Flood Death Toll Rises To 281: Thailand

[webfact]

Flood death toll rises to 281

The Nation

As of Wednesday, some 26 provinces are inundated and six provinces in the South are at risk for landslide and flash flood due to heavy rainfall.

The 24/7 Emergency Operation Centre for Flood, Storm and Landslide issued its latest update on the water situation, saying 2.3 million people are being affected by the inundation. The casualties rose to 281 deaths since July.

Flooded provinces are Sukhothai, Pichit, Phitsanulok, Chai Nat, Nakhon Sawan, Uthai Thani, Sing Buri, Ang Thong, Ayutthaya, Lop Buri, Saraburi, Suphan Buri, Nakhon Pathom, Pathum Thani, Nonthaburi, Ubon Ratchathani, Khon Kaen, Si Sa Ket, Surin, Chachoengsao, Nakhon Nayok, Prachin Buri, Roi Et, Kamphaeng Phet, Tak and Ratchaburi.

Major dams with water retention capacity at critical level are Bhumibol (99 per cent), Sirikit (98 per cent), Kwai Noi (100 per cent) and Pasak (130 per cent).

About 223 roads are being submerged.

Heavy rains are expected in the Central Region, the East and the upper South due to monsoon trough and low pressure ridge. Residents in six provinces should take extra precaution for possible landslide and flash flood.

The six are Ranong (Suk Samran district), Phang Nga (Kapong and Takua Pa), Phuket (Muang, Thalang and Kathu), Krabi (Muang, Khao Phanom), Trang and Satun.

-- The Nation 2011-10-12

[alexakap]

Pasak (130 per cent).

Thai math again?

[geriatrickid]

It would be interesting to know just how these deaths occurred, i.e. cause of death. Are they all drowning or electrocution etc.? Or, are we seeing what is called the katrina bloat so named because of Hurricane Katrina that saw natural deaths or those near death being attributed to the hurricane. Compensation is available to those that die in natural disasters in Thailand, it is not much, but is certainly more than if an elderly person expires due to old age.

[serenitynow]

It would be interesting to know just how these deaths occurred, i.e. cause of death. Are they all drowning or electrocution etc.? Or, are we seeing what is called the katrina bloat so named because of Hurricane Katrina that saw natural deaths or those near death being attributed to the hurricane. Compensation is available to those that die in natural disasters in Thailand, it is not much, but is certainly more than if an elderly person expires due to old age.

I agree it would be interesting to know which deaths they attribute to the flooding. Just guessing, but I'd say before its all over the death toll will be well undercounted as opportunistic diseases associated with the harsh conditions may take their toll as well.

[spirit47]

It would be interesting to know just how these deaths occurred, i.e. cause of death. Are they all drowning or electrocution etc.? Or, are we seeing what is called the katrina bloat so named because of Hurricane Katrina that saw natural deaths or those near death being attributed to the hurricane. Compensation is available to those that die in natural disasters in Thailand, it is not much, but is certainly more than if an elderly person expires due to old age.

Agree with you, deseases and a lot of suicide and missing people make this statistik a joke...

With the 130%, I think it means over 30% of capacity the dam is build for. I don't trust them, I fear the dams broken if rain not stop, and the sandbags in Bangkok can't stand it.

Evacuation must be done Yesterday, before water coming, that will be a ugly DISASTER.

[alexakap]

With the 130%, I think it means over 30% of capacity the dam is build for.

If you are a dam build for, say, 100m high concrete wall...how the heck can you hold extra +30 metres of water? It will just overpass your 100m w/o any difficulties...

So...which 130 percent they're mentioned? 100% full and +30% of the current is passing over?

Edited October 12, 2011 by alexakap

[animatic]

With the 130%, I think it means over 30% of capacity the dam is build for.

If you are a dam build for, say, 100m high concrete wall...how the heck can you hold extra +30 metres of water? It will just overpass your 100m w/o any difficulties...

So...which 130 percent they're mentioned? 100% full and +30% of the current is passing over?

First off they don't rate dams as 100% when the water is spilling over the top, but at a safe distance below, and then attempt to not let water behind the dam rise above the 100% mark, knowing there is a safety factor built in. Still the dam should be able to withstand water to it's top. The problem arises when water starts flowing over the top causing stresses the dam can't handle.

If an old person is close to death and the stresses of being moved to a safer location from their hospital bed contribute, then some of the deaths happening earlier can certainly be attributed to the disaster, even if they were ill before.

RIP to all the dead and chockj dee to the injured and homeless.

[alexakap]

First off they don't rate dams as 100% when the water is spilling over the top, but at a safe distance below,

Thus that is NOT a 100% as they rated it is, but 70% (as it can handle extra +30% without any harm).

And THEN those real 70% + extra overlimited 30% giving us 100% of the capacity (when water finally reaches the top of the wall). STILL 100% at the very maximum, not 130.

I just can't accept the percentages like "a very-very full, sure sir, a 100%!!! PLUS 30 extra for'ya only!" (but the dam still stands - mean it is still not reached its 100 REAL percent even they said it is now on 130). On its REAL 100% it will start collapsing (and please God save us all at that time).

PS: and yes, I know about structure's overall limits - and overlimits, adjusted for safety purposes or something. Just no one ever plus'es em together. 100% of planned capacity and 30% of (still known and meant while constructing!) overlimit (the dam wall's overheight, IMO) - this I will understand. But not "Pasak dam is 130% full of water" - please gimme a break...

"Pasak dam is going to it's REAL 100%" should be correct...

[NCFC]

First off they don't rate dams as 100% when the water is spilling over the top, but at a safe distance below,

Thus that is NOT a 100% as they rated it is, but 70% (as it can handle extra +30% without any harm).

And THEN those real 70% + extra overlimited 30% giving us 100% of the capacity (when water finally reaches the top of the wall). STILL 100% at the very maximum, not 130.

I just can't accept the percentages like "a very-very full, sure sir, a 100%!!! PLUS 30 extra for'ya only!" (but the dam still stands - mean it is still not reached its 100 REAL percent even they said it is now on 130). On its REAL 100% it will start collapsing (and please God save us all at that time).

PS: and yes, I know about structure's overall limits - and overlimits, adjusted for safety purposes or something. Just no one ever plus'es em together. 100% of planned capacity and 30% of (still known and meant while constructing!) overlimit (the dam wall's overheight, IMO) - this I will understand. But not "Pasak dam is 130% full of water" - please gimme a break...

"Pasak dam is going to it's REAL 100%" should be correct...

So when you sit down for dinner tonight and can see some of your plate under the rice, do you shout ' hey my plate's not full!' ?