Chapter 4 - Adapting to Climate Variability
The impact of reduced rainfall
4.1
The current severe drought has highlighted the impact of reduced rainfall
on the sustainability and security of our water resources. The situation is
particularly difficult in the eastern and south-eastern states where the
majority of Australians live and water use is high. Whether the drought is
considered to be part of the recognised cycle of climate variation or the
direct result of climate change, the implications for the Murray Darling Basin
are significant and the long-term predictions of climate experts paint a
pessimistic picture. Studies by the International Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) show that water flows in the MD basin could fall by as much as 35 per
cent by 2050. Associated rainfall scenarios predicted by CSIRO show decreases
of 0-8 per cent by 2030 and 0-20 per cent by 2070 for much of Australia. These
forecasts also include temperature increases of between 0.8 -3.9°C by 2050 and
1.0- 5.9°C in 2080, which means increased evaporation from the rivers.[1]
4.2
CSIRO's Professor Michael Young told the committee that there is at
least a two to one relationship between decline in rainfall and water
availability from run-off:
As a rule of thumb, if you have a decline in rainfall, normally
the decline in water available for use is roughly twice the reduction in
rainfall A 15 per cent reduction in rainfall, which is what
a lot of people are talking about, means a 30 per cent reduction in yield... This
is a general rule of thumb; you would need to run the models everywhere. [2]
4.3
Professor Young's estimate has proved to be very conservative in the
light of the experience in southern Western Australia (including the Perth
region) where a threefold reduction in run-off has been experienced in the past
30 years. The CEO of WA's Water Corporation, Dr Gill told the committee:
There has been a phenomenal shift of climate and weather in the
south of WA and it does appear to be unique worldwide... there seems to be no
other place that is drying quite as fast as the south of Western Australia... We
have had to cope with that over the last 10 years. It has been a trend, we now
know with the best of hindsight, for about 30 years.
For the last eight or nine years the rainfall has been down by
about 21 per cent on what it was up until 1974, and the run-off has been down
by 64 per cent. Actually now it is becoming clear that for the last four or
five years, since 2001, we seem to be down still further. [3]
4.4
In such a situation, it becomes crucial to manage the water available so
that it yields the maximum benefit to all water users, regardless of location. The
Western Australian government and its agencies, including the WA Water
Corporation, have made some progress towards achieving a balance between urban
and rural water needs, in part because they have had the benefit of good
climate decision-making tools developed through the Indian Ocean Climate
Initiative (IOCI), funded by the WA government since 1998.
Monitoring drought
4.5
The committee was fortunate to attend a demonstration of the National
Agricultural Monitoring System (NAMS), a drought monitoring system developed by
the Bureau of Rural Science (BRS) in collaboration with the Bureau of
Meteorology and CSIRO. Although developed with the aim of streamlining
decisions in the Exceptional Circumstances process, the NAMS has the potential
to be applied to a wide range of uses in the process of adaptation to a drier
climate. It contains climatic and production information for dryland and broadacre
industries for over 600 regions throughout Australia and can be developed for
other agricultural sectors. The committee sees a need for a decision-making
tool such as the NAMS to be developed to its full potential so that it can be
of benefit to a wide range of agricultural industries. The committee urges the
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to make funds available to BRS
and its partners to facilitate further development of the NAMS.
4.6
While recognising the valuable information provided by IOCI to the
Western Australian government, the committee is concerned that not enough
climate forecasting and rainfall prediction information is currently available to
decision- makers in other parts of southern and eastern Australia. As a result,
it is not yet possible for the potential impacts of climate change to be
factored into water entitlements and management plans. CSIRO stated in its
submission:
Current water allocation systems do not take into account the
state of the art in climate forecasting methods and therefore it is often not
until the irrigation season is well underway that irrigators have any idea of
how much water will be available. Thus there is considerable risk associated
with planting and crop establishment decisions, and therefore there is a need
for climate forecasting tools aimed at risk management. [4]
4.7
In its submission to the inquiry, the Bureau of Meteorology also argued
for "ongoing investment in basic meteorological and related data systems
and in the science and technology that will ensure best use is made of the
data." [5]
Among the Bureau's initiatives is a new coupled climate model for generating
seasonal to inter annual climate predictions called POAMA (Predictive Ocean
Atmosphere Model for Australia). POAMA is based on mathematical representations
of the interactive physical and dynamical processes of the atmosphere, ocean
and land surface domains that together control climate variability.
