. The Panel was given access to all relevant found that a more comprehensive approach to documents and information, including some not whole-of-system management would produce yet formally considered by the Commission. improved outcomes. It therefore strongly Inclusion – The spread of representation on believes that an integrated program of waterway the Panel, and its determination to ensure that and floodplain management is required for the the Valley community could participate in the Mitta Mitta. It also proposes that the costs and debate, slowly but surely created a growing benefits of a variable level offtake at Dartmouth understanding and mutual respect between the be investigated. parties at the corners of a triangle of tensions – In considering the River Murray below Hume Water Use, Floodplain Land-use and Dam, an early conclusion of the Panel was that HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW iii HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW REFERENCE PANEL flood easements should be negotiated with addressing waterway and floodplain management landholders as a principal means of addressing requires funding and immediate initiation. adverse effects of flooding at the peak regulated A common issue raised along the whole river flow level of 25 000 megalitres/day. was a perception of inadequate communications Reinstating some of the natural variability of from the Commission about water management, flow is an important objective in the Hume to with a particular emphasis on flood seasons. Yarrawonga reach and may be possible with few Interestingly, it was found that floodplain trade-offs during the majority of the year. community concerns and perceptions did not Currently there is little room for movement always reflect the reality of actual dam operations during the peak irrigation season when the which were generally near optimum. What existing nominal channel capacity already seemed to be missing was information and restricts operational flexibility. The Panel consultation. The Panel therefore believes that however found that there is scope for increased structured and regular liaison is required between rates of pre-releases and environmental releases River Murray Water and interested community through negotiation with landholders for groups. This should be accompanied by ongoing, purchase of limited, special purpose easements. real-time liaison and consultation with Mitta After comprehensive modelling of multiple Mitta landholders, Hume to Yarrawonga scenarios, an appropriate environmental flow landholders, and with peak irrigator groups. regime below Hume Dam (a managed form of Finally, in keeping with its strongly held translucency of around 30% is shown to have views on the need for community involvement considerable promise) has been recommended to and ownership of natural resource management, improve river health and to minimise the the Panel is firmly of the view that development adverse economic impacts of regulated flows, of environmental flow options for the whole particularly to floodplain landholders. river should include a community-based steering Also important are the operational scenarios or reference committee. for which the Panel recommends no further All Panel members have shown dedication, consideration. For instance, the popular notion tolerance and commitment throughout. I thank of ‘air-space’ operations is shown to be very them for this and congratulate them on a real costly in water terms, whereas other options are contribution to the future of the Murray Valley. shown to have a better mix of outcomes. In this I have pleasure in commending this report to case, an environmental flow regime modelled the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. was shown to produce equivalent benefits for floodplain owners, but with a lower cost to consumptive water users, plus of course a regime more favourable to river health. The existence of the State border has mitigated against the much needed BRIAN HAISMAN whole-of-system approach between Hume and Chair, Yarrawonga. The Panel believes that a Operations Review Reference Panel ‘no-borders’ integrated River Management Plan May 1999 iv HUME AND DARTMOUTH DAMS OPERATIONS REVIEW Contents 1 Background 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Responses to Options Paper 1 1.3 Finalisation of issues raised in Options Paper 1 1.4 Issues not covered in Options Paper 1 1.4.1 Economic modelling 1 1.4.2 Effects on flows to South Australia 2 1.5 Corrections to Options paper 2 1.6 Cost Sharing 2 2 Conclusions and Recommendations 3 2.1 Dartmouth – Hume reach of Mitta Mitta
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DUCK HUNTING in VICTORIA 2020 Background
