Australia's Plan to Green the Outback

John C. Delfeld

May 7, 2022

Australia is the driest inhabited continent in the world and is limited in livable areas. This means that there are vast amounts of land that is unsuable for human settlement and agriculture.

As seen in this map rainfall most commonly falls on the coast. This results in a highly coastal population

However some think that the Outback could be geoformed into a breadbasket of agricultaral productivivty. A plan known as the Bradfield scheme proposes diverting flows from river water into the desert, thus irrigating the land. The man behind the plan was named John Bradfield, a prominent engineer who is known for designing the Syndey harbor bridge. He said the plan was inspired by New Deal projects in America.

The circle area is the amount of land that Bradfield claimed would be irrigated.

It was first drawn up in the 1930s's. The idea was to divert the upper reaches of the Herbert,Tully and Burkedin rivers into an arid area of northern Queensland. In the plan it was claimed that an area of 3,000 sq miles could be irrigated, a area larger than 2 Rhode Islands. However the orginal plan quickly came under critism from scientists, who pointed out that Bradfield failed to account for the high evaporation rates of the Australian desert. The plan was scrapped at the time, but the idea never totally died.

Starting in the late 2000's there has been a push to revisit the Bradfield scheme, with new plans being devolped that claim to account for thre high evaporation rates, among other enviromental hazards. In 2019 support took off, as the one of the two main parties in Australia, the Liberal Party pledged their support for long term investment in a modified plan. The party has pledged 20 million AUD to revive the scheme.

To the left is Lake Eyre, on of the dry areas that would be irrigated by the scheme. To the right is a wheat field, one of the crops planned to be planted in the irrigated area

In modern times it is being reconsidered because some Australian policy makers believe that there is potential for Australia to be a major food supplier to a growing Asia. The new farmland would help with this goal.

As seen in the graph Asia's demand for food will rise significantly in the coming decades

Although their exists some scepticism,proponents point to other successful geoenginering projects in Australia as reason to finally go through with the plan. The Ord river scheme in Western Australia was sucessfully completed in 1972, resulting in 100s of kilometers of land being made suitable for irrigated agriculture, with more land being planned for the future.

New areas of agriculture opened up by Ord river scheme

Ross Garnault. Economist and one of the leading advocates for the Bradfield scheme

To the proponenets of the new Bradfield plan this success proves that terreforming projects in dry Australia are viable. Thus in 2020 a feasibility study by the Queensland government was commissoned in order to determine its feasibility . It is headed by economist Ross Garnault, a former advisor to two previous Australian prime ministers. The panels report has not been released yet.

Sediment pollution in the Great Barrier Reef

In addition to providing area for agriculture, Garnault claims that this scheme will make interior Queensland "drought proof" and reduce the amount of enviromentally damaging runoff water from reaching the ocean. It is claimed this would help the decaying Great Barrier Reef.

However there is a loud voice of opposition to this plan. They claim the plan will cause more enviormental damage than it will fix and that the costs outweight the benefits. One of the main criticisms of the plan is that it will disrupt the fragile ecosystems of western interior. According to an impact assesment by the Australian government, many of the areas that are to be inudated are critical habitaits to several endangered species.

(L-R)Mary River Cod,Australian Lungfish,Mary River Turtle

Some critics also refute Garraults claim that the project will help protect the Great Barrier Reef. James Webster of the Australian Marine Conservation Society says that the project "is a big problem" for the health of the reef. The idea that the project will reduce pollution exists because runoff water from the three rivers will be diverted inward, away from the ocean. Instead of the sediment going into the ocean, it will stay inland. Webster fears that the increase in agriculture will create massive amounts of sediment buildup, buildup that will eventually find its way back into the ocean. There are various safeguards in place to prevent sediment from runing off into the water, but it is unclear if these will hold up with increased agriculural use.

A stream with high salinity in Queensland. A common sight throught Australia

Salinity: Another problem is the massive salt deposits that are situated underneath the areas soil. Some say the salt will seep up through the ground after the plants are destroyed during the flooding process, thus making the water unusable.

Indigneous land rights: A further issue with the Bradfield plan is the fact that much of the land that would be used in the plan falls under the jurisdication of Aborginal land title. This is an obstacle as the government would need to get permission from the titleholder if they were to go through with the plan.Otherwise they will have to use eminent domain, an ardous process.

A map of Aborginal land titles in Northern Queensland.

An interesting aspect of the project is its polical overtures. Those most in favor of the project are those considered right wing in Australia such as Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Senator Pauline Hanson and Reprsentative Bob Kattar.

Scott Morrison(top) Pauline Hanson(left) Bob Kattar (right)

Besides economic devolpment, the other main reason for the project is to fufil the idea Australian expansion. Similiar to America, Australia was orginally a pioneer society settled by European, English speaking settlers. Like in America, expansion in Australia started out on the coasts and eventually trickled inward. During this time period an idea similiar to America's "manifest destiny" emerged, in which it was Australians duty to settle and tame the interior of wild continent. This idea of taming nature is apparent in the proposal of the Bradfield scheme. To many the scheme is not just about taking making economic gains, but an act in nation building, continuing the legacy of the pioneering Australians came before. It makes sense than that the conservative right wing would be enthusiastic about this project, as in their idealogy they glorify the history of pioneering Australians.

Those oppossed to the plan include Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszcuk of the Labour Party and Queensland Senator Larissa Waters of the Green Party, both of which are left wing parties.

Larissa Waters(left) Annastacia Palaszcuk(right)

In contrast the the right wing, the old ideas of Australian exceptionlism are far less important in the ideology of the Australian left wing and thus there is not much of an emotional appeal to the Bradfield project for them. To them the scheme is a pie in the sky idea that is not worth the risk.