Anger Rises In Flooded Bangkok As Centre Stays Dry

[thaicbr]

It is about symbolism in a changing country. The area that is not flooded stands for certain things in many many people's minds and that makes this a very divisive and political issue regardless of whether risking the flooding of central BKK by a more aggressive water flow through the centre is a good or bad idea.

Everyone has seen the satellite images showing BKK at the centre of the water mass and dry and virtually everyone north of BKK thinks the gates should have been opened ages ago. The whole thing is compounded now by high tides and it is fairly obvious that if water were to be sent through central BKK a while back when there were low tides was the time to do so. There will be another opportunity starting soon when tides get lower. In the meantime the symbolism in a badly divided country is not missed.

Symbolism is great as long as you can control it.. Can you control the flood that you want to release into Bkk,

Can you provide food and water to the people in Bkk that have been flooded?

Can you confirm that Financial and business heart of Thailand can be up and running again quickly to provide the much needed finances that Thailand will need..

Not to mention the increased rebuild costs that Flooding Bkk will do. Flooding Bkk with have a very small effect on the flood and VERY big effect on the country being able to weather this tragic flood in the long term.

The water is going to flow west and east and through BKK (the cha pyra is STILL flowing) as and when it wants. In some low lying areas the floods are going to be bad. Nearly ALL of Bkk is low lying.

[animatic]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

[h90]

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

I live in Huay Kwang and I haven't seen a fully stocked supermarket in nearly 2 weeks, and there certainly hasn't been any water. I doubt On Nut would be any different given that there have even been shortages reported in non-flooded areas well outside Bangkok.

I heard people "were living it up" in Central Rama II. Those rich elite over there are unbelievable! Thai's love shopping. They will go shopping whenever they can. It is nothing to do with "protecting peoples right to live it up".

Doubt it all you want. But I have seen it with my own two eyes. I'm in On Nut right now, on Soi 50, and the Lotus is a 5-10 minute walk from here. The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. I was trapped in Phutthamonthon two days ago and am seeing the contrast between there and here with my own eyes. Until you have been in my shoes--and rob's and h90's and others, perhaps you should just shut up.

yes now it is getting really bad here........I am still here

[robblok]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

[thaicbr]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

But the multi national companies are the food producers and if they stop working Thailands income stops as well.. A factory is closed. ok the company can clean it up and open it. If the company headquarters is closed ...who will open the factories.

I feel for all of you flooded.. we will have the flood in about 3-4 days. But flooding the CBD is just NOT the correct thing to do. Not withstanding the huge amount of people that live in central BKK. what do you want to do with them..?

Edited November 1, 2011 by thaicbr

[zydeco]

I live in Huay Kwang and I haven't seen a fully stocked supermarket in nearly 2 weeks, and there certainly hasn't been any water. I doubt On Nut would be any different given that there have even been shortages reported in non-flooded areas well outside Bangkok.

I heard people "were living it up" in Central Rama II. Those rich elite over there are unbelievable! Thai's love shopping. They will go shopping whenever they can. It is nothing to do with "protecting peoples right to live it up".

Doubt it all you want. But I have seen it with my own two eyes. I'm in On Nut right now, on Soi 50, and the Lotus is a 5-10 minute walk from here. The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. I was trapped in Phutthamonthon two days ago and am seeing the contrast between there and here with my own eyes. Until you have been in my shoes--and rob's and h90's and others, perhaps you should just shut up.

yes now it is getting really bad here........I am still here

h90, I know the flood hit you a couple of days after it came to me, and I know you don't want to leave your considerable investment (in comparison, all I stand to lose are the things in my house) but you might seriously want to consider getting out if you can. I was in a boat for 2 hours two days ago, going through my village, down Sai 3, and across Utthayan, until I hit the big overpass, under which was the only way out, got a taxi, went to the nearest BTS with two shoulder bags, and arrived at On Nut. Lots of my Thai neighbors, including my housekeeper and her family were holding on. Really worried about them. While they are resourceful in ways of handling this I would never imagine, all that filthy flood water is going to cause disease and health problems. Their life is already tough enough. At least I was able to get out. Their fate is all tied up in hoping the water peaks soon.