    DUCK HUNTING IN VICTORIA 2020 Background The Wildlife (Game) Regulations 2012 provide for an annual duck season running from 3rd Saturday in March until the 2nd Monday in June in each year (80 days in 2020) and a 10 bird bag limit. Section 86 of the Wildlife Act 1975 enables the responsible Ministers to vary these arrangements. The Game Management Authority (GMA) is an independent statutory authority responsible for the regulation of game hunting in Victoria. Part of their statutory function is to make recommendations to the relevant Ministers (Agriculture and Environment) in relation to open and closed seasons, bag limits and declaring public and private land open or closed for hunting. A number of factors are reviewed each year to ensure duck hunting remains sustainable, including current and predicted environmental conditions such as habitat extent and duck population distribution, abundance and breeding. This review however, overlooks several reports and assessments which are intended for use in managing game and hunting which would offer a more complete picture of habitat, population, abundance and breeding, we will attempt to summarise some of these in this submission, these include: • 2019-20 Annual Waterfowl Quota Report to the Game Licensing Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries • Assessment of Waterfowl Abundance and Wetland Condition in South- Eastern Australia, South Australian Department for Environment and Water • Victorian Summer waterbird Count, 2019, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research As a key stakeholder representing 17,8011 members, Field & Game Australia Inc. (FGA) has been invited by GMA to participate in the Stakeholder Meeting and provide information to assist GMA brief the relevant Ministers, FGA thanks GMA for this opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • World's Major Rivers
    WWWWWWoorrlldd’’ss mmaajjoorr rriivveerrss AAnn IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn ttoo iinntteerrnnaattiioonnaall wwwwwwaatteerr llaawwwwww wwwwwwiitthh ccaassee ssttuuddiieess THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK WWWWWWoorrlldd’’ss mmaajjoorr rriivveerrss An introduction to international water law with case studies Colorado River Commission of Nevada 555 E. Washington Avenue, Suite 3100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Phone: (702) 486-2670 Website: http://crc.nv.gov November 2008 Jacob (Jay) D. Bingham, Chairman Ace I. Robinson, Vice Chairman Andrea Anderson, Commissioner Marybel Batjer, Commissioner Chip Maxfield, Commissioner George F. Ogilvie III, Commissioner Lois Tarkanian, Commissioner George M. Caan, Executive Director Primary Author: Daniel Seligman, Attorney at Law Columbia Research Corp. P.O. Box 99249 Seattle, Washington 98139 (206) 285-1185 Project Editors: McClain Peterson, Project Manager Manager, Natural Resource Division Colorado River Commission of Nevada Sara Price Special Counsel-Consultant Colorado River Commission of Nevada Esther Valle Natural Resource Analyst Colorado River Commission of Nevada Nicole Everett Natural Resource Analyst Colorado River Commission of Nevada THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK World’s Major Rivers ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Daniel Seligman at the Columbia Research Corp. wishes to thank Jacqueline Pruner, attorney at law in Seattle, for her contribution to the section on water law in Canada and her valuable editing assistance throughout the entire document. The staff at the Murray-Darling Basin Commission and Goulburn-Murray Water in Australia provided important information about the Murray-Darling River system, patiently answered the author’s questions, and reviewed the draft text on water trading. Staff at the International Joint Commission in Washington, D.C., and the Prairie Provinces Water Board in Regina, Canada, also offered helpful comments on an earlier draft.
    [Show full text]
  • River Murray Operations | Murray–Darling Basin Authority August 2020
    River Murray Key facts The River Murray is Australia’s longest operations river and flows for more than 2500 kilometres through New South The River Murray flows through New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. Wales, Victoria and South Australia, sustaining rural towns and communities, supporting Several major rivers join the Murray, including the agricultural production and nourishing many Goulburn, Murrumbidgee unique Australian plants and animals. and Darling, and many smaller rivers and MDBA River Operations is responsible for operating the tributaries on its westward River Murray on behalf of the joint governments of New journey to the sea. South Wales (NSW), Victoria and South Australia. Key water regulation assets under control of the MDBA The Murray–Darling Basin include Dartmouth Dam, Hume Dam, Yarrawonga Weir, Agreement (the Agreement) Torrumbarry Weir, Lake Victoria and the locks and weirs sets out the water sharing from Lock 15 at Euston to Lock 7 at Rufus River. rules across the states. The MDBA determines the volume of water released to meet demands, but does not own any water and can only The main storages in the release water from storage when there are state orders or River Murray are system demands to be met. Dartmouth Dam, Hume Dam, Yarrawonga Weir The physical operation of structures is managed by water and Lake Victoria. authorities in each state. This includes Menindee Lakes on the Darling River, which contributes some water for use in the Murray system, but is managed by the NSW Other major storages Government. Additionally, the MDBA does not operate the connected to the system River Murray downstream of the South Australian border, (but not the responsibility where the South Australian Government take on this role.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F. Statement of Heritage Impacts
