Table 3: State-contingent water use (GL)
Simulation Year |
Horticulture |
Broadacre | ||||
Irrigation |
Irrigation |
Irrigation |
Irrigation |
Irrigation | ||
Baseline |
2000 |
1,507 |
_______0 |
7,302 |
2,089 |
766 |
Adaptation only |
2050 |
1,101 |
259 |
2,788 |
3,007 |
________0 |
2100 |
_______0 |
811 |
______0 |
2,050 |
________0 | |
Mitigation and (Environment residual) |
2050 |
1,504 |
_______0 |
6,693 |
1,872 |
926 |
2100 |
1,504 |
_______0 |
6,565 |
1,897 |
864 | |
Mitigation and (Environment priority) |
2050 |
1,504 |
_______0 |
4,845 |
1,317 |
507 |
2100 |
1,504 |
_______0 |
4,571 |
1,303 |
488 |
More detailed results on the allocation of land and water between crops and
regions are available as an Appendix from the authors. These results show that,
in the ‘adaptation only’ scenario, the focus of horticultural production shifts
from citrus and grapes (high value commodites that require irrigation in all
states) to a vegetable production activity using irrigation to produce tomatoes in
Normal and Wet states and producing rockmelons without irrigation in Drought
states.
higher than modelled here, as additional irrigation is needed to flush the salt away from the root
zones. This extra water requirement may lead to further adjustment towards opportunity
cropping.
22