[hammered]

It is about symbolism in a changing country. The area that is not flooded stands for certain things in many many people's minds and that makes this a very divisive and political issue regardless of whether risking the flooding of central BKK by a more aggressive water flow through the centre is a good or bad idea.

Everyone has seen the satellite images showing BKK at the centre of the water mass and dry and virtually everyone north of BKK thinks the gates should have been opened ages ago. The whole thing is compounded now by high tides and it is fairly obvious that if water were to be sent through central BKK a while back when there were low tides was the time to do so. There will be another opportunity starting soon when tides get lower. In the meantime the symbolism in a badly divided country is not missed.

Symbolism is great as long as you can control it.. Can you control the flood that you want to release into Bkk,

Can you provide food and water to the people in Bkk that have been flooded?

Can you confirm that Financial and business heart of Thailand can be up and running again quickly to provide the much needed finances that Thailand will need..

Not to mention the increased rebuild costs that Flooding Bkk will do. Flooding Bkk with have a very small effect on the flood and VERY big effect on the country being able to weather this tragic flood in the long term.

The water is going to flow west and east and through BKK (the cha pyra is STILL flowing) as and when it wants. In some low lying areas the floods are going to be bad. Nearly ALL of Bkk is low lying.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the practical side of things. However, it is still the symbol of BKK above all else always that is seen by so many especially those sitting in deep flood waters and knowing that central BKK is dry and knowing that floodgates are not being opened more than a few tens of centimeters to spare central BKK. It becomes a them and us issue when decisions are made on what areas to keep flooded and what areas to not even take a risk on.

[ginjag]

Tawp..........My comment spoke for it's self--like we don't care about 20 million(government) sort of attitude...........sod them. we the government want to care for the areas we want dry. (minority 4 mill) MONEY is the overriding factor--much of it is tied up in this area. VIP zone as it should be called.

Of course money matters. They aren't protecting rich people but businesses and the city center's infrastructure which is where a lot of the money is concentrated. If you let BKK grind to a halt then you might as well shut the country down. A few neighborhoods being flooded is still a lot less expensive than allowing entire urban areas to go under water. Later they can always compensate those people. The question is if the government will do the right thing later or not.

I said before .Vital areas HAVE to be protected....YES. but to close off a smaller % of the city centre for the sake and sacrifice of the rest is selfish to say the least. You said '''A few neighbourhoods being flooded is less expensive. A FEW---please.I think you have your % of areas flooded wrong. Who is going to compensate the people--the fugitive ??? the country is going to be bankrupt--nearly... and now they want 900 billion to mend etc.

Think again if you think they are not protecting rich people........... a good stupid idea.... relocate BKK and set up a capitol example Khon Khen......or have this fiasco on larger scales every year---and it's sinking to boot.---OR LAND FILL BKK.

[thaicbr]

It is about symbolism in a changing country. The area that is not flooded stands for certain things in many many people's minds and that makes this a very divisive and political issue regardless of whether risking the flooding of central BKK by a more aggressive water flow through the centre is a good or bad idea.

Everyone has seen the satellite images showing BKK at the centre of the water mass and dry and virtually everyone north of BKK thinks the gates should have been opened ages ago. The whole thing is compounded now by high tides and it is fairly obvious that if water were to be sent through central BKK a while back when there were low tides was the time to do so. There will be another opportunity starting soon when tides get lower. In the meantime the symbolism in a badly divided country is not missed.

Symbolism is great as long as you can control it.. Can you control the flood that you want to release into Bkk,

Can you provide food and water to the people in Bkk that have been flooded?

