DOCSLIB.ORG

Coomera River Catchment Hydrological Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coomera River Catchment Hydrological Study Coomera River Catchment Hydrological Study August 2014 1 Title: Coomera River Catchment Hydrological Study Author: Study for: City Planning Branch Planning and Environment Directorate The City of Gold Coast File Reference: WF19/44/(P1) TRACKS #45484061-v1 Version history Changed by Reviewed by & Version Comments/Change & date date 1.0 Draft Review Review Review Review Distribution list Name Title Directorate Branch Coomera River Catchment – Hydrological Study, August 2014 TRACKS-#45484061-v1 Page 2 of 92 Executive Summary The Natural Hazards (NH) team of the City Planning Branch has undertaken a comprehensive hydrological study of the Coomera River catchment. The Council of the City of Gold Coast (Council) commissioned WRM Water and Environment Pty Ltd (WRM) to undertake a study to review and update its hydrological models to a consistent standard in December 2007. WRM assessed all aspects of model development, calibration, estimation of design discharges and provided a set of recommendations (12.10 ) including a recommendation to update all hydrological models to a consistent standard. Furthermore Monte Carlo methodologies have since become available and it was considered necessary to contrast these methods with the standard Design Event Approach (DEA). This study addresses the WRM recommendations and includes Monte Carlo methodologies for comparative analysis. The main objective of this study is to develop a hydrological model for the Coomera River catchment using the URBS modelling software, calibrate and verify the model against historical flood data, verify the modelling results against Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA) and Joint Probability Analysis (JPA). Finally, estimate the design flood discharges for events ranging from 2 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) to the Probable Maximum Precipitation Design Flood (PMPDF) and document all the works to a consistent standard. In this study, the URBS model for the Coomera River catchment was developed using the current land uses, topographic data sets and best available industry standard modelling approaches. The hydrological study undertaken by NH team has been reviewed by WRM, Council’s Peer Review Group (PRG) and Don Carroll Project Management. Calibration and verification data for 30 historical flood events between 1954 and 2013 were sourced for this study from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). From the available data, five events (January 2013, February 2010, January 2008, June 2005 and March 2004) were selected for calibration and another three events (February 1990, January 1974 and June 1967) were selected for verification. The calibration attempted to match the modelled and recorded flood peaks, volumes, shapes and timing of the hydrographs. A single set of model parameters was adopted for all calibration, verification and design events. Rainfall losses were adjusted to achieve the best possible hydrograph shapes and flood volumes. A uniform initial loss and a continuing loss rates were calibrated for each event. Table below shows the set of model parameters adopted for all calibration, verification and design event simulations: Parameter Adopted Value α (Channel lag) 0.12 (Catchment lag) 1.2 m (Catchment non-linearity) 0.65 N (Muskingum non-linearity) 1 F (Fraction of sub-catchment forested) F*0.5 Coomera River Catchment – Hydrological Study, August 2014 TRACKS-#45484061-v1 Page 3 of 92 Good agreement was achieved between modelled and rated discharges from recorded levels at Canungra Army TM, Clagiraba Road ALERT and Oxenford Weir ALERTs for all calibration events. For the purpose of this report rated discharges from recorded levels are labelled as recorded discharges. The table below shows the modelled and recorded peak discharges for all calibration events. Peak Discharge (m3/s) Event Canungra Army TM Clagiraba Rd AL Oxenford Weir AL Modelled Recorded Modelled Recorded Modelled Recorded Jan 2013 541 527 1047 * 1779 1819 Feb 2010 568 446 1179 * 2237 2203 Jan 2008 801 733 1222 * 1352 * Jun 2005 150 * 269 255 850 790 Mar 2004 383 368 620 571 755 798 * Station appears to have malfunctioned during the event The calibrated URBS model was then used to estimate the design flood discharges throughout the Coomera River catchment using the Design Event Approach (DEA). The design rainfall data including Intensity Frequency Duration (IFD), Temporal Patterns (TP), Areal Reduction Factor (ARF), rainfall spatial distribution and design rainfall losses adopted in this study were recommended by WRM, Council’s Peer Review Group (PRG) and Don Carroll Project Management. A Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA) was undertaken using annual peak discharges at Canungra Army TM for 51 years (1962–2013) of recorded