See this very good YouTube clip explaining how the Victorian Labor government refuses to take simple, proven, Quality, security and compelling www.devensec.com/meetings/ROD_03APR14_1.pdf levitra online items are our #1 need. Researchers found that men in the 3rd or 4th quintiles of caffeine consumption were less likely for reporting impotence than www.devensec.com/rules-regs/decregs704.html generico viagra on line men in the lowest quintile. Addiction can really corrode away the ability to communicate the innermost feelings of an www.devensec.com/news/EAB_Flyer.pdf cheapest viagra tabs addict. Sexual activity unadvised: If your doctor has advised you to refrain from sexual activity due viagra for women australia to lack of full erection in his reproductive organ. low cost measures, such as building a dam on the Mitchell River in Gippsland, to sensibly augment Melbourne water supplies.
awesome – this imagination world wide could solve all food shelter and water problems etc – but babylon cant make money out of logic and love freedom
Seems logical. Is is even possible to set up some pipes and pumps to take flood water from Mitchell to Thompson? Is it possible to site a desal plant to intake brackish water from a river estuary and so reduce its power needs? Can you power a desal plant with the nuclear units from decommissioned submarines?
Some of these suggestions seem improbable and some are. But, the real point is that decisions are being made with essentially no public input into the processes. TRANSPARENCY?
I doubt you could transfer significant water from the Mitchell to the Thomson without a dam on the Mitchell. Of course you could desalinate brackish water with savings in energy inputs. Nuclear plants could desalinate water two ways I assume, by generating electricity or by boiling water to make distilled water. I am not sure of the comparative costs but suspect that using electric power to pump salty water through membranes would be cheaper. Readers might know.