Can you confirm that Financial and business heart of Thailand can be up and running again quickly to provide the much needed finances that Thailand will need..

Not to mention the increased rebuild costs that Flooding Bkk will do. Flooding Bkk with have a very small effect on the flood and VERY big effect on the country being able to weather this tragic flood in the long term.

The water is going to flow west and east and through BKK (the cha pyra is STILL flowing) as and when it wants. In some low lying areas the floods are going to be bad. Nearly ALL of Bkk is low lying.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the practical side of things. However, it is still the symbol of BKK above all else always that is seen by so many especially those sitting in deep flood waters and knowing that central BKK is dry and knowing that floodgates are not being opened more than a few tens of centimeters to spare central BKK. It becomes a them and us issue when decisions are made on what areas to keep flooded and what areas to not even take a risk on.

Well if they take matters into their own hands . They will pay the price. The canal system can not handle the amount of water that the want to channel through it. IF the flood gates are opened to far then the pumps that are needed to traverse the water will be inundated and stop working making the whole system unworkable. The tap water supply will be contaminated (as it has been already because of the braking of the dyke) and people will die.

[robblok]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

But the multi national companies are the food producers and if they stop working Thailands income stops as well.. A factory is closed. ok the company can clean it up and open it. If the company headquarters is closed ...who will open the factories.

I feel for all of you flooded.. we will have the flood in about 3-4 days. But flooding the CBD is just NOT the correct thing to do. Not withstanding the huge amount of people that live in central BKK. what do you want to do with them..?

I think a big deal is made out of some flooding for BKK. Its not the end of the world and can be cleaned up. Just like my home is going to be cleaned up. I loose some money, too bad. But holding the water back and making other suffer is not a nice thing to do.

IF (and i really mean if) it could help the whole flooding to end 1 week faster i think its worth it. But i dont wish hardship on BKK for the sake of it. Maybe its already to late to open gates wider. It should have been done a long time ago. But BKK did not want to take any risks.

I heard people here posting how the canals near their homes were stagnant and not moving while we needed to drain the water.

[TAWP]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

@suthichai: BKK Governor declares "Bangchan Industrial Estate" as "danger zone" now that PM had ordered him to open Samwa water barrier

@wannasiri_: There r 93 factories at Bang Chan industrial estate, 26 of them producing food brands ie Farmhouse, Yum Yum, Hanami

Edited November 1, 2011 by TAWP

[sparebox2]

You can guard the sluice gate with heavy armed army as much as you want.

But you cannot effectively arm guard the hundres of kilometers of mud/sand dykes.

[ginjag]

Does anyone know what part of Bangkok Yingluck lives in??? Just wondering if her location has anything to do with choice of water run off locations.

She lives in Phanoyotin and her house is nice and dry, but like her big Brother her home is well sand bagged courtesy of the BMA. A little bit more action by the locals is required for her to get her feet wet ! Problem is Thais have short memories so will have forgotten this by the time of the next election.

next election 500 Baht and minimum salary promise of 400 Baht per day+ the promise that every school children get a ipad and everything will be OK. It is 4 years from now. No one will remember.

WE all will...................after this - sure

[robblok]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

@suthichai: BKK Governor declares "Bangchan Industrial Estate" as "danger zone" now that PM had ordered him to open Samwa water barrier

@wannasiri_: There r 93 factories at Bang Chan industrial estate, 26 of them producing food brands ie Farmhouse, Yum Yum, Hanami

I take it all the ingredients are produced in BKK.. haven't seen many rice fields, chickens, pigs ect in BKK. I do agree that these factories are important too but without the base ingredients they come to a halt too. Those are not produced in BKK.

Danger zone is different from flooding. Taking no risks while it can help others is bad. If its sure to flood then close the gates. But taking some risks is ok.

