Comments by "michael close" (@6226superhurricane) on "American Reacts to Australia’s insane plan to green the Outback" video.

generally speaking animal and plant life would benefit hugely from extra water. they boom in wetter years which could offset the impacts of feral pests and land degradation. that is of course unless they just decide to run more cattle, but there is room for both natural and farmland.
3
@shaynegadsden as i mentioned in my own comment on the main post, i don't believe there will ever be enough water to "green" or terraform the desert. there will just be some extra water after extreme flood events. which would greatly benefit the natural plants and animals in those times which is what happens now to a lesser extent. as for extra water there changing rainfall patterns it's highly unlikely to have a significant effect as there just isn't any topography to push the water vapor up into cooler air where it will condense into rainfall. i see it strictly as flood mitigation for the east coast towns with some extra water to replenish what farming is already using to allow a more natural amount to reach plants and wildlife downstream.
2
i believe it should be done but not as way to "green" the desert. i believe it needs to be done to protect dams and cities in times of extreme flood. to be clear this is not to divert rivers normal flow but to divert excess floodwater to central queensland. this floodwater wouldn't be enough to create cropland very far into the desert but it would give the desert flora and fauna more good times of regrowth and reproduction which is already part of the natural cycle. droughts and floods have not become more frequent we operate on a very regular el nino - la nina weather cycle. so even with this scheme there will be still be years of drought even with the bradfield scheme.
2
@shaynegadsden greening the desert was and still is a fairy tale. as i said the extra water can be used to replace what farming already takes. it's not a constant supply. when the east coast dams are full and the water is diverted to the emergency spillways to run west instead of east which saves extensive flood damage on the east coast, and this will only happen every once or twice every 10yrs.
1
@shaynegadsden the benefit is saving on flood insurance claims. there's been times where flooding had already occured downstream and they didn't lower dam levels as they didn't want to add to the flooding. then they got more rain and the dam was at danger level. these scenarios are where the bradfield scheme makes sense. as flooding is a huge cost but a dam breech would be an absolute disaster.
1