Whole Bangkok At Risk Of Flooding After Opening Of Key Sluice Gate

[elcent]

...

I am just curious whether downtown Bangkok be under water to prevent normal existence for a week, 2 weeks, a month? If it is a month, the discussion isn't worth having, but no one seems to have even the remotest accurate calculation.

When Yingluck was talking about opening the flood gates and flooding Bangkok to a metre a couple of weeks ago, she said that it would take a month for the flood waters to recede.

So that would mean it could be anything from a week to 3 months.

That is opening the gates, what also about intentionally breaking some of the water barriers, or would the damage be too catastrophic.(As though it could get any worse anyway) I am just curious as to whether there is a quicker way to get this dam_n water to the sea, prepare to protect the vital parts downtown as much as possible, open up absolutely every path to the sea, and get rid of it as quickly as possible.

There are some absolutely vital parts of Bangkok of course, but, if every non-essential person was moved out of the city, and it was intentionally flooded, there are also enormous amounts of residential areas very close and inside the downtown, unlike a lot of other large modern cities. These are areas that shouldn't necessarily be considered vital.

Would it speed up the whole process? From a month to two weeks or possibly less? I don't know, because there is no info. Much better surely to get people out of the area and get the water through than to let them slowly be engulfed.

you have to consider that re-insurance companies don't negotiate any longer and they will not take anything new now. Big worries for the investment climate.

[Thai at Heart]

I don't really think the people who wish for central BKK to be flooded to help relieve the current problem really understand the implications.

Bad move for everybody in the long term.

If it can be proven to speed up the path of the water to the sea, and there is time to prepare to protect what is absolutely vital, why?

Strewth, it isn't as though downtown Bangkok hasn't had to put up with various other issues paralysing it in the last few years.

How long would it take to "prepare to protect" everything?

Well, that is a bit like the statement that the water would stay around for "a long time" earlier in the thread.

I didn't say everything, just what is vital.10 days? should be enough to sandbag and brick most of it if the authorities get organised. Whoops, now we have the real issue.......

Edited November 2, 2011 by Thai at Heart

[MEL1]

Well, Roger, as you posted up on another thread is a humanitarian catastrophe looming, so I prefer to investigate thing from a "where there is a will there is a way".

How many old, aged and young, and non-working could be moved out of the city and housed elsewhere by other Thai's? Millions, no doubt. How many areas of the city could be completely evacuated and housed by others? Millions. They do it every single year moving back home for Songkran, or ironically elections.

If it makes the whole thing quicker, asking people to evacuate their currently dry homes, condos and offices, to enable the whole process to be over and done with quicker, why is it impossible if people are given a week to get out? Instead of wasting time protecting areas that are going to be inundated anyway, why not focus on putting up better protection around the absolutely vital things in the downtown. By that I don't include Paragon for example by the way.

You are right. Perhaps I over-reacted Thai at Heart. A couple of weeks ago I even suggested the same thing myself here. You're right ... it's never too late. And it's probably still possible. Someone should be looking into this as a contingency.

Still ... I'm happy to share what I'm drinking if you'll share some of your's with me

They were evidently very wealthy. Even sadder, there was a very old bloke, upstairs surrounded by medical equipment they had bought.

Unfortunately, that old bloke was his wife, and she has been in a coma for 3 years. He was 73, and his wife was 73, I got that much.

-m.

[MunterHunter]

RT @ThanongK: Situation at Khlong Sam Wa is precarious. Residents attempted to destroy dykes at Khlong 9-13. Bangchan is vulnerable target.

This is why the residents need to back off and let the authorities handle things... That industrial estate has a number of food producing factories... might be more difficult to get food when that's under water

[sparebox2]

"BANGKOK, November 2, 2011 (AFP) - The death toll from Thailand's worst floods in decades surged above 400 .... ... .. . So far no deaths in Bangkok have been reported in the official toll."

I hope this will make those trying to justify shuting the floodgate sleep better at night.

Bangkok is not all that Thailand has.

There are human living outside Bangkok too, not just buffalos.