[StoneSoup]

Everyone seems to believe that water that flows into central Bangkok will simply flow on into the river or the sea - just like that. But - this is not how drainage works in Bangkok - not even for rainwater. Rainwater flows to the khlongs, and it must then be PUMPED out of those khlongs, into the Chao Phraya.

If water enters Bangkok faster that the storm drainage system can discharge it intro the river, I suspect that it will simply build up and inundate the surface area of Bangkok, until it reaches equilibrium depth with the water level to the north. I do not think that level is sufficient to drive water "naturally" into the Chao Phraya.

So - the question is: if you inundate the surface area of Bangkok to one meter water depth, and water flow then stabilizes to equilibrium - with the khlong pumps discharging continuously - but not affecting Bangkok's water level - is the total volume of water thus "relocated" to Bangkok actually significant in relieving flooding up north?

The San Wa activists seem to feel that "all" their water will flow away into Bangkok. Is that really how things will work? Or - will the water that flows into Khlong San Saeb simply be replaced by an endless flow of additional water from up north?

I don't know the real calculations, but I will guess that if you flood Bangkok's surface area to one meter depth, that will equate to perhaps a one cm lowering of the water level in the "lake" that occupies an arc north, east, and west of Bangkok. That means that flooding Bangkok really won't accomplish much.

If this is correct, then it makes little sense to pour water into Bangkok any faster than the discharge pumps at terminal ends of the main drainage khlongs can pump it into the sea.

If the water at San Was was a static volume, dumping it to the south would make sense. But - if it was a static volume - it would simply drain away to the north. It can't drain away - because it is simply the lead volume of a 100+ km "lake". Whatever drains south will be replaced from the north - whether the southward flow is slow, or fast. Drowning Bangkok will not change that situation significantly.

Bottom line: It probably makes little sense to dump water into central Bangkok any faster than its storm drainage system can discharge that water - via pumping stations - into the Chao Phraya.

[farang000999]

fwiw, the people in the city centre pay the highest taxes, it is the wealthiest area of thailand. they subsidize much of the government.

[wintermute]

I take it all the ingredients are produced in BKK.. haven't seen many rice fields, chickens, pigs ect in BKK. I do agree that these factories are important too but without the base ingredients they come to a halt too. Those are not produced in BKK.

Danger zone is different from flooding. Taking no risks while it can help others is bad. If its sure to flood then close the gates. But taking some risks is ok.

The main factories are what is important. If there is a shortfall in raw materials they can import it from neighboring countries to produce finished goods. It doesn't add to the overhead cost as much as it would take to rebuild an entire main factory.

[robblok]

Everyone seems to believe that water that flows into central Bangkok will simply flow on into the river or the sea - just like that. But - this is not how drainage works in Bangkok - not even for rainwater. Rainwater flows to the khlongs, and it must then be PUMPED out of those khlongs, into the Chao Phraya.

If water enters Bangkok faster that the storm drainage system can discharge it intro the river, I suspect that it will simply build up and inundate the surface area of Bangkok, until it reaches equilibrium depth with the water level to the north. I do not think that level is sufficient to drive water "naturally" into the Chao Phraya.

So - the question is: if you inundate the surface area of Bangkok to one meter water depth, and water flow then stabilizes to equilibrium - with the khlong pumps discharging continuously - but not affecting Bangkok's water level - is the total volume of water thus "relocated" to Bangkok actually significant in relieving flooding up north?

The San Wa activists seem to feel that "all" their water will flow away into Bangkok. Is that really how things will work? Or - will the water that flows into Khlong San Saeb simply be replaced by an endless flow of additional water from up north?

I don't know the real calculations, but I will guess that if you flood Bangkok's surface area to one meter depth, that will equate to perhaps a one cm lowering of the water level in the "lake" that occupies an arc north, east, and west of Bangkok. That means that flooding Bangkok really won't accomplish much.

If this is correct, then it makes little sense to pour water into Bangkok any faster than the discharge pumps at terminal ends of the main drainage khlongs can pump it into the sea.