4.8
There is a need for projects like POAMA to be adequately funded as part
of the Australian Climate Change Science Programme to which the Australian
government through the Department of Environment and Heritage and the
Australian Greenhouse Office has committed $30.7 million over four years to
2008. The programme supports research for:
- addressing key knowledge gaps about drivers of change in the
climate system relevant to Australia;
- determining climate changes at the regional scale and the causes
of these changes;
- further developing Australia's world class climate modelling
capacity to reduce uncertainty and more accurately simulate past, current and
projected climate;
- investigating how climate change will affect frequency and
intensity of extreme events such as heat waves, cyclones storm tides fire risk
and drought and
- developing more reliable and more comprehensive regional climate
change projections for Australia, including for use in impact and adaptation
studies.
4.9
The following climate science projects are also currently underway and
focus on the task of predicting rainfall and water availability:
-
the Australian Community Climate Earth System Simulator (ACCESS)
project. ACCESS is developing a mathematical model of the earth's climate
system to provide more detailed and accurate predictions of the Australian
climate over forthcoming seasons. It will also enable climate projections for
several decades ahead. ACCESS is being developed by the Australian Bureau of
Meteorology and CSIRO with support from the Australian Greenhouse Office.
- the South East Australian Climate Initiative, (SEACI) project.
SEACI is a $7 million research partnership between CSIRO, Land and Water Australia,
the Murray Darling Basin Commission, the Australian Greenhouse Office and the
Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment.
4.10
The committee believes that in a country with high levels of climate
variability like Australia, it is of the utmost importance to encourage more
climate research. In its submission to the committee, the Bureau of Meteorology
quoted research findings that an estimated $600 million to $1200 million were
saved by the grazing industries alone in the years 1991/92 to 2002/03 because
their farm management decisions were based on improved seasonal climate
forecasting.[6]
4.11
The committee notes that water resources and climate change will be on
the agenda for the next COAG meeting (a decision taken by the participants at
the Southern Murray Darling Basin summit on 7 November 2006). The committee welcomes the fact that COAG's policy makers will have the benefit of data from
the projects mentioned above on which to base future water management
decisions. However, the committee believes that more real-time integrated
climate forecasting, rainfall prediction and water extraction data is needed to
provide better decision making tools for those involved in managing the risks
posed by climate variability.
Recommendation 14
4.12
The committee recommends that, at its next meeting, COAG come to an
agreement about data sharing and the development of protocols relating to
climate forecasting, water measurement and water extraction information, and
the need to support and resource the development of more accurate monitoring
and forecasting systems such as WRON, POAMA and ACCESS.
The Water Resources Observation
Network (WRON)
4.13
In evidence to the committee, Dr Bryson Bates made a plea for additional
government funding for the Water Resources Observation Network (WRON) project
into which CSIRO has already invested $9 million. WRON is modelled on South
Korea's Water Resources Operations Centre (WROC) operated by that country's
Water Corporation. The Australian network will facilitate the sharing of
information on the web about Australian water resources by standardising the
data through a Water Resources Mark-up Language (WRML). WRON's developers are
also establishing agreements on how data will be shared and how the system will
integrate information from electronic and conventional sources.
4.14
The system will integrate new data received through satellite feeds and
ground-based sensor networks to provide real-time hydrologic information, using
state-of-the art visualisation resources to facilitate decision making about
the water resources available. The development of the WRON is supported by an Alliance
that includes the Bureau of Meteorology, the Bureau of Rural Sciences,
Geoscience Australia, ABARE, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, eWater
Cooperative Research Centre, the National Land and Water Resources Audit, the Murray-Darling
Basin Commission and Sinclair Knight Merz.
4.15
By improving both the water accounting and water reporting systems,
WRON, together with climate forecasting tools such as ACCESS, SEACI and
projects similar to IOCI will enable water managers, policy makers, water users
and those involved in the water markets to make decisions that
"incorporate climate variability and change scenarios into understanding
the sustainable footprint of irrigation, irrigation demand management, whole
farm planning and environmental management" as advocated by CSIRO in its
submission.[7]
The committee sees a vital need for that type of integrated approach to water
management data. CSIRO told the committee that the WRON's national scale
approach could result in a saving of 15% to 20% in the annual $2.6 billion
costs of water resources management.[8]
4.16
The committee recognises that by taking into account the impact of
climate and rainfall variation on water availability, a system such as WRON can
help scientists and water managers ensure the longer term security of our water
supplies. They can do this by integrating WRON data with the work done by the
Bureau of Meteorology, CSIRO and other agencies. The CRC for Catchment
Hydrology (CRCCH), for example, has developed techniques for generating long
sequences of climate data that may be used to assess the risk of supply failure
of our water supply systems. The committee believes that with long-term drought
and possible climate change making conditions drier, every possible step should
be taken to fast-track the development of WRON so that its potential benefits should
be realised more rapidly for farmers and irrigators around the country.