data were available at the time of this study. The methodology recommended in Book 4, Section 2 of Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) viz. fit a Log-Pearson Type III distribution was used for this study. Joint Probability Analyses (JPA) were undertaken using both the Total Probability Theorem Monte Carlo (TPT MC) methodology and Cooperative Research Centre – Catchment Hydrology Monte Carlo (CRC-CH MC) methodology. The design peak flood discharges throughout the Coomera River catchment has been estimated using the DEA, FFA, TPT MC and CRC–CH MC methodologies. The peak design discharges for different ARIs at Canungra Army TM estimated by these methods are shown in the table below: ARI Design Peak Discharge @ Canungra Army TM (m3/s) (Year) DEA FFA TPT MC CRC-CH MC 2 121 113 254 220 5 280 273 370 318 10 396 393 467 404 20 539 528 562 515 50 726 734 694 678 100 883 915 806 868 Coomera River Catchment – Hydrological Study, August 2014 TRACKS-#45484061-v1 Page 4 of 92 The comparison table shows very good agreements between the DEA and FFA estimates and good agreements among DEA, TPT MC and CRC-CH MC estimates for ARIs 10 years and above. Consequently the design hydrographs estimated in this study using the Design Event Approach is considered robust and it will provide the most appropriate input to the hydraulic models to be used for flood planning and flood management studies in the Coomera River catchment. The Tables below show the final peak design discharges at different locations within Coomera River catchment for the 2 year ARI to PMPDF events. It is of note that the design peak discharges estimated in the above comparison table are based on adopted ARF for the catchment area only upstream of Canungra Army TM. However the design discharges estimated in the table below are based on adopted ARF for the total catchment area1. Design Peak Discharge (m3/s) ARI Canungra Oxenford Pacific Hwy Catchment (Year) Clagiraba AL Army TM Weir AL Coomera Outlet 2 113 207 391 406 551 5 264 490 840 865 1118 10 374 706 1152 1186 1507 20 513 960 1488 1536 1944 50 694 1287 1988 2049 2548 100 844 1550 2333 2395 2932 200 896 1667 2544 2615 3239 500 1021 1903 2926 3007 3729 1000 1111 2054 3065 3143 3997 2000 1218 2254 3362 3443 4379 PMPDF 2839 5301 7997 8263 10599 Design Peak Discharge (m3/s) ARI Beechmont Pacific Hwy Pacific Hwy GC Hwy (Year) TM Saltwater Ck Coombabah Ck Coombabah Ck 2 18 72 27 66 5 35 142 62 134 10 49 191 83 174 20 65 242 108 221 50 86 327 149 311 100 104 367 167 346 200 120 407 191 397 500 135 457 217 449 1000 166 685 338 666 2000 182 753 371 730 PMPDF 354 1153 584 1107 1 Adoption of an ARF for the total catchment is appropriate for deriving inflows for a hydraulic model of the lower Coomera catchment. Coomera River Catchment – Hydrological Study, August 2014 TRACKS-#45484061-v1 Page 5 of 92 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Study Objective and Scope ............................................................................................... 10 1.3 Previous Studies ................................................................................................................ 10 1.3.1 Kinhill Cameron McNamara (1979) .......................................................................... 10 1.3.2 WBM Oceanics (1988) ............................................................................................. 10 1.3.3 Kinhill Cameron McNamara (May 1992) .................................................................. 10 1.3.4 Kinhill Cameron McNamara (January 1993) ............................................................ 11 1.3.5 Kinhill Pty Ltd (Jun 1998) .......................................................................................... 11 1.3.6 Bureau of Meteorology (July 1998) .......................................................................... 11 1.3.7 Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (February 2000) .......................................................... 11 1.3.8 Gold Coast City Council (April 2001) ........................................................................ 11 1.4 Limitation Statement .......................................................................................................... 12 1.5 Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................. 12 2. Catchment Description ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Queensland Public Boat Ramps