    Hume Battery Energy Storage System Environmental Impact Statement Appendix F. Statement of Heritage Impacts Hume Battery Energy Storage System Statement of Heritage Impact IA213400_Hume BESS SOHI | Final 28 July 2020 Meridian Energy Australia Statement of Heritage Impact Meridian Energy Australia Statement of Heritage Impact Hume Battery Energy Storage System Project No: IA213400 Document Title: Statement of Heritage Impact Document No.: IA213400_Hume BESS SOHI Revision: Final Date: 28 July 2020 Client Name: Meridian Energy Australia Project Manager: Thomas Muddle Author: Deborah Farina File Name: IA213400 Hume BESS SOHI_Final Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited ABN 37 001 024 095 Level 7, 177 Pacific Highway North Sydney NSW 2060 Australia PO Box 632 North Sydney NSW 2059 Australia T +61 2 9928 2100 F +61 2 9928 2444 www.jacobs.com © Copyright 2019 Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright. Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this document by any third party. IA213400_Hume BESS SOHI i Statement of Heritage Impact Contents Executive Summary
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Eildon Land and On-Water Management Plan 2012 Table of Contents
    Lake Eildon Land and On-Water Management Plan 2012 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................3 3.5 Healthy Ecosystems ...........................................24 1. Objectives of the Plan ..........................................4 3.5.1 Native Flora and Fauna ............................24 2. Context .......................................................................4 3.5.2 Foreshore Vegetation Management .........25 3.5.3 Pest and Nuisance Plants ........................26 2.1 Lake Eildon Development ....................................4 3.5.4 Pest Animals .............................................27 2.2 Lake Eildon as a Water Supply ............................4 3.5.5 References ...............................................27 2.3 Storage Operations ..............................................5 2.4 Land Status ...........................................................5 3.6 Land Management ..............................................28 2.5 Legal Status ..........................................................5 3.6.1 Permits, Licences and Lease Arrangements ................................28 2.6 Study Area .............................................................5 3.6.2 Fire ............................................................29 3. A Plan for the Management 3.6.3 Foreshore Erosion ....................................30 of Lake Eildon ..........................................................5 3.6.4 Stream Bank Erosion ................................31 3.1 Plan
    [Show full text]
  • The Murray–Darling Basin Basin Animals and Habitat the Basin Supports a Diverse Range of Plants and the Murray–Darling Basin Is Australia’S Largest Animals
    The Murray–Darling Basin Basin animals and habitat The Basin supports a diverse range of plants and The Murray–Darling Basin is Australia’s largest animals. Over 350 species of birds (35 endangered), and most diverse river system — a place of great 100 species of lizards, 53 frogs and 46 snakes national significance with many important social, have been recorded — many of them found only in economic and environmental values. Australia. The Basin dominates the landscape of eastern At least 34 bird species depend upon wetlands in 1. 2. 6. Australia, covering over one million square the Basin for breeding. The Macquarie Marshes and kilometres — about 14% of the country — Hume Dam at 7% capacity in 2007 (left) and 100% capactiy in 2011 (right) Narran Lakes are vital habitats for colonial nesting including parts of New South Wales, Victoria, waterbirds (including straw-necked ibis, herons, Queensland and South Australia, and all of the cormorants and spoonbills). Sites such as these Australian Capital Territory. Australia’s three A highly variable river system regularly support more than 20,000 waterbirds and, longest rivers — the Darling, the Murray and the when in flood, over 500,000 birds have been seen. Australia is the driest inhabited continent on earth, Murrumbidgee — run through the Basin. Fifteen species of frogs also occur in the Macquarie and despite having one of the world’s largest Marshes, including the striped and ornate burrowing The Basin is best known as ‘Australia’s food catchments, river flows in the Murray–Darling Basin frogs, the waterholding frog and crucifix toad. bowl’, producing around one-third of the are among the lowest in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Dams in Victoria Safe and Versatile Infrastructure