Recommendation 15
4.17
The committee recommends that the government allocate to the CSIRO's
Water Resources Observation Network (WRON) project an additional $10 million
over three years from the National Climate Change Adaptation Programme.
Farming innovation and Adaptation
4.18
Few submissions to the inquiry addressed in any great detail, terms of
reference (c) and (e):
- (c) farming innovation and
- (e) the implications for agriculture of predicted changes in
patterns of precipitation and temperature.
4.19
The Queensland Farmers' Federation (QFF) was one of the few. Its submission
stated:
QFF recognises that responding to and managing for climate
variability and change is fundamentally a responsibility of farmers and rural
industries. It is also recognised that this management effort must also be
supported by clearly defined government policy and targeted scientific
research.[9]
4.20
QFF identified the possibility that changes in seasonal rainfall
patterns could deliver rain when it is not needed but also longer periods of
drought. With the predicted increases in temperatures, broad acre crops could
face heat stress and increased susceptibility to pests and diseases. The
submission recognised that climate change might bring both threats and
opportunities for rural industries and it called for research into plant
varieties and farming practices that might be better suited to climate change.
It also called for government funds to be allocated for a research programme to
develop adaptation scenarios to climate change for the benefit of farmers. [10]
Improved irrigation practices
4.21
Other submissions to the inquiry dealing with term of reference (c) farming
innovation, tended to focus on improved irrigation practices.[11]
For example, the manager of Cubbie station compared its very efficient water
storage practices to the high evaporation losses of Menindee lakes.[12]
Coleambally Irrigation Cooperative Limited referred to its $9 million
investment in Total Channel Control technology, a programme aimed at to making
water savings by installing improved metering systems and reducing water lost
through channel escapes.[13]
4.22
Central Downs Irrigators said in evidence to the committee:
We have fully enclosed tail water re-circulations, basically
representing best practice in furrow irrigation, with overhead systems partly
being installed in the area, and drip and various other forms being trialled in
the interests of greater efficiency. [14]
4.23
Cotton Australia told the committee that the industry meets the
international FAO benchmark of 60 per cent whole farm water use efficiency and
that its members are aiming for 75 per cent water efficiency. Cotton farmers do
this by using a water budgeting tool called WATERTRACK to:
...monitor seepage and evaporation losses from farm dams, channels
and fields and develop remediation strategies when required.[15]
Water losses due to seepage and evaporation
4.24
In a period when Australia faces increasingly frequent droughts
and the prospect of a drier climate, the large amounts of water lost to
evaporation has become an issue of concern to irrigators and water policy
makers alike. In December 2004, the Pratt Water report, The
Business of Saving Water sounded the alarm on unaccounted water flows and water losses in the Murrumbidgee river valley. Even
if the often quoted figure of 1,333,000 megalitres of water lost is the subject
of some dispute, there is no doubt that the losses to evaporation from our
rivers, lakes and irrigation channels are huge. The report's research team
leader, CSIRO's Dr Shahbaz Khan, pointed that in arriving
to an accurate measure of water losses, it was important to distinguish
between real water loss to evaporation and seepage into saline groundwater from
apparent water loss into good-quality aquifers, or back to the river, where the
water is often recovered by water users further downstream.[16]
4.25
For the Murray-Darling Basin, the MDBC's CEO estimated yearly losses as
high as 700 GL to 1000 GL before the water reaches South Australia – the
equivalent volume of water that the Murray system can expect to get from the
Snowy scheme in a year.[17]
Referring to another body of water, the Menindee Lakes, Queensland Irrigators
and the manager of Cubbie station complained that "on average, 80 per cent
of all the water take in Queensland evaporates at the Menindee Lakes".[18]
Evaporative losses from the Menindee lakes is often put at an average of 425GL
per year, a volume of water equivalent to Melbourne's yearly water consumption.