    Queensland public boat ramps Ramp Location Ramp Location Atherton shire Brisbane city (cont.) Tinaroo (Church Street) Tinaroo Falls Dam Shorncliffe (Jetty Street) Cabbage Tree Creek Boat Harbour—north bank Balonne shire Shorncliffe (Sinbad Street) Cabbage Tree Creek Boat Harbour—north bank St George (Bowen Street) Jack Taylor Weir Shorncliffe (Yundah Street) Cabbage Tree Creek Boat Harbour—north bank Banana shire Wynnum (Glenora Street) Wynnum Creek—north bank Baralaba Weir Dawson River Broadsound shire Callide Dam Biloela—Calvale Road (lower ramp) Carmilla Beach (Carmilla Creek Road) Carmilla Creek—south bank, mouth of creek Callide Dam Biloela—Calvale Road (upper ramp) Clairview Beach (Colonial Drive) Clairview Beach Moura Dawson River—8 km west of Moura St Lawrence (Howards Road– Waverley Creek) Bund Creek—north bank Lake Victoria Callide Creek Bundaberg city Theodore Dawson River Bundaberg (Kirby’s Wall) Burnett River—south bank (5 km east of Bundaberg) Beaudesert shire Bundaberg (Queen Street) Burnett River—north bank (downstream) Logan River (Henderson Street– Henderson Reserve) Logan Reserve Bundaberg (Queen Street) Burnett River—north bank (upstream) Biggenden shire Burdekin shire Paradise Dam–Main Dam 500 m upstream from visitors centre Barramundi Creek (Morris Creek Road) via Hodel Road Boonah shire Cromarty Creek (Boat Ramp Road) via Giru (off the Haughton River) Groper Creek settlement Maroon Dam HG Slatter Park (Hinkson Esplanade) downstream from jetty Moogerah Dam AG Muller Park Groper Creek settlement Bowen shire (Hinkson
    [Show full text]
  • Water for South East Queensland: Planning for Our Future ANNUAL REPORT 2020 This Report Is a Collaborative Effort by the Following Partners
    Water for South East Queensland: Planning for our future ANNUAL REPORT 2020 This report is a collaborative effort by the following partners: CITY OF LOGAN Logo guidelines Logo formats 2.1 LOGO FORMATS 2.1.1 Primary logo Horizontal version The full colour, horizontal version of our logo is the preferred option across all Urban Utilities communications where a white background is used. The horizontal version is the preferred format, however due to design, space and layout restrictions, the vertical version can be used. Our logo needs to be produced from electronic files and should never be altered, redrawn or modified in any way. Clear space guidelines are to be followed at all times. In all cases, our logo needs to appear clearly and consistently. Minimum size 2.1.2 Primary logo minimum size Minimum size specifications ensure the Urban Utilities logo is reproduced effectively at a small size. The minimum size for the logo in a horizontal format is 50mm. Minimum size is defined by the width of our logo and size specifications need to be adhered to at all times. 50mm Urban Utilities Brand Guidelines 5 The SEQ Water Service Provider Partners work together to provide essential water and sewerage services now and into the future. 2 SEQ WATER SERVICE PROVIDERS PARTNERSHIP FOREWORD Water for SEQ – a simple In 2018, the SEQ Water Service Providers made a strategic and ambitious statement that represents decision to set out on a five-year journey to prepare a holistic and integrated a major milestone for the plan for water cycle management in South East Queensland (SEQ) titled “Water region.
    [Show full text]
  • Disaster Management Plan Important Information
    LOCAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPORTANT INFORMATION Certain sections of this Scenic Rim Regional Local Disaster Management Plan are privileged and confidential and are not available for distribution to the general public. Scenic Rim Regional Council permits the use of material contained in the Scenic Rim Regional Local Disaster Management Plan being reproduced for research or planning purposes provided that any material used remains unaltered and due recognition of the source of the materials is recognised. Any party using the information for any purposes does so at their own risk and releases and indemnifies Scenic Rim Regional Council against all responsibility and liability (including negligence, negligent misstatement and pure economic loss) for all expenses, losses, damages and costs as a consequence of such use. All requests for additional or clarifying information regarding this document are to be referred to: The Local Disaster Coordinator Scenic Rim Local Disaster Management Group Scenic Rim Regional Council PO Box 25 BEAUDESERT QLD 4285 Ph. 07 5540 5111 Website: www.scenicrim.qld.gov.au ii Scenic Rim Regional Council Local Disaster Management Plan FOREWORD FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF SCENIC RIM LOCAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT GROUP The Scenic Rim region is a dynamic area in South East Queensland which has a wide range of topography, changing demographic and diversified industries that may be occasionally subject to the impact of disasters, both natural and non-natural. To meet these challenges, Scenic Rim Regional Council annually review and maintain this Local Disaster Management Plan. The focus of the Plan, as required by the Disaster Management Act 2003, is to minimise the effects of disasters or significant emergencies within the Scenic Rim community by ensuring a coordinated, risk management approach involving Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Recovery strategies at Local, District, State and Federal Government levels, along with local emergency services.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Needs Analysis (August 2018)