[CantSpell]

Many posters asking not to flood Bangkok for many different reasons:

- Political gain is not cited enough imho, if I remember correctly, only 2 or 3 weeks ago, some areas that could have drained the water where fully closed to water as the top-man of the district had a big political influence...

- Tax reason I agree only 50%: VAT is paid equally by all and probably VAT income been paid a fair share by poor ppl: yes some of them work in bangkok, but how many of them actually live inside Bangkok as opposed to those flooded area....

Those living in Bangkok are the bosses and the middle class, not those poor ppl that some here are trying to make us believed will be saved if Bangkok is not flooded...

- Bangkok as a relief center??? Relief center = stocks.. warehouse depots... HUGE warehouses to store HUGES amounts of package goods (Bottled water been first on the list)....

Have you ever seen warehouse in central Bangkok?

Or just 7/11 and convenience stores...

Warehouse depots (2 of the 3 biggest in Thailand been apparently already flooded) are north of BKK on the Ayutthaya plains....

How Bangkok is going to help with food and water relief donations when warehouses are under water flood?...

Edit: Understand a lot of money been made in bankok, just asking how much of what is sold in BKK is actually produced there; as opposed to in the flooded plains. Where are car made, where are food factories, bottle factories, warehouse... not in BKK. The managers, VP and CEO of those lives in Bkk though

Edited November 2, 2011 by CantSpell

[MikeyIdea]

"BANGKOK, November 2, 2011 (AFP) - The death toll from Thailand's worst floods in decades surged above 400 .... ... .. . So far no deaths in Bangkok have been reported in the official toll."

I hope this will make those trying to justify shuting the floodgate sleep better at night.

Bangkok is not all that Thailand has.

There are human living outside Bangkok too, not just buffalos.

Your posts are not getting more intelligent sparebox2, you are rather digging yourself down deeper and deeper

Please explain how flooding the area that generates 40% of the tax revenue that the government gets will improve the governments ability to help the poor

Edited November 2, 2011 by MikeyIdea

[Netfan]

...

I am just curious whether downtown Bangkok be under water to prevent normal existence for a week, 2 weeks, a month? If it is a month, the discussion isn't worth having, but no one seems to have even the remotest accurate calculation.

When Yingluck was talking about opening the flood gates and flooding Bangkok to a metre a couple of weeks ago, she said that it would take a month for the flood waters to recede.

So that would mean it could be anything from a week to 3 months.

That is opening the gates, what also about intentionally breaking some of the water barriers, or would the damage be too catastrophic.(As though it could get any worse anyway) I am just curious as to whether there is a quicker way to get this dam_n water to the sea, prepare to protect the vital parts downtown as much as possible, open up absolutely every path to the sea, and get rid of it as quickly as possible.

There are some absolutely vital parts of Bangkok of course, but, if every non-essential person was moved out of the city, and it was intentionally flooded, there are also enormous amounts of residential areas very close and inside the downtown, unlike a lot of other large modern cities. These are areas that shouldn't necessarily be considered vital.

Would it speed up the whole process? From a month to two weeks or possibly less? I don't know, because there is no info. Much better surely to get people out of the area and get the water through than to let them slowly be engulfed.

This isn't some movie of the week. Evacuate every non-essential person out of Bangkok? How many people do think that might be - 6 million, 8 million? Any less than 3 or 4 million seems like it wouldn'tbe enough to make a difference. How do you get them out? Who decides who is "essential"? What if people don't want to leave thier homes, businesses - have you read about the robberies of evacuated properties? Where are they going to go? Right now its just about impossible to get a hotel in dry area. Oh, they can stay with relatives. Right. Or evacuation centers, like the ones that the government is doing such a great job with now? The reality is that flooding Bangkok will bring about a disaster beyond what people can imagine. Who thought it would be this bad so far? FROC has proved you can't control a flood. Uncomfortable and miserable and sad as the situation is, it will get much much worse if bangkok is flooded.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Netfan

[Wuffy]

"BANGKOK, November 2, 2011 (AFP) - The death toll from Thailand's worst floods in decades surged above 400 .... ... .. . So far no deaths in Bangkok have been reported in the official toll."

I hope this will make those trying to justify shuting the floodgate sleep better at night.

Bangkok is not all that Thailand has.