If the water at San Was was a static volume, dumping it to the south would make sense. But - if it was a static volume - it would simply drain away to the north. It can't drain away - because it is simply the lead volume of a 100+ km "lake". Whatever drains south will be replaced from the north - whether the southward flow is slow, or fast. Drowning Bangkok will not change that situation significantly.

Bottom line: It probably makes little sense to dump water into central Bangkok any faster than its storm drainage system can discharge that water - via pumping stations - into the Chao Phraya.

I agree, and once it becomes clear you let in too much close it more. I am only asking to take some risks. Drain water at maximum capacity.

[TAWP]

Everyone seems to believe that water that flows into central Bangkok will simply flow on into the river or the sea - just like that. But - this is not how drainage works in Bangkok - not even for rainwater. Rainwater flows to the khlongs, and it must then be PUMPED out of those khlongs, into the Chao Phraya.

If water enters Bangkok faster that the storm drainage system can discharge it intro the river, I suspect that it will simply build up and inundate the surface area of Bangkok, until it reaches equilibrium depth with the water level to the north. I do not think that level is sufficient to drive water "naturally" into the Chao Phraya.

So - the question is: if you inundate the surface area of Bangkok to one meter water depth, and water flow then stabilizes to equilibrium - with the khlong pumps discharging continuously - but not affecting Bangkok's water level - is the total volume of water thus "relocated" to Bangkok actually significant in relieving flooding up north?

The San Wa activists seem to feel that "all" their water will flow away into Bangkok. Is that really how things will work? Or - will the water that flows into Khlong San Saeb simply be replaced by an endless flow of additional water from up north?

I don't know the real calculations, but I will guess that if you flood Bangkok's surface area to one meter depth, that will equate to perhaps a one cm lowering of the water level in the "lake" that occupies an arc north, east, and west of Bangkok. That means that flooding Bangkok really won't accomplish much.

If this is correct, then it makes little sense to pour water into Bangkok any faster than the discharge pumps at terminal ends of the main drainage khlongs can pump it into the sea.

If the water at San Was was a static volume, dumping it to the south would make sense. But - if it was a static volume - it would simply drain away to the north. It can't drain away - because it is simply the lead volume of a 100+ km "lake". Whatever drains south will be replaced from the north - whether the southward flow is slow, or fast. Drowning Bangkok will not change that situation significantly.

Bottom line: It probably makes little sense to dump water into central Bangkok any faster than its storm drainage system can discharge that water - via pumping stations - into the Chao Phraya.

That is the main problem - an area many times the un-affected areas of Bangkok (more got affected today) would need to somehow handle several meter in depth of water to be able to, in real effect, lower the water-height of the areas North of it.

It just doesn't make sense. Center of Bangkok isn't that large at all compared to the areas that have water. Or even compared to the areas of Bangkok that now have water to some degree.

[tjrd12]

I would say food and water are ABSOLUTES and so saving a food source

and clean drinking water sources take precedence over housing in this situation.

Sure your house is dry but in 2 weeks you are starving.

Have to look medium term not JUST short term.

2¢

I agree there.. but BKK is not a food producer. Water yes that has to be protected. But Saying BKK is a food producer is not correct IMHO.

But the multi national companies are the food producers and if they stop working Thailands income stops as well.. A factory is closed. ok the company can clean it up and open it. If the company headquarters is closed ...who will open the factories.

I feel for all of you flooded.. we will have the flood in about 3-4 days. But flooding the CBD is just NOT the correct thing to do. Not withstanding the huge amount of people that live in central BKK. what do you want to do with them..?

I think a big deal is made out of some flooding for BKK. Its not the end of the world and can be cleaned up. Just like my home is going to be cleaned up. I loose some money, too bad. But holding the water back and making other suffer is not a nice thing to do.