    RDA Ipswich & West Moreton AGRICULTURAL NEEDS ANALYSIS TRANSFORMING A REGION August 2018 Kilcoy Esk Regional Development Australia Ipswich & West Moreton would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of our region – The Jagera, Kitabul, Ugarapul, Yugambeh and Yuggera people. Gatton Ipswich Laidley Springfield Lakes Disclaimer – Whilst all efforts have been made to ensure the content of this Boonah Beaudesert publication is free from error, the Regional Development Australia Ipswich & West Moreton (RDAIWM) Ipswich and West Moreton Agricultural Needs Analysis does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information. RDAIWM does not accept any liability for any persons, for any damage or loss whatsoever or howsoever caused in relation to that person taking action (or not taking action as the case may be) in respect of any statement, information or advice given in this publication. 2 RDAIWM Agricultural Needs Analysis AUG 2018 Chair’s Message As there is no single entity to bring together becoming better informed about the food they the various needs and wants for the future are eating and taking a more significant interest development of the agricultural industry of in its provenance and qualities. the four Councils of the West Moreton region Similarly, the increasing pressures of living in a (Ipswich, Somerset, Lockyer Valley and Scenic global city, as Brisbane is becoming, engenders Rim), Regional Development Australia Ipswich & a desire for respite. West Moreton (RDAIWM) has undertaken a high- level review of the vital infrastructure and policy The SEQ Regional Plan categorises most of development needs of the region. the study as: “Regional Landscape and Rural ongoing existing lists of considered, critical Production” for precisely this reason: to provide infrastructure priorities.
    [Show full text]
  • WATER SECURITY STATUS REPORT December 2020
    WATER SECURITY STATUS REPORT December 2020 SEQ Water Grid capacity Average daily residential consumption Grid operations and overall water security position (L/Person) Despite receiving rainfall in parts of the northern and southern areas The Southern Regional Water Pipeline is still operating in a northerly 100% 250 2019 December average of South East Queensland (SEQ), the region continues to be in Drought direction. The Northern Pipeline Interconnectors (NPI 1 and 2) have been 90% 200 Response conditions with combined Water Grid storages at 57.8%. operating in a bidirectional mode, with NPI 1 flowing north while NPI 80% 150 2 flows south. The grid flow operations help to distribute water in SEQ Wivenhoe Dam remains below 50% capacity for the seventh 70% 100 where it is needed most. SEQ Drought Readiness 50 consecutive month. There was minimal rainfall in the catchment 60% average Drought Response 0 surrounding Lake Wivenhoe, our largest drinking water storage. The average residential water usage remains high at 172 litres per 50% person, per day (LPD). While this is less than the same period last year 40% 172 184 165 196 177 164 Although the December rain provided welcome relief for many of the (195 LPD), it is still 22 litres above the recommended 150 LPD average % region’s off-grid communities, Boonah-Kalbar and Dayboro are still under 57.8 30% *Data range is 03/12/2020 to 30/12/2020 and 05/12/2019 to 01/01/2020 according to the SEQ Drought Response Plan. drought response monitoring (see below for additional details). 20% See map below and legend at the bottom of the page for water service provider information The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) outlook for January to March is likely 10% The Gold Coast Desalination Plant (GCDP) had been maximising to be wetter than average for much of Australia, particularly in the east.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Forum and Stakeholder Engagement Booklet
    Urban Water Security Research Alliance Science Forum and Stakeholder Engagement Building Linkages, Collaboration and Science Quality 28-29 September 2010 Brisbane, Queensland Program and Abstracts UWSRA Science Forum and Stakeholder Engagement – Program and Abstracts ISSN 1839-1230 (Print) UWSRA Science Forum and Stakeholder Engagement – Program and Abstracts ISSN 1839-1249 (Online) The Urban Water Security Research Alliance (UWSRA) is a $50 million partnership over five years between the Queensland Government, CSIRO’s Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, Griffith University and The University of Queensland. The Alliance has been formed to address South-East Queensland's emerging urban water issues with a focus on water security and recycling. The program will bring new research capacity to South-East Queensland tailored to tackling existing and anticipated future issues to inform the implementation