In some years, evaporative losses can go as high as 750 GL.
4.26
At the farm level, the Pratt Water study in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation
area suggested the use of 'lay flat' fabric pipes as a cost-effective option
for dealing with excessive evaporation of water as it is being delivered to the
farm.[19]
In a recent major study for grain growers in the Coleambally and Murrumbidgee
irrigation areas, CSIRO found that a systems approach could save them more than
300GL of irrigation water with the costs of water saving technologies ranging
from $50 per ML to an excessive $5,000 per ML.
[20]
4.27
A range of ways of saving water were investigated as part of the study
including canal lining, irrigation scheduling, high-tech irrigation
technologies, improved cropping patterns and conversion to crops with higher
economic returns. In addition, the researchers looked at reducing the
break-even period by leasing water for the environment from farmers and
providing preferential access rights to saved water for farmers who invested in
water-saving technologies.
Storage and irrigation
infrastructure
4.28
Evaporation is inevitable in our dry climate but better storage
management and better irrigation infrastructure can help reduce the loss of
excessive amounts of precious water. The committee welcomes the recent
announcement by the Australian and New South Wales governments of joint funding
for a feasibility study to establish ways of reducing evaporative losses from
the Menindee lakes and securing Broken Hill's water supply. [21]
4.29
In evidence to the inquiry, Engineers Australia expressed concern about
the parlous state of Australia's water storage and irrigation infrastructure:
In the Engineers Australia's Infrastructure Report Card,
irrigation assets have been given a C-minus rating, which means 'not fit for
purpose'.
Looking at the remaining life of irrigation assets around Australia,
...they range from 73 years down to 15 years, so it is a non trivial issue.[22]
4.30
In 2003, the Australian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage
(ANCID) put the annual losses from regional water authorities at around 320 GL.
The committee notes that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
indicated in its submission that reducing water loss from water transport and
storage infrastructure was a federal government priority as part of the Living
Murray Initiative's projects:
The Australian Government has indicated an interest in investing
up to... 40% of the costs of these projects, equating to potentially
$71.6 million.[23]
4.31
South Australia has responded to the evaporation problem by building
piping systems to replace open channels as a means of carrying water. The water
savings more than justify the extra costs involved. An independent assessment
of the situation by Professor Peter Cullen found that in South Australia:
There has been considerable public investment in water delivery
systems to farms that sees most water piped rather than transported in open
channels".[24]
Drought-resistant crops
4.32
Central Downs Irrigators and Cotton Australia gave evidence to the committee
that, in addition to better irrigation practices, the cotton industry has
adopted GM technology such as Bollgard cotton which yields more lint per
megalitre of water.[25]
The committee's view is that the development of new plant varieties is an
essential component of the effort to adapt to a drier climate. In that context,
the committee notes the work of CSIRO in developing more drought-tolerant grain
varieties.[26]
In 2003 for example, CSIRO released the wheat variety Rees, developed using
innovative gene selection criteria. Rees can produce about five per cent more
grain despite receiving the same rainfall. It also has outstanding resistance
to major wheat diseases. [27]
4.33
The development of Rees was supported by the Grains Research & Development
Corporation (GRDC), the departments of Agriculture in WA, and Queensland as
well as Agriculture NSW, AWB Ltd and Enterprise Grains Australia. This
cooperative approach illustrates the benefit of partnerships in pursuing
innovative ways to adapt to a drying climate. The committee urges government
and private agencies involved in agriculture to continue to join forces to fund
the search for solutions to the problems that climate change will inevitably
bring to the agricultural sector.
4.34
CSIRO is involved in developing other adaptation techniques. Advances in
geophysical science are making it possible for CSIRO's Land and Water to
develop techniques to "map" the plant-available water storage
capacity (PAWC) of farm soil.[28]
In addition, CSIRO's ICT centre is developing a system of Wireless Sensor
Networks (WSNs) to assist farmers in optimising their water (and other)
resources on the farm. According to the Project Leader, Dr Tim Wark,:
A Wireless Sensor Network comprises a group of "nodes"
each measuring a variable, for example soil moisture, which wirelessly interact
with their neighbours creating an ad-hoc network which passes information to a
central database. By covering a farm with these nodes, the farmer can always
have an accurate picture of soil moisture levels to determine the most
effective irrigation needs for a field.[29]
4.35
There is no doubt that around Australia, many scientists are involved in
developing techniques that will assist farmers and rural industries to adapt to
a drier climate. However, all the scientific innovative techniques in the world
are useless if they remain a mystery to those who are working the land and who
have the means to apply them – the farmers and those engaged in rural
industries. The committee sees a need for the Department of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) to develop an integrated database of information
about farming innovations currently being developed to assist farmers cope with
drier climate conditions. The committee believes also that DAFF should undertake
a communications programme aimed at making farmers and all those involved in
rural industries aware of new research and new sources of online information
about adapting to climate change.
