Moving The Capital To Higher Ground ?

[Ricardo]

Have just watched Al Gore's film, 'An Inconvenient Truth', and was wondering about the likely effects of this on Thailand. Assuming that the Thai professor is wrong - in saying we're too far from the melting glaciers and polar ice-packs.

As the sea-level rises, Bangkok looks a likely place to suffer, given how well it already floods, so I would guess that a re-location of the capital must be high on the government-planners' list of contingency-actions.

But where would 'they' move the capital to ?

Chiang Mai must be a possible, given its height above sea-level, and it already has many essential-features, such as a world-class pollution-problem.

For the traditionalists then Ayutthaya must be a leading proposal, as a former capital, and not too far from the current one.

Anybody have any other proposals ?

And would the South finally achieve independance, having been cut-off or turned into an island, by the rising waters ??

[draggons]

Ayutthaya floods pretty well too as I know only to well from last year.

[Heng]

Are there any good topographic maps of Thailand online? I'm kinda of curious about some of my properties as well. Will likely be 70 before it becomes an issue though...and Heng Jr's problem.

[Thaddeus]

Are there any good topographic maps of Thailand online?

Here you go.

http://www.star.ait.ac.th/~souris/thailand.htm

[slapout]

There was a article in newspaper a month or so back that Bangkok was already being affected by the rising water level due to warming. This was confirmed by locals who livel in the lower laying areas, wonder if the lack of drainage canels which have been filled in may be a lot of the problem.

[Heng]

cool, thanks Thaddeus.

[soundman]

Moving "it" would be a monumental undertaking. Too hard.

[cm-happy]

Moving "it" would be a monumental undertaking. Too hard.

why not move it. They did it in Brazil, so why not here?

[Jimjim]

Let's move the capital to Mt. Everest if you're that worried.

[think_too_mut]

Let's move the capital to Mt. Everest if you're that worried.

Even that won't help. From today's The Sydney Morning Herald:

More than 70 people were killed by heavy rain and floods across South Asia this weekend, while over one million were left stranded by rising waters, officials said.

Several days of torrential downpours combined with melting Himalayan snow caused flooding in low-lying areas of Nepal, India's northern states and neighbouring Bangladesh, with rivers expected to crest in coming days.

Full article, until it disappears:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/floods-ta...5647773095.html

[Jimjim]

I mean to the peak, of course.

[soundman]

I mean to the peak, of course.

That would leave many peope high and dry.

[cmsally]

I helped my mother purchasing a new house a few years back and we came up with a short list. One of the checks was if the area was likely to flood either by very high tides or excess rain. People thought I was crazy; after the last weeks in the UK they don't think I'm too crazy any more.

A Thai friend living overseas told me some of his relations had to move because of rising sea levels not so long ago. It was the same area as on the news or in the paper - Samut ??? Their temple was also partly underwater.

[Upcountry]

Hey, I finally saw "An Inconvenient Truth" recently, myself. I read the book, but the film really shows the threat of melting pole ice in a dramatic way. We do live in a rapidly changing world. I do think that drought and flooding, along with higher temperatures, will continue to get worse in places like Thailand. We don't need to see that movie to know that.

Smart people will take this into consideration when they pick a place to live, particularly when buying land and building a house, etc.

Ayutthaya is a nice place, and not too far from BKK, but I don't think I'd move there after last year's flooding. I'm not sure about Phitsanulok, my neck of the woods either, in the next few years. If the government gets serious about reforestation up north that will help a lot, of course, but it takes time.

They should return the Floral Expo and Night Safari areas, near Doi Suthep, to forest ASAP.

But there's no stopping the rising sea level, and river water from China is becoming a serious political issue, or it will be in the near future.

Pen rai

[Ned]

The capital's not going anywhere soon. Five to seven million new residents are heading that way by 2020. Rural workers are getting hammered so construction and hazardous factory work in Bangkok beckons. A few feet of water in the streets will not deter them.

[Aussietraveller]

I can see it now...the new slogan for Thai Tourism..

Venice of Asia....

Motrocycles replaced with Long Tail boats

Soi's will need to be renamed Klongs

Let me know where the nearest dry land will be, i will go and buy some now...

[londonthai]

Chiang Mai must be a possible, given its height above sea-level

was badly flooded 2 years ago - but floads almost every year whenever there is too much rain in the mountains.

Bangkok has learned from the last year floads that something has to be done - more than just marely diverting water into the fields of the Ang Thong and Ayuthaya provinces. Capital was saved - but the crops, houses and livelyhood was damaged for the local peasants for many months. They still eat dried fish from the last year deluge.

I believe they have already digged up a 1km canal down the Chao Phraya, in the port area, which shortcuts the 20km loop of the river - that should speed up drainage of the rainwater.

The option is, as in London, building huge barriers on the river, to prevent high sea tides. They would have to be positioned above the very active port od Bangkok. Doing proper, high banks of the river would be equally important.