of the Water Strategy. For more information about the: UWSRA - visit http://www.urbanwateralliance.org.au/ Queensland Government - visit http://www.qld.gov.au/ Water for a Healthy Country Flagship - visit www.csiro.au/org/HealthyCountry.html The University of Queensland - visit http://www.uq.edu.au/ Griffith University - visit http://www.griffith.edu.au/ Enquiries should be addressed to: The Urban Water Security Research Alliance PO Box 15087 CITY EAST QLD 4002 Ph: 07-3247 3005; Fax: 07- 3405 3556 Email: [email protected] Begbie, D.K. and Wakem, S.L. (eds) (2010), Science Forum and Stakeholder Engagement: Building Linkages, Collaboration and Science Quality, Urban Water Security Research Alliance, 28-29 September, Brisbane, Queensland. Copyright © 2010 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Capital and Operating Expenditure Final
    Seqwater Irrigation Price Review 2013-2017 Assessment of Capital and Operating Expenditure FINAL December 2012 Seqwater Irrigation Price Review 2013- 2017 ASSESSMENT OF CAPITAL AND OPERATING EXPENDITURE Rev 6 Final 12 December 2012 Sinclair Knight Merz ABN 37 001 024 095 Cnr of Cordelia and Russell Street South Brisbane QLD 4101 Australia PO Box 3848 South Brisbane QLD 4101 Australia Tel: +61 7 3026 7100 Fax: +61 7 3026 7300 Web: www.skmconsulting.com COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Merz constitutes an infringement of copyright. LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd’s Client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Contents 1. Executive summary 6 1.1. Introduction and background 6 1.2. Policy and procedure review 6 1.3. Capital expenditure 7 1.4. Operational Expenditure 12 2. Introduction 18 2.1. Terms of reference 18 2.2. Report overview 19 3. Background 20 3.1. Seqwater 20 3.2. The role of the Authority 22 3.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Safety Management Program
    DAM SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Controlled Copy 1 Revision 0 May 2010 REVISION STATUS Revision No. Date Amendment Details 0 May 2010 Revision No: 0 Date: May 2010 1 DISTRIBUTION LIST Controlled Copy Agency Responsible Person Location Number 1 Seqwater Chief Executive Officer Brisbane 2 Executive General Manager, Seqwater Brisbane Water Delivery 3 Dam Safety and Source Seqwater Brisbane Operations Manager 4 Seqwater Principal Engineer Dam Safety Karalee 5 Seqwater Operations Coordinator, North Landers Shute 6 Seqwater Operations Coordinator, Central Wivenhoe Dam 7 Seqwater Operations Coordinator, South Karalee 8 DERM Dam Safety Regulator Brisbane Revision No: 0 Date: May 2010 2 DEFINITIONS “Act” means the Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act 2008; “AHD” means Australian Height Datum; “ANCOLD” means Australian National Committee on Large Dams; “Chairperson” means the Chairperson of Seqwater; “Controlled Document” means a document subject to managerial control over its contents, distribution and storage. It may have legal and contractual implications; “Dams” means dams to which this document applies, that is all referable dams owned by Seqwater; “Dam Operator” means a person who has been trained and who is competent to operate a Dam; “Dam Supervisor” means the senior on-site officer at a Dam; “Data Book” means Data Book for a Dam; “DERM” means the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management; “EAP” means Emergency Action Plan for a Dam; “EL” means elevation in metres Australian Height Datum; “Flood Manuals” means Manual
    [Show full text]
  • South Coast District
    152°30'E NORTH COAST DISTRICT 153°0'E METROPOLITAN DISTRICT 153°30'E U 2 B 8 e R A B v La 8 I k S A e 0 >>34 S >>97 BIRKDALE Dr ! 1 k L Mining INDOOROOPILLY o Peel Is. 0 O n R e ! ster d Dunwich t BEENLEIGH che o k an n 1 R B M Co v iv U >>5 # 0 c a er B C s m k S U H Pine U 2 r il M R p ls A 9 d o A LEGEND L R 8 1 a K 2 O C R A d o U96 n c oa y d I G w d u BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL T n N S 2 27°30'S e h BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL A P P ) n 27°30'S i a k W p N v l R o a t B G R n a t a R t H k y A d O 5<< y 1 h e a d o i E MOUNT CROSBY r C n o C l KENMORE d g y S i A a 1 ! 97<< a n i C r n o L Cleveland Pt. r U r P n x U re B e h N 201 d o Raby Bay STATE-CONTROLLED ROAD 12A 9 a P I l YERONGA 201 w l h s v e 9 D y ea F E g l C p i ie san D d a C l CHANDLER 8 e t t y w 3 k I R CRIMSTON 2 w B w a o L C s n R E n a 905 1 S A ! 12 u o 2 T Fin r 1 ir e o H A b uc e S d O S ( ane C V h y d a F d k S N FUTURE STATE-CONTROLLED ROAD 4 11 c a PINE MOUNTAIN CR c T HOLLAND R 2 T d d o COOLANA d R d U R i R m n A L a i e o d 23 i a w l l CAPALABA R Mon k L l s m R L s M ao o a PAR K u S m uth Mt Crosby E PULLENVALE A p hA >>8 E n L R I a s B v a S R d I Sil ar R ALEXANDRA CLEVELAND OTHER ROAD n R LOGAN CITY e Hu E ! kw d - g R R M t T h o d G r es IVE o Y Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Reports Volume 1 and Volume 2 Seqwater Irrigation Price Review 2013- 2017