    Dams in Victoria Safe and versatile infrastructure A dam is a wall that holds back water to form a basin, lake or reservoir. Dams are typically made of earth, rock or concrete. Dams can be privately owned, owned by business or a Government agency. They can be used to store water for drinking, industry or farming, to protect property from flooding, or for recreation. Dams in Victoria Victoria has about 450,000 dams – this number shows how important dams are to the economy and our way of life. The sizes of our dams range from major storages such as Dartmouth dam (about 4,000,000 ML), Lake Eildon (about 3,300,000 ML) and the Thomson dam (about 1,070,000 Farm dams ML) to small swimming pool-sized dams on farms or lifestyle properties. These smaller privately-owned dams are the most Generating power: these large dams hold water for cooling common type of dam in Victoria. Together, Victoria’s dams have coal or gas-fired power stations or to generate hydro-electric a total storage capacity of about 13,400,000 ML. power. How we use our dams Recreation: some of the lakes created by dams are used for recreational activities such as boating and fishing. These dams Dams have huge social, economic and environmental benefits. can be popular tourist destinations and the tourism generated The vast majority of dams in Victoria have been built to store by these dams can be important to the social and economic rainfall when it is plentiful for use in times when it is most wellbeing of regional communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Storage for Renewable Energy
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Engineering and Information Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences - Papers: Part A Sciences 2012 Energy storage for renewable energy Saugato Mukerji University of Wollongong Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers Part of the Engineering Commons, and the Science and Technology Studies Commons Recommended Citation Mukerji, Saugato, "Energy storage for renewable energy" (2012). Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences - Papers: Part A. 20. https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers/20 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Energy storage for renewable energy Abstract Presented at All Energy Australia 2012 International Conference, Melbourne Disciplines Engineering | Science and Technology Studies This conference paper is available at Research Online: https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers/20 Energy Storage for Renewable Energy The biggest remaining challenge Saugato Mukerji Layout • Built environment has potential to increase its renewable energy usage massively and become energy positive over 24hrs and the cost incentives to drive this change are approaching critical mass. • This will completely change where and when and how energy is used, generated, stored, transported and delivered to users. • This presentation starts at the grass roots and examines the issues & the potential game changers innovations and synergies between them
    [Show full text]
  • GMW AR Map Final
    G o egion ulb ter R urn-Murray Wa Mildura Woorinen Weir Irrigation District Nyah Irrigation District Tresco Irrigation District Kerang River Murray Cobram Macorna Torrumbarry Yarrawonga er Channel Weir Br Yarrawonga Weir Riv oken Pyramid Hill KOW Main Channel Riv er Mur Victoria SWAMP ray National Hume G-MW Region Channel Dam Cr Western eek East Goulburn Main Channel Wangaratta Waranga Rochester Shepparton Campaspe Tatura Broken Ov Mitta Mitta Irrigation ens Riv District King Riv Kie er wa Riv er ChannelWaranga Riv Dartmouth don er Basin Stuart Murray Canal Riv Goldfields er Dam er Lod Goulburn Lake Riv Superpipe Cattanach Weir er Canal Bualo Laanecoorie Lake Lake Lake Reservoir Eppalock Nillahcootie William Cairn Curran Hovell Reservoir Goulburn Riv Tullaroop er Lake Eildon Reservoir Campaspe Sugarloaf Hepburns Pipeline Lagoon Newlyn Reservoir MAJOR STORAGES Great Dividing Range Lake Nillahcootie Dartmouth Dam* Lake Eildon Hume Dam*‡ Goulburn Weir Yarrawonga Weir* N DISTRICT SERVICES Waranga Basin Torrumbarry Weir* KEY SCALE OF KILOMETRES IRRIGATION AREAS WATER DISTRICTS Lake Eppalock Mildura Weir* Channel/Canal 0 50 100 150 Shepparton Tungamah Cairn Curran Reservoir Lake Bualo River Newlyn Reservoir Central Goulburn East Loddon Lake William Hovell Operations Centres Rochester-Campaspe West Loddon Hepburns Lagoon * Murray-Darling Basin Dams Operation Centres Tullaroop Reservoir Authority assets Pyramid-Boort Normanville Pipelines Managed by NSW Murray Valley FLOOD PROTECTION Laanecoorie Reservoir ‡ DISTRICT Constructing Authority (Not managed by G-MW) Torrumbarry Loch Garry.