IF (and i really mean if) it could help the whole flooding to end 1 week faster i think its worth it. But i dont wish hardship on BKK for the sake of it. Maybe its already to late to open gates wider. It should have been done a long time ago. But BKK did not want to take any risks.

I heard people here posting how the canals near their homes were stagnant and not moving while we needed to drain the water.

Allowing the CBD and the rest of Central BKK to flood is idiotic. While I feel for the folks in the 'burbs, if flooding is allowed in inner BKK it will only prolong recovery and damage the economy more. Business can still continue, but allow flooding and it will grind to a halt. Not smart. Protect the inner city and airport, if they don't, well, TIT!

[robblok]

I take it all the ingredients are produced in BKK.. haven't seen many rice fields, chickens, pigs ect in BKK. I do agree that these factories are important too but without the base ingredients they come to a halt too. Those are not produced in BKK.

Danger zone is different from flooding. Taking no risks while it can help others is bad. If its sure to flood then close the gates. But taking some risks is ok.

The main factories are what is important. If there is a shortfall in raw materials they can import it from neighboring countries to produce finished goods. It doesn't add to the overhead cost as much as it would take to rebuild an entire main factory.

Importing now is not that easy with all those flooded roads. We were talking food supplies now. I know that importing will help but its not a quick fix. Anyway im not advocating putting those factories under a meter of water. Just drain as much as possible. But take some risks. Hearing people telling about how their klongs are lower then ever does not sound like doing it at max effort.

[StoneSoup]

I agree, and once it becomes clear you let in too much close it more. I am only asking to take some risks. Drain water at maximum capacity.

That makes sense to me. It does not appear that the Bangkok drainage system is being exercised to its full potential. It also appears fairly unlikely that there will be significant additional heavy rainfall this season.

[ginjag]

Tawp..........My comment spoke for it's self--like we don't care about 20 million(government) sort of attitude...........sod them. we the government want to care for the areas we want dry. (minority 4 mill) MONEY is the overriding factor--much of it is tied up in this area. VIP zone as it should be called.

But your comment doesn't make sense.

There isn't 20 million affected now or later.

And if BKK is flooded than all that suffer put together would make BKK be the big majority of the people that suffer, in raw numbers.

Do you understand this?

Tawp what % of the entire area of Bkk and Ayuttaya are flooded ???? ALL THE SPIN OFFS FROM THAT, all those affected indirectly, industry the lot the game is up NOW--through bad management.

How many people do YOU think would be further affected if the Chosen Zone(dry) was flooded, RAW numbers are suffering my figures represent a broader picture - the numbers in mills were not really the point it was the attitude of the powers that be-to protect a sacred centre .........50 million people are directly affected in a big way---prices, shop shortages, hardship all round.............Please you have to remember the people who live on higher ground and would not normally be flooded ARE, because of this DRY zone. Look at the whole picture, yes I do understand, and I talk to the people that have lost the lot. Had the water been let (more or less) free style-apart from vital inst,..not so many would be in SH#t street.

[MunterHunter]

Importing now is not that easy with all those flooded roads. We were talking food supplies now. I know that importing will help but its not a quick fix. Anyway im not advocating putting those factories under a meter of water. Just drain as much as possible. But take some risks. Hearing people telling about how their klongs are lower then ever does not sound like doing it at max effort.

Not easy, but not impossible... flood Bangkok and the areas around the airport and 'not easy' suddenly becomes 'impossible'

Then it doesn't matter how much money your 'unit' has in you moo ban, there will be no food or supplies for you to buy.

Keeping strategic areas of Bangkok dry is paramount... I'm not in a strategic area (i don't think) so i don't mind getting a bit wet :jap:

[thaicbr]

Everyone seems to believe that water that flows into central Bangkok will simply flow on into the river or the sea - just like that. But - this is not how drainage works in Bangkok - not even for rainwater. Rainwater flows to the khlongs, and it must then be PUMPED out of those khlongs, into the Chao Phraya.