There are human living outside Bangkok too, not just buffalos.

Your posts are not getting more intelligent sparebox2, you are rather digging yourself down deeper and deeper

Please explain how flooding the area that generates 40% of the tax revenue that the government gets will improve the governments ability to help the poor

More to the point. Explain how causing more damage to the infrastructure and putting more peoples lives in danger will help Thailand.

[anon8]

Downtown Bangkok won't stop if flooded. In the not too distant past, parts of the inner city was flooded regularly and people still got to work.

When was the inner city flooded, in the not too distant past, please? What was the water level when inner Bangkok was last flooded? Kindly provide a link!

[whybother]

"BANGKOK, November 2, 2011 (AFP) - The death toll from Thailand's worst floods in decades surged above 400 .... ... .. . So far no deaths in Bangkok have been reported in the official toll."

I hope this will make those trying to justify shuting the floodgate sleep better at night.

Bangkok is not all that Thailand has.

There are human living outside Bangkok too, not just buffalos.

400 deaths isn't enough. You want more!

[Thai at Heart]

...

I am just curious whether downtown Bangkok be under water to prevent normal existence for a week, 2 weeks, a month? If it is a month, the discussion isn't worth having, but no one seems to have even the remotest accurate calculation.

When Yingluck was talking about opening the flood gates and flooding Bangkok to a metre a couple of weeks ago, she said that it would take a month for the flood waters to recede.

So that would mean it could be anything from a week to 3 months.

That is opening the gates, what also about intentionally breaking some of the water barriers, or would the damage be too catastrophic.(As though it could get any worse anyway) I am just curious as to whether there is a quicker way to get this dam_n water to the sea, prepare to protect the vital parts downtown as much as possible, open up absolutely every path to the sea, and get rid of it as quickly as possible.

There are some absolutely vital parts of Bangkok of course, but, if every non-essential person was moved out of the city, and it was intentionally flooded, there are also enormous amounts of residential areas very close and inside the downtown, unlike a lot of other large modern cities. These are areas that shouldn't necessarily be considered vital.

Would it speed up the whole process? From a month to two weeks or possibly less? I don't know, because there is no info. Much better surely to get people out of the area and get the water through than to let them slowly be engulfed.

you have to consider that re-insurance companies don't negotiate any longer and they will not take anything new now. Big worries for the investment climate.

Yup big problem. Funnily enough though, they don't seem to have any issue letting industrial estates go under, which will probably cause many companies to relocate if they can't get insurance, but office blocks which can't move, contain people and computers stored way away from the flood on the 50th floor are an insurance issue.

It would be interesting to know if the original contracts to build the factories where they were included a flood protection provision. In which case, I would expect a few extremely minted families who built and own these industrial parks to be puckering up a bit waiting for the insurance companies to be coming after them.

[whybother]

Many posters asking not to flood Bangkok for many different reasons:

- Political gain is not cited enough imho, if I remember correctly, only 2 or 3 weeks ago, some areas that could have drained the water where fully closed to water as the top-man of the district had a big political influence...

- Tax reason I agree only 50%: VAT is paid equally by all and probably VAT income been paid a fair share by poor ppl: yes some of them work in bangkok, but how many of them actually live inside Bangkok as opposed to those flooded area....

Those living in Bangkok are the bosses and the middle class, not those poor ppl that some here are trying to make us believed will be saved if Bangkok is not flooded...

- Bangkok as a relief center??? Relief center = stocks.. warehouse depots... HUGE warehouses to store HUGES amounts of package goods (Bottled water been first on the list)....

Have you ever seen warehouse in central Bangkok?

Or just 7/11 and convenience stores...

Warehouse depots (2 of the 3 biggest in Thailand been apparently already flooded) are north of BKK on the Ayutthaya plains....

How Bangkok is going to help with food and water relief donations when warehouses are under water flood?...

Edit: Understand a lot of money been made in bankok, just asking how much of what is sold in BKK is actually produced there; as opposed to in the flooded plains. Where are car made, where are food factories, bottle factories, warehouse... not in BKK. The managers, VP and CEO of those lives in Bkk though

VAT is not paid equally by all. Only those spending money pay VAT. The less money you earn, the more likely you are going to buy things that don't have VAT - food from street vendors or small restaurants, clothes from small vendors.