[lost_in_space]

I see a massive dike system in Bangkok's future, built by the Dutch, and paid for with chickens.

[Upcountry]

The capital's not going anywhere soon. Five to seven million new residents are heading that way by 2020. Rural workers are getting hammered so construction and hazardous factory work in Bangkok beckons. A few feet of water in the streets will not deter them.

I think you're probably right. First of all, despite the floods, and plenty of chickens for trade, it's unlikely that money will be available for any high tech solutions any time soon.

When tuk tuks start to come with pontoons, and car owners are up in arms, marching in rubber boots, they'll probably start to build a new Bangkok somewhere, one entrepreneur at at time, just as chaotic and unplanned as the present one. After all, the Thailand's capitol has moved many times, and it will again.

[londonthai]

bangkok has just finished it's metro, skytrain and elevated motorways (and still developing them) and there are thousands of skyscrappers - so can afford means of protecting them from submerging.

There are as well thousands of canals all over bangkok and around, which drain the area - the matter would be with deepening them from the mud, conservation and better management of locks.

Edited July 30, 2007 by londonthai

[Ricardo]

One of the more-memorable forcasts is for 1, possibly 2, very-rapid ( over a year or so) rises of global sea-level by some 20-feet/6-metres each time, as the Greenland & (part of) South-Polar ice-caps slide into the sea.

The question is, what impact this would have on Bangkok, and whether people would still want to relocate to a semi-flooded capital, in search of work or better living-standards.

Having a lot of capital invested, in individual buildings or support-systems, doesn't necessarily mean that those owners would then work together to invest further capital, to protect their initial investments, or that a suitable way of holding back the waters might be found.

It might be that countries, such as Nigeria, Brazil, Ivory Coast or Burma, who have recently moved their capitals inland and higher, might turn out to be more forward-thinking, than I/we had previously supposed.

[JR Texas]

One of the more-memorable forcasts is for 1, possibly 2, very-rapid ( over a year or so) rises of global sea-level by some 20-feet/6-metres each time, as the Greenland & (part of) South-Polar ice-caps slide into the sea.

The question is, what impact this would have on Bangkok, and whether people would still want to relocate to a semi-flooded capital, in search of work or better living-standards.

Having a lot of capital invested, in individual buildings or support-systems, doesn't necessarily mean that those owners would then work together to invest further capital, to protect their initial investments, or that a suitable way of holding back the waters might be found.

It might be that countries, such as Nigeria, Brazil, Ivory Coast or Burma, who have recently moved their capitals inland and higher, might turn out to be more forward-thinking, than I/we had previously supposed.

Thais do not plan for the future, so do not expect any preventative measures other than "talk." I think global warming will impact Thailand in many ways.

Most likely the weather patterns will shift in some unpredictable manner causing problems in terms of agricultural production--rivers, lakes, ponds could start to dry up. Farmers would have to adapt and that would cost a lot of money and effort. The entire agricultural-logistics system will change (very expensive and disruptive).

Any additional flooding in the large cities will greatly disrupt traffic and the economy. Various diseases (transmitted by insects) could start to take off in response to temperature changes.....

It is impossible to predict with any degree of certainty what will actually happen or where.....but if Thailand is not directly impacted and all of the surrounding countries are, then waves of migrants will start pouring into the country, totally ignoring the insane visa rules.

In short, there will be a negative medical, economic, and social impact.

Global warming is already happening, but it is slow (at least in terms of human perception......extremely fast in terms of geological time), so it is not easily seen or appreciated by most people.

One impact right in front of our eyes is the bleaching of coral all around Thailand. ...the direct result of global warming.

[Doza]

I can see it now...the new slogan for Thai Tourism..

Venice of Asia....

You're about 100 years too late for that one. BKK with all its klongs and the river (used to have more) has been referred to as the Venice of the East for a long time.

Also people are talking about flooding here but rising sea levels is different - think floods but permanent!

I go for the sea wall scenario.

And yes, as mentioned, water borne tropical diseases may increase. We are now seeing an increase in Dengue fever in the region (although I am not relating this to global warming necessarily).

[Upcountry]

"Environmental refugees" will be a household term very soon. Not "tomorrow", but before we know it.

I hope I survive the new diseases (btw, I heard that Australian scientists are looking for a dengue cure in algae), to see the global reaction to the changes coming faster than we expect. We may see wars, but I hope we'll see more global cooperation as the population is cut (epidemics) and the economic balance shifts (coast lines, arable land, etc.). Imagine when we finally reduce our dependence on oil, and the northwest passage means shipping doesn't have to go through the canals.

It's interesting how Myanmar changed it's capital. Thais of centuries past changed the center of government in a similar way I suppose. Today, government could set up a new center somewhere on higher ground, and maybe plan districts for commerce, road grid, etc., over time. Economics will take care of the rest - the pain of trying to fend off the water and dealing with constant flooding - will drive more business and people elsewhere. Migrants can follow business faster than the landed middle class!

Goodbye Thai rice.