ACTEW Water has posted a series of pictures as the new Cotter Dam fills up and the old dam wall disappears beneath the waters:
The original dam was built in 1915, and the reliable river it is built on, the Cotter, was instrumental in the decision to place the National Capital where it is today.
The height of the dam was increased in the 1950’s to around 30m high, with a capacity of just under 4 gigalitres (billion litres).
The new Cotter Dam is being built 100m downstream of its predecessor and at 80m high towers above it, capable storing much more water at 78 gigalitres.
It is not possible to view the old dam as it is within the Enlarged Cotter Dam construction site, however we will continue to keep our customers updated with photos as our faithful old friend is gradually submerged.
Loading ...
This may be of interest:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/act_parks/8725002668/
The point overall is that the Cotter Dam/Reservoir is but one third of the overall catchment.
The ACT exists because of this reliable water source (i.e. Cotter River). Your tap water has been provided via Bendora and fed to you simply by gravity. The Cotter has and will continue to be an ‘insurance policy’ – a bit like the water tank you have (or should have) in your backyard.
Tnks to C-C for the info on the attempts at hydro along the cotter. I did not know. Thanks again.
patrick_keogh said :
All the dams are in order alphabetical. It’s just a coincidence that the Cotter River are adjacent in the list.
thebrownstreak69 said :
And while you are there please reorder the Cotter River dams to be in the correct order.
Diggety said :
I’d say when the dam construction was finished, which looks to still be a few months away. They’ve reached the top height but there’s still a fair bit of work to do to finish it.
thebrownstreak69 said :
Good question.
Please don’t answer c_c, I’m having a happy day today.
54-11 said :
Oh wise and wonderful overlords of the Riot Act, can I suggest a bumper sticker to show support for those of us who choose to post comment about things we have no idea about.
I’M IGNORANT, AND I POST
Two for me, please.
c_c™ said :
When did this rule come in?
Wow, who would have thought a comment pointing out a single (yet not insignificant) flaw with the Cotter Dam would draw such vitriol. For the record I didn’t ever claim that the new Cotter Dam was the wrong/worst decision. I simply pointed out that the location is not ideal and the construction/operational costs are high – both of which are true.
That being said, thank you c_c™ for sharing your wisdom. You make very good points, and the fact is that any expansion of Canberra’s water supply involves compromise. I have some views on the options identified in the Future Water Options project (and previous reports), but clearly this is not the forum for rational discussion on the topic.
Keijidosha said :
Boom boom! Hahahaha!
54-11 said :
Yeah, there’s a surprising amount of heat being generated over this topic. Energy that would be better directed at cyclists, motorists, or the local politicians I reckon. 🙂
54-11 said :
There’s more than enough material in the public domain that there’s no excuse, that’s why.
4 years of construction and all the discussion during that time, the better part of 15 years of planning. They looked at more than 30 different options, from entirely new dams, to fuse gates and wall extensions to increase capacity of existing dams, to virtual dams and water recycling.
This is the option they arrived at.
I’m willing to bet the vast majority of the naysayers aren’t familiar with the alternatives explored, or the back story of the existing dam.
The capacity for Canberrans to whinge is astonishing. What’s that I hear? Yes, enough about the Dam, let’s slag off the new airport too.
54-11 said :
Only a bloody dam?
It’s an eebil socialistic commie Labor plot to waste the hard-earned dollars of the good burghers of Canberra whose money should be entirely theirs to spend as they please. It’s been put over on us by the greenie global warming liars who tell us there’ll be less water because we haven’t built trams and wind farms when everyone can see that it’s been raining for the last few days and it’s been chilly today!
Understand?
Duffbowl said :
Agreed, what’s with all the aggro? Jeez, it’s only a bloody dam.
patrick_keogh said :
More like going under to be stored under 70 odd gigalitres
c_c™ said :
Bloody hell, if we make that a condition of posting comment, this will rapidly become a very quiet site.
gooterz said :
Do you mean “Small first steps, moving towards broad capacity on a firm footing?”
Keijidosha said :
I dare you to drink from the Molonglo River for a week. If you are still well enough to converse after that, try convincing Canberrans to dam up somewhere west of the lake. Got any good catchment options? It’s only Queanbeyan you’d be putting underwater and wow, what an impressively large and expensive dam it would be! Googong does not have enough capacity for supply or they wouldn’t have built the link to the Murrumbidgee either. You do not realise that it’d still have to be pumped in from there anyway. If you wish, and have access to a river, build your own dam in the backyard and fetch water with a bucket to save on pumping costs.
Is this a metaphor for self government?
The new Cotter Dam continues the worst legacy of the old dam – being built in a location that requires pumping to supply Canberra. So not only did it cost a mint to build, the ongoing costs just to access the water are steep.
Now you see, this is the stupid uneducated comments that people who do understand how a utility network should be designed have to put up with on a day to day basis.
I trust you are on some sort of committee throwing in your opinion,making decisions on matters that you clearly have no idea about, whilst ensuring everyone listens when you speak but go to ground and start pointing fingers if it does not pan out how you thought?
Why not try politics 1/2 way I there now!