A lot of business is done in Bangkok, and a lot of tourists come to Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded for a month, the tourists will disappear and the business won't get done.

A lot of people are employed in Bangkok, whether they are living in currently flooded areas or not. If Bangkok is flooded, more people will be out of work than already are. More people will die or get sick than already are. More hospitals will need to transfer patients than already have.

[Thai at Heart]

...

I am just curious whether downtown Bangkok be under water to prevent normal existence for a week, 2 weeks, a month? If it is a month, the discussion isn't worth having, but no one seems to have even the remotest accurate calculation.

When Yingluck was talking about opening the flood gates and flooding Bangkok to a metre a couple of weeks ago, she said that it would take a month for the flood waters to recede.

So that would mean it could be anything from a week to 3 months.

That is opening the gates, what also about intentionally breaking some of the water barriers, or would the damage be too catastrophic.(As though it could get any worse anyway) I am just curious as to whether there is a quicker way to get this dam_n water to the sea, prepare to protect the vital parts downtown as much as possible, open up absolutely every path to the sea, and get rid of it as quickly as possible.

There are some absolutely vital parts of Bangkok of course, but, if every non-essential person was moved out of the city, and it was intentionally flooded, there are also enormous amounts of residential areas very close and inside the downtown, unlike a lot of other large modern cities. These are areas that shouldn't necessarily be considered vital.

Would it speed up the whole process? From a month to two weeks or possibly less? I don't know, because there is no info. Much better surely to get people out of the area and get the water through than to let them slowly be engulfed.

This isn't some movie of the week. Evacuate every non-essential person out of Bangkok? How many people do think that might be - 6 million, 8 million? Any less than 3 or 4 million seems like it wouldn'tbe enough to make a difference. How do you get them out? Who decides who is "essential"? What if people don't want to leave thier homes, businesses - have you read about the robberies of evacuated properties? Where are they going to go? Right now its just about impossible to get a hotel in dry area. Oh, they can stay with relatives. Right. Or evacuation centers, like the ones that the government is doing such a great job with now? The reality is that flooding Bangkok will bring about a disaster beyond what people can imagine. Who thought it would be this bad so far? FROC has proved you can't control a flood. Uncomfortable and miserable and sad as the situation is, it will get much much worse if bangkok is flooded.

So tell the people to get out asap. 2 weeks is more than enough to get many people out. Don't wonder why it can't be done, because if they had something approaching a plan for this, knowing that the waters will possibly take a week or two more to get completely downtown, why wouldn't they be encouraging, forcing, telling everyone who doesn't absolutely have to stay to get out. Old, women and children. Lay on trains, lay on planes, lay on automobiles, and get them out. Why is this so hard, it is like people in bangkok aren't used to a traffic jam or something. Get the hotels organised around the whole country, start asking people to volunteer to take people in, or aren't we living in the "uniquely" caring society of thailand as mentioned elsewhere. Sitting in the dry, it isn't very easy to understand how much of a catastrophe this is. Keeping a few places dry, which causes other bits to stay wet longer, which could be alleviated by allowing the water through more quickly. There is an enormous amount of water to get through Bangkok, and many more places are going to get wet.

What is the point in having people sitting in their houses, getting inundated area by area, and then arguing about whether the flood gates should be opened to flood them a bit quicker. Once they are inundated it is virtually impossible to move people around at all, and makes the whole logistics of taking care of those people harder and harder.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Thai at Heart

[Wuffy]

{SNIP}

Yup big problem. Funnily enough though, they don't seem to have any issue letting industrial estates go under, which will probably cause many companies to relocate if they can't get insurance, but office blocks which can't move, contain people and computers stored way away from the flood on the 50th floor are an insurance issue.

It would be interesting to know if the original contracts to build the factories where they were included a flood protection provision. In which case, I would expect a few extremely minted families who built and own these industrial parks to be puckering up a bit waiting for the insurance companies to be coming after them.

Show me where there was a choice between flooding bangkok and keeping those industrial zones dry was.