If water enters Bangkok faster that the storm drainage system can discharge it intro the river, I suspect that it will simply build up and inundate the surface area of Bangkok, until it reaches equilibrium depth with the water level to the north. I do not think that level is sufficient to drive water "naturally" into the Chao Phraya.

So - the question is: if you inundate the surface area of Bangkok to one meter water depth, and water flow then stabilizes to equilibrium - with the khlong pumps discharging continuously - but not affecting Bangkok's water level - is the total volume of water thus "relocated" to Bangkok actually significant in relieving flooding up north?

The San Wa activists seem to feel that "all" their water will flow away into Bangkok. Is that really how things will work? Or - will the water that flows into Khlong San Saeb simply be replaced by an endless flow of additional water from up north?

I don't know the real calculations, but I will guess that if you flood Bangkok's surface area to one meter depth, that will equate to perhaps a one cm lowering of the water level in the "lake" that occupies an arc north, east, and west of Bangkok. That means that flooding Bangkok really won't accomplish much.

If this is correct, then it makes little sense to pour water into Bangkok any faster than the discharge pumps at terminal ends of the main drainage khlongs can pump it into the sea.

If the water at San Was was a static volume, dumping it to the south would make sense. But - if it was a static volume - it would simply drain away to the north. It can't drain away - because it is simply the lead volume of a 100+ km "lake". Whatever drains south will be replaced from the north - whether the southward flow is slow, or fast. Drowning Bangkok will not change that situation significantly.

Bottom line: It probably makes little sense to dump water into central Bangkok any faster than its storm drainage system can discharge that water - via pumping stations - into the Chao Phraya.

I agree, and once it becomes clear you let in too much close it more. I am only asking to take some risks. Drain water at maximum capacity.

And how do you know they are NOT doing that now. I know you have been flooded for some time. and i can in a small way imagine what your going through but flooding BKK is NOT the answer.

We can all say what SHOULD have been done it wasn't. There are things that need protecting if possible. The centre of Bkk is one of them, The airport another. Part of the west's problems stem from the fact that the vast majority of water is actually above the western part of Bangkok and and adjoining Nakhon Pathom. Which are now slowly flooding. That's because water flows downhill and we are near the bottom of the hill.

Ps: also once open to far will you be able to close the sluice gates. They already had one stuck open due to the force of the water.

Edited November 1, 2011 by thaicbr

[TAWP]

Tawp what % of the entire area of Bkk and Ayuttaya are flooded ???? ALL THE SPIN OFFS FROM THAT, all those affected indirectly, industry the lot the game is up NOW--through bad management.

How many people do YOU think would be further affected if the Chosen Zone(dry) was flooded, RAW numbers are suffering my figures represent a broader picture - the numbers in mills were not really the point it was the attitude of the powers that be-to protect a sacred centre .........50 million people are directly affected in a big way---prices, shop shortages, hardship all round.............Please you have to remember the people who live on higher ground and would not normally be flooded ARE, because of this DRY zone. Look at the whole picture, yes I do understand, and I talk to the people that have lost the lot. Had the water been let (more or less) free style-apart from vital inst,..not so many would be in SH#t street.

Now your claimed number of affected has gone up from 20 million to 50 million?

[robblok]

Everyone seems to believe that water that flows into central Bangkok will simply flow on into the river or the sea - just like that. But - this is not how drainage works in Bangkok - not even for rainwater. Rainwater flows to the khlongs, and it must then be PUMPED out of those khlongs, into the Chao Phraya.

If water enters Bangkok faster that the storm drainage system can discharge it intro the river, I suspect that it will simply build up and inundate the surface area of Bangkok, until it reaches equilibrium depth with the water level to the north. I do not think that level is sufficient to drive water "naturally" into the Chao Phraya.