Rural and urban water trading
4.36
A number of utilities, individuals and organisations around the country
are addressing the need to save water by exploring new avenues. The following
two examples from opposite ends of the Australian continent, south east Queensland
and Western Australia were brought to the attention of the committee during its
inquiry.
4.37
One of the ways in which the WA Water Corporation has responded to the
serious drop in rainfall and run-off in the south-west of the state is by buying
water from a group of rural irrigators at Harvey, south of Perth to supplement
urban demand. The arrangement includes payment in kind through replacing open
irrigation channels with a pipe network that makes water delivery to the
farmers more effective by eliminating loss to evaporation.
4.38
The committee is firmly of the view that such examples of urban-rural
cooperation on water initiatives can be of great benefit to those who engage in
it and it would like to urge water authorities around the country to look for
opportunities to develop similar approaches.
4.39
In other innovative (at least in the Australian context) approaches to
ensuring a reliable water supply for Perth in a drying climate, WA Water
Corporation has constructed a large desalination plant at Kwinana, about 40
kilometres from the city, which is now supplying 17 per cent of Perth's water
needs. It is also exploring other, if somewhat controversial possibilities,
including extracting water from the south-west Yarragadee — a big aquifer about 300
kilometres south of Perth.
Water Recycling in Toowoomba
4.40
The committee held a public hearing in Toowoomba, a city that has
experienced water restrictions since 1992 and the only Australian city to have
considered a serious direct potable reuse proposal, that is, a plan to recycle
waste water to supply one quarter of its water needs including all domestic
uses and drinking water. The reason Toowoomba considered this plan is that the
city currently has just enough water for two years consumption and according to
Toowoomba's mayor:
There is both depleting rainfall and depleting run-off. We get a
bit of rain and it fills the catchment, but before we get the next bit of rain
it has dried out and we have to go again, so our catchment never stays wetted
up enough for us to get run-off. We have seen a fairly substantial lack of run-off
over the last 30 years. I should tell you that our major dam in the last 15
years has run over on only 16 consecutive days on one occasion. In the two
previous years, it ran over on 285 days.[30]
4.41
The committee's visit took place on 2 August 2006, just 4 days after the people of Toowoomba had rejected the recycling proposal in a plebiscite
by a vote of 68 per cent to 32 per cent. Concern was expressed in the hearings
that the period for consultation was too short to allow an effective public
education campaign, and that an alternative solution to secure the city's water
supply was not put forward. The direct potable reuse campaign had been
conducted intensely for three months prior to the referendum and the idea had
first been talked about less than 10 months before the vote. Toowoomba's mayor
told the committee that, in her opinion, three or four years were needed to
educate the public about the scientific aspects of the issue under
consideration. The plebiscite decision effectively leaves the city still
searching for a solution to an increasingly pressing problem. The irony is that
legitimate public concerns about the health and safety of their water
ultimately led the citizens of Toowoomba to reject a water source which is
arguably cleaner than their current supply.