IF the choice was clear cut, IF we flood here this will be not flooded at all HERE. Tell me when that choice came up and was made?

This Flood is a terrible crisis, But creating MORE damage and risking the infrastructure and undermining the health and safety of even MORE property will help those places that are thoroughly screwed and unusable.

Most of the flooded factories now will have to be gutted and stripped and refitted to be made work safe again.

Are you suggesting that we must do this to homes, offices and small family stores. Create the potential for more infection to fester and hide within dry wall all across the city?

All this in the hopes it will MAYBE drain the water faster... and not just turn MORE of bangkok and it's surrounding area into a pond.

Then we can turn what was the nickname for the airport into the title of the city, no longer city of Angels, now Swampy.

[whybother]

Agriculture Minister Thira estimates it should take 40 days to drain 2,000 cubic m of water in wester BKK out to sea /TANN

40 days for western Bangkok. I wonder if it would be that much for central Bangkok. Central Bangkok does have been drainage, but would it be much different?

[CantSpell]

A lot of business is done in Bangkok, and a lot of tourists come to Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded for a month, the tourists will disappear and the business won't get done.

A lot of people are employed in Bangkok, whether they are living in currently flooded areas or not. If Bangkok is flooded, more people will be out of work than already are. More people will die or get sick than already are. More hospitals will need to transfer patients than already have.

You said it yourself, those ppl working in BKK might be living in flooded areas for the majority; they are under water, they are the one been at health risk...

I do not see any health risk staying on 2nd 3rd or any other floor of any area.

Most place on ground floors in Bangkok are shops, banks and so on, move the PC and equipment to higher floors and let the water flow....

What do ppl eat in Thailand? Rice.. Plains...

Warehouses. I mentioned already.

Bet when goods starts to become very scarce and ppl very hungry, then they will find a water to flow water much faster to sea...

As Thai as Heart said, get the ppl out, secure the buildings and empty the plains...

Remember last Nov, huge rains in Thailand and floods until Dec in Southern parts....

BKK is between 12 B m3 of water and the sea... Holding 12 billions like they won the battle???

Raining season is not finished...

Dangerous gamble imo.

[whybother]

You said it yourself, those ppl working in BKK might be living in flooded areas for the majority; they are under water, they are the one been at health risk...

I do not see any health risk staying on 2nd 3rd or any other floor of any area.

Most place on ground floors in Bangkok are shops, banks and so on, move the PC and equipment to higher floors and let the water flow....

What do ppl eat in Thailand? Rice.. Plains...

Warehouses. I mentioned already.

Bet when goods starts to become very scarce and ppl very hungry, then they will find a water to flow water much faster to sea...

As Thai as Heart said, get the ppl out, secure the buildings and empty the plains...

Remember last Nov, huge rains in Thailand and floods until Dec in Southern parts....

BKK is between 12 B m3 of water and the sea... Holding 12 billions like they won the battle???

Raining season is not finished...

Dangerous gamble imo.

Where do you put 6-8 million people? How do they all get out?

If they don't get out, how do you feed them? It's already difficult to get food (especially food that will last a month) and water.

And if it takes a month to get the water through Bangkok, it will take another month (at a minimum) to get things working again. A lot of electrical systems are in basements. How do you get them fixed, especially when you need to fix so many of them.

It would be a logistical nightmare to even consider deliberately flooding Bangkok for a month.

[rogerdee123]

Many posters asking not to flood Bangkok for many different reasons:

- Political gain is not cited enough imho, if I remember correctly, only 2 or 3 weeks ago, some areas that could have drained the water where fully closed to water as the top-man of the district had a big political influence...

- Tax reason I agree only 50%: VAT is paid equally by all and probably VAT income been paid a fair share by poor ppl: yes some of them work in bangkok, but how many of them actually live inside Bangkok as opposed to those flooded area....

Those living in Bangkok are the bosses and the middle class, not those poor ppl that some here are trying to make us believed will be saved if Bangkok is not flooded...

- Bangkok as a relief center??? Relief center = stocks.. warehouse depots... HUGE warehouses to store HUGES amounts of package goods (Bottled water been first on the list)....

Have you ever seen warehouse in central Bangkok?

