A review of water options for South East Queensland by UTS's Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) and Brisbane-based engineering firm Cardno has found that the Traveston Crossing dam scheme is neither necessary nor desirable.

The review, undertaken for the Mary River Council of Mayors, has investigated proposed water supply projects and current and predicted demand for water in South East Queensland (SEQ).

It has also assessed the Queensland Government's proposed strategy for meeting long-term demand for water in SEQ, in which the Traveston Crossing scheme is a major and controversial component.

ISF Director Professor Stuart White said while his organisation supported the Queensland Government's development of a diverse portfolio of water supply and water demand reduction measures as part of the Government's drought response strategy there was no need for a dam.

He said the study team compared a number of water supply and water demand management options in terms of the potential for different options to provide additional water for drought relief as well as the unit cost of different options.

"The Traveston Crossing scheme performs poorly on both these counts," Professor White said. "It will not provide any additional water in the current drought and at $3 per kilolitre is an expensive option in terms of investment required for water returned."

The review proposes an alternative strategy for ensuring that SEQ has a secure water supply including demand reduction and water supply measures. On the water demand side, it recommends that the Queensland Government expand its demand management initiatives and adopt additional programs outlined in the review that have a unit cost less than half that of the Traveston Crossing scheme.

In regard to water supply, the review has found that additional supplies of water are not needed until approximately 2030. However it does recommend to cope with the potential for future severe drought, supply projects such as water recycling and desalination should be prepared in readiness for roll-out as soon as they are required.

The strategy outlined in the review offers an alternative and preferable plan for ensuring water security for SEQ and outlines options which are significantly less expensive than the Traveston Crossing scheme, have fewer negative environmental and social impacts and are less greenhouse intensive.

The report is available for download on the ISF website