So - the question is: if you inundate the surface area of Bangkok to one meter water depth, and water flow then stabilizes to equilibrium - with the khlong pumps discharging continuously - but not affecting Bangkok's water level - is the total volume of water thus "relocated" to Bangkok actually significant in relieving flooding up north?

The San Wa activists seem to feel that "all" their water will flow away into Bangkok. Is that really how things will work? Or - will the water that flows into Khlong San Saeb simply be replaced by an endless flow of additional water from up north?

I don't know the real calculations, but I will guess that if you flood Bangkok's surface area to one meter depth, that will equate to perhaps a one cm lowering of the water level in the "lake" that occupies an arc north, east, and west of Bangkok. That means that flooding Bangkok really won't accomplish much.

If this is correct, then it makes little sense to pour water into Bangkok any faster than the discharge pumps at terminal ends of the main drainage khlongs can pump it into the sea.

If the water at San Was was a static volume, dumping it to the south would make sense. But - if it was a static volume - it would simply drain away to the north. It can't drain away - because it is simply the lead volume of a 100+ km "lake". Whatever drains south will be replaced from the north - whether the southward flow is slow, or fast. Drowning Bangkok will not change that situation significantly.

Bottom line: It probably makes little sense to dump water into central Bangkok any faster than its storm drainage system can discharge that water - via pumping stations - into the Chao Phraya.

I agree, and once it becomes clear you let in too much close it more. I am only asking to take some risks. Drain water at maximum capacity.

And how do you know they are NOT doing that now. I know you have been flooded for some time. and i can in a small way imagine what your going through but flooding BKK is NOT the answer.

We can all say what SHOULD have been done it wasn't. There are things that need protecting if possible. The centre of Bkk is one of them, The airport another. Part of the west's problems stem from the fact that the vast majority of water is actually above the western part of Bangkok and and adjoining Nakhon Pathom. Which are now slowly flooding. That's because water flows downhill and we are near the bottom of the hill.

Ps: also once open to far will you be able to close the sluice gates. They already had one stuck open due to the force of the water.

How i know that is when i read the posts here about people telling that their klongs were lower then ever.. not moving ect. Sounds to me that then your not doing what should be done. Also i can't imagine Ying luck opening the gates to 1m if she is sure that it will flood more industrial estates. I just think that the BKK governor is erring on the safe side.

Anyway i just want the water to go down here. I want some progress. At least here the water is now not getting deeper. I am showering in water that smells.. drinking the same tap water after i purified it. So yea i might not be thinking rationally.

Again I dont want BKK to flood i want them to drain the max possible. Anyway going to do something else this is not productive.

[sparebox2]

Allowing the CBD and the rest of Central BKK to flood is idiotic. While I feel for the folks in the 'burbs, if flooding is allowed in inner BKK it will only prolong recovery and damage the economy more. Business can still continue, but allow flooding and it will grind to a halt. Not smart. Protect the inner city and airport, if they don't, well, TIT!

Be a sport. Bangkok people should take their fair share. Rural people pay tax too, not just bangkokians.

[farang000999]

I agree I would be angry as a wet hornet if my place were flooded, but more angry at who caused the flooding to begin with...

Good remark, and a good question: WHO caused the flooding to begin with?:

[thaicbr]

Allowing the CBD and the rest of Central BKK to flood is idiotic. While I feel for the folks in the 'burbs, if flooding is allowed in inner BKK it will only prolong recovery and damage the economy more. Business can still continue, but allow flooding and it will grind to a halt. Not smart. Protect the inner city and airport, if they don't, well, TIT!

Be a sport. Bangkok people should take their fair share. Rural people pay tax too, not just bangkokians.

ACTUALLY. I think he was meaning corporate taxes. And a very,very small percentage of Thai's pay tax. Most do not because of the tax structure..

I agree it IS IDIOTIC to WANT to flood BKK, Swampy or any of the remaining factories (especially water and food producers)

The area of BKK is a drop in the ocean for the amount of flood water (pun intended)