4.42
Direct potable reuse is only one of a range of approaches to water
recycling, and systems based on the substitution of recycled water for
industrial, agricultural and other non-potable uses (such as watering parks and
gardens) are more likely to receive public endorsement in the shorter term. The
Chair and Chief Executive Officer of the National Water Commission, Mr Ken
Matthews, sees water recycling as one of key policy areas that have to be
addressed by the National Water Initiative. He told the committee:
there is a need for more widespread and objective consideration (of
water recycling) across Australia. Surely Australia, as the driest inhabited
continent in the world, should be an early adopter of new and cost-effective
recycling technologies that are now becoming available.[31]
4.43
It appears that in the first instance, using recycled water for watering
parks and gardens and for industrial purposes will prove more acceptable to the
public than using it for domestic purposes.[32]
Twin-pipe or 'purple pipe' domestic systems, which use recycled water for
non-potable domestic purposes (like flushing toilets or watering gardens) are
another less-controversial option for new developments, but the cost of
retro-fitting such systems to existing suburbs is prohibitive. Western
Australia's Water Corporation is currently involved in a joint project with
CSIRO to research the possibilities of managed aquifer recharge, in which
recycled water is infiltrated into an aquifer. The method increases water
storage in the aquifer, to make more water available for irrigation and other
uses and also to preserve water levels in wetlands that are maintained by
groundwater. The intention is to use the aquifer's water initially for watering
parks, ovals and golf courses.[33]
4.44
Ideally, recycled urban wastewater should not only be available for use in
cities and for industry but, where possible, it should add to the volume of
water available for irrigation in rural areas. This is happening to some extent
already, for example in South Australia as explained by the South Australian
government in its submission to the committee:
Trials involving the storage and recovery of treated wastewater
for irrigation of horticultural crops are currently being undertaken at Bolivar
on the Northern Adelaide Plains and in the McLaren Vale area.[34]
4.45
Elsewhere in the country treated town water is routinely returned to
various rivers and streams but a concerted effort should be made to make this
the norm rather than the exception. More importantly, town and shire councils
should not be reluctant to reveal this to ratepayers since it would assist in
making the concept of using recycled water more acceptable, and would
constitute an important step in encouraging judicious use of a precious
resource that is becoming scarcer in many areas through reduced rainfall at the
same time as a growing population means that demand for it is growing.
4.46
Toowoomba's mayor, Councillor Thorley, argued that seeing an advanced water recycling
plant in operation would help people make a decision based on facts rather than
emotion.[35]
In the committee's view, there is a case for governments to invest in one or
more water recycling plants around the country as part of a community education
project designed to raise the awareness of the Australian public in regards to
how a water recycling plant would work and how safe the water would be.
4.47
The reason why this would make sense is that, while the issue has been
decided in Toowoomba, it is highly likely that at some future date, other cities
and regions may wish to consider putting recycled water to uses that have not
been contemplated previously in this country. Politicians of all persuasions
are on the public record as backing this idea.[36]
Recommendation 16
4.48
The committee recommends that the federal government should commit to
the construction of one or more advanced water recycling plants to produce
water for a range of both potable and non-potable uses in order to raise public
awareness about the safety of recycled water.
Conclusion
4.49
Managing our water resources is a difficult balancing act. We are a
growing nation living on a dry continent with extremely variable rainfall
patterns, and recent years have brought water supply security problems to our
agricultural industries, major rural centres and a number of our cities. The
challenge for policy makers is how to best balance competing demands for a
limited precious resource in a manner that ensures the sustainability of the
resource, equity among competing users, predictability and security of supply
for our industries and populations, and still guarantees the survival of
treasured environmental assets. The issue is made more difficult by the
complexity and uncertainty of the science of assessing the resource, and
predicting the impacts of drought and increased climate variability. Ultimately
we need to be able to make good decisions on the basis of the available information
knowing that we cannot predict the future. We need flexible and adaptable water
management systems that can deliver equity and certainty to all users. At stake
is the viability of our cities and towns, our industries and our ecosystems,
our very way of life.
4.50
Although there are gaps in the information available on all aspects of
climate forecasting, a number of promising initiatives are underway to gather
more accurate climate data and develop better forecasting methods. While
uncertainties in climate science are being reduced, it is still important to
recognise that we are dealing with probabilities and risks when talking about
climate forecasts. New drought and rainfall forecasting tools and
scientifically-based suggestions for adaptation will only be of full benefit to
those working on the land if they are made aware of the usefulness of new
research through effective communications programs. Funds must be made
available for education programs for rural industry groups right around the
country. Only by tailoring the message to the needs of the end users can that
message be communicated effectively. For this to happen, those who undertake
such education programs must be adequately trained for the job.
4.51
The evidence gathered during the course of this inquiry has convinced
the committee that Australian scientists and researchers have the creative capability
to find ways to adapt to climate change and use the country's water resources
most efficiently. In addition to its $30.7 million investment
into the research effort as part of the Australian Climate Change Science
Programme, the Australian government has made $14 million over four
years to the National Climate Change Adaptation Programme. Those funds should
be used to pursue every avenue of research that will enable all Australians, in
rural as well as in urban areas, to adapt in the face of the challenge posed by
climate change.
Senator Bill Heffernan
Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page