    Response to Queensland Competition Authority Draft Reports Volume 1 and Volume 2 Seqwater Irrigation Price Review 2013- 2017 on behalf of Members of Mid Brisbane River Irrigators Inc March 2013 MBRI gratefully acknowledges QCA’s assistance by granting an extension for this Response to 13 March 2013 MBRI Response to QCA Draft Reports Contents Abbreviations and Terms used in this Response .............................................................................. ii Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................... iii Features of mid Brisbane River irrigation............................................................................................ 1 About MBRI ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 MBRI comments on particular recommendations ............................................................................ 5 Part 1: QCA Draft Report Volume 1 .................................................................................................... 5 Part 2: QCA Draft Report Volume 2: CBRWSS .............................................................................. 18 Comment on terms of reference............................................................................................................. 36 Legal position ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WATER SECURITY STATUS REPORT July 2021
    WATER SECURITY STATUS REPORT July 2021 Overall Water Security Position Wivenhoe and Somerset future levels should recent conditions repeat Average Daily Residential Consumption With the Water Grid levels now below 60%, Seqwater continues 100% 100% to advocate for water efficiency and has a campaign in market to 80% encourage residential demand reduction. The target of 150 litres per 90% person per day (LPD) is in place as per the South East Queensland 60% 80% adaptive drought response approach. 70% 40% Drought Readiness 60% 2020 July average 20% Drought Response 50% 0% % 40% Target 150 (LPD) 30% Jun-19 Jun-20 Jun-21 Jun-22 Sep-19 Sep-20 Sep-21 Dec-19 Dec-20 Dec-21 59.4 Mar-20 Mar-21 Mar-22 20% Combined Brisbane storage level (%) Somerset-Wivenhoe observed Somerset-Wivenhoe forecast based on average monthly changes 2016-2021 10% SEQ 0% Average Litres per Person Day 0.8% 1 month ago Water Grid storage 3.1% 1 year ago *as at 31 July 2021 Water Grid storage actual drawdown to July 2021, with projected drawdown to December 2021. Drought is continuing across the South East Queensland region, with 146 156 145 165 141 143 the Water Grid level now officially below the drought response trigger The Water Grid drawdown graph shows historical storage data and a projected five month drawdown if the rate observed during the dry calendar 1 *Data range is 1/07/2021 - 28/07/2021 and 2/07/2020 - 29/07/2020 at 59.4%. year of 2019 was repeated. The 2019 data is used because it was a particularly dry year.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Queensland Agriculture Report June 2014
    Case study Improved management practices The Queensland Government is committed to building • pest management a strong and sustainable agricultural industry; – Targeted chemical application which has been demonstrated through its ongoing (injecting rather than spraying) commitment to the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan – Reduced chemical use and other land management initiatives. Agricultural practices may impact the environment and natural • soil and water management resources that the industry depends on. However, – Reduced tillage improving agricultural practices may result in a two- fold benefit of improved environmental outcomes and – Longer crop cycles economic benefit over the long term. – Minimised traffic in wet season – Soil moisture monitoring Modelling of a typical cane farm near Cairns showed – Interrow vegetation that income increased by improving practices such as reducing tillage and nitrogen application and legume – Composting. fallow. Although analysis indicated a small reduction Capital outlay was needed for purchasing three in crop yield, financial returns were enhanced through harvesters and a slasher and to make changes to reduced tillage operations, increased efficiencies the irrigation and fertigation system. The farmer and inputs over a full crop cycle. Overall, operating considered it a worthwhile investment as it led to a with these improved practices provided important 20 per cent reduction in irrigation-related costs and economic benefits to a farmer at the plot level and improved soil and plant health. resulted in positive effects on profitability. Water monitoring equipment and a soil analysis was A 95 hectare banana farm that adopted improved also purchased, which resulted in a considerable practices after Severe Tropical Cyclone Larry in reduction in chemical (fertiliser and pesticide) costs.
    [Show full text]