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian Water Project Volume 1
    The Australian Water Project Volume 1 Crisis and opportunity: Lessons of Australian water reform DRAFT DISCUSSION PAPER NOVEMBER 2011 A COLLABORatION BY: WITH SUPPORT FROM: The Australian Water Project Volume 1 Crisis and opportunity: Lessons of Australian water reform DRAFT DISCUSSION PAPER NOVEMBER 2011 By Australian Water Project editors Professor John Langford AM and Professor John Briscoe with support from Nathan Taylor, Chief Economist, CEDA A COLLABORatION BY: WITH SUPPORT FROM: About this publication Australian Water Project © CEDA 2011 ISBN: 0 85801 278 2 The views expressed in this document are those of the authors, and should not be attributed to CEDA. CEDA’s objective in publishing this collection is to encourage constructive debate and discussion on matters of national economic importance. Persons who rely upon the material published do so at their own risk. Designed by Robyn Zwar Graphic Design Photography by iStockphoto About CEDA CEDA – the Committee for Economic Development of Australia – is a national, independent, member-based organisation providing thought leadership and policy perspectives on the economic and social issues affecting Australia. We achieve this through a rigorous and evidence-based research agenda, and forums and events that deliver lively debate and critical perspectives. CEDA’s expanding membership includes more than 900 of Australia’s leading businesses and organisations, and leaders from a wide cross-section of industries and academia. It allows us to reach major decision makers across the private and public sectors. CEDA is an independent not-for-profit organisation, founded in 1960 by leading Australian economist Sir Douglas Copland. Our funding comes from membership fees, events, research grants and sponsorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Methods for Managing Freshwater Refuges Against Climate Change in Southern Australia
    Novel methods for managing freshwater refuges against climate change in southern Australia Supporting document 1: Evaluating the utility of cold-water releases (“shandying”) for enhancing the resilience of riverine species Courtney R. Cummings, Ty G. Matthews and Rebecca E. Lester NOVEL METHODS FOR MANAGING FRESHWATER REFUGES AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTHERN AUSTRALIA SUPPORTING DOCUMENT 1: Evaluating the utility of cold-water releases (“shandying”) for enhancing the resilience of riverine species AUTHORS Courtney R. Cummings – Deakin University Ty G. Matthews – Deakin University Rebecca E. Lester – Deakin University Published by the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility 2013 ISBN: 978-1-925039-51-1 NCCARF Publication 80/13 Australian copyright law applies. For permission to reproduce any part of this document, please approach the authors. Please cite this report as: Cummings, CR, Matthews, TG & Lester, RE 2013, Novel methods for managing freshwater refuges against climate change in southern Australia. Supporting Document 1: Evaluating the utility of cold-water releases (“shandying”) for enhancing the resilience of riverine species, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, 74 pp. Acknowledgement This work was carried out with financial support from the Australian Government (through the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency and the National Water Commission) and the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF). The role of NCCARF is to lead the research community in a national interdisciplinary effort to generate the information needed by decision-makers in government, business and in vulnerable sectors and communities to manage the risk of climate change impacts. Disclaimer The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the Commonwealth or NCCARF, and neither the Commonwealth nor NCCARF accept responsibility for information or advice contained herein.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomass Solar Wind Hydro
    National GreenPower Accreditation Program Annual Audit Audit Period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2006 COMPLIANCE AUDIT hydro solar biomass wind Prepared for The National GreenPower Steering Group October 2007 National GreenPower Accreditation Program Annual Audit Audit Period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2006 COMPLIANCE AUDIT hydro solar biomass wind Prepared for The National GreenPower Steering Group October 2007 URS Australia Pty Ltd Level 3, 116 Miller St, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia Phone: +61 2 8925 5500 • Fax: +61 2 8925 5555 www.ap.urscorp.com Contents 1 Introduction-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-1 1.1 Background 1-1 1.2 Audit Scope 1-1 1.3 Audit Methodology 1-1 1.4 Limitations and Exceptions 1-2 1.5 Structure of this Report 1-3 1.6 List of Abbreviations 1-3 2 National GreenPower Accreditation Program 2006--------------------------------------------------------2-1 2.1 Overview 2-1 2.1.1 GreenPower Products 2-1 2.1.2 Rules of the Program 2-2 2.1.3 Mandatory Renewable Energy Target 2-2 2.1.4 NSW Greenhouse Gas Reduction Scheme (GGAS) 2-2 2.1.5 GreenPower Generators 2-3 2.2 Participation 2-4 2.2.1 Reporting Period 2-4 2.2.2 GreenPower Product Providers/Products 2-4 2.3 Changes to GreenPower Products 2-5 2.3.1 GreenPower Customers 2-7 2.4 GreenPower Purchases and Sales 2-11 2.4.1 GreenPower Events, Events Customers and Events Sales 2-13 2.4.2 GreenPower Generation Sources 2-13 2.5 Energy from ‘Existing’ and ‘New’ GreenPower Generators 2-14 2.5.1
    [Show full text]