Or just 7/11 and convenience stores...

Warehouse depots (2 of the 3 biggest in Thailand been apparently already flooded) are north of BKK on the Ayutthaya plains....

How Bangkok is going to help with food and water relief donations when warehouses are under water flood?...

Edit: Understand a lot of money been made in bankok, just asking how much of what is sold in BKK is actually produced there; as opposed to in the flooded plains. Where are car made, where are food factories, bottle factories, warehouse... not in BKK. The managers, VP and CEO of those lives in Bkk though

you left out "humanitarian disaster"

[Sturbuc]

A win for the poor.

This should be the way to fight double standard.

Why should bangkok be kept dry? Do bangkok people pay special tax for this privilege?

Well, no privileged people but the necessity of keeping many things which can't be refurbished easyly. And to give a sign to all the tourist who are going to visit TH in the starting Main Season!

Better spend money in draining!

[Tanaka]

Bangkok is the only city in Thailand with a permanent, functional drainage system. Any water entering the central areas of the city can be drained out in relatively short time, like in days. Water let into the flat areas outside the city will stay there for weeks or months. There's no way to control it and pumping it out will take ages, since it flows so slowly. Interestingly, the other place with a functional drainage system, Suwannapoom, is being protected too. It's mostly about face.

Many of the pump stations along the coast in Samut Prakan are currently going at less than half speed, simply because there's not enough water there to work on. The water is moving slowly partly because of the nature of the landscape, but mostly because it's being obstructed by human action and by the fact that the klongs haven't been maintained and developed properly.

Remember also that in Bangkok, poor people live in concrete ghettos from the second floor and up. Mostly rich and upper middle class people live on the ground in Bangkok.

You are not correct. Bangkok is not the only city. The drainage system in Udon Thani was rebuild a few years ago and there has not been any flooding since. Except a little after a heavy rain and that was drained in a short time.

[Thai at Heart]

{SNIP}

Yup big problem. Funnily enough though, they don't seem to have any issue letting industrial estates go under, which will probably cause many companies to relocate if they can't get insurance, but office blocks which can't move, contain people and computers stored way away from the flood on the 50th floor are an insurance issue.

It would be interesting to know if the original contracts to build the factories where they were included a flood protection provision. In which case, I would expect a few extremely minted families who built and own these industrial parks to be puckering up a bit waiting for the insurance companies to be coming after them.

Show me where there was a choice between flooding bangkok and keeping those industrial zones dry was.

IF the choice was clear cut, IF we flood here this will be not flooded at all HERE. Tell me when that choice came up and was made?

This Flood is a terrible crisis, But creating MORE damage and risking the infrastructure and undermining the health and safety of even MORE property will help those places that are thoroughly screwed and unusable.

Most of the flooded factories now will have to be gutted and stripped and refitted to be made work safe again.

Are you suggesting that we must do this to homes, offices and small family stores. Create the potential for more infection to fester and hide within dry wall all across the city?

All this in the hopes it will MAYBE drain the water faster... and not just turn MORE of bangkok and it's surrounding area into a pond.

Then we can turn what was the nickname for the airport into the title of the city, no longer city of Angels, now Swampy.

As I have said, the only reason to do this, would be to make the WHOLE problem go away significantly quicker. The problem is, everyone with any pull has a political bias behind the statements that they make. If someone with enough pull could state, that opening it up would make the whole issue go away a quicker, I would go for it, providing they move as many people out of the way first and have a weeks notice to prepare to protect vital stuff that is dry right now.

I have asked the question if anyone can state whether it makes the problem go away quicker or not, and no one can give an answer because none of the politicians want to discuss it because it is such a divisive issue. If the priority is 100% to protect downtown Bangkok, then tell the people, declare an SOE and protect the dykes, floodgates and every part of the flood prevention. However, this should be stated clearly and the politician who stands behind it has to take the fallout. But expecting people to sit upto their necks in water for months more isn't going to be a practical answer. Just wait for the disease to come, and then I believe they will really wish they had tried everything they could to get this water out as quick as possible irrespective of the damage.

If there is nothing to be done, but wait it out, and suffer being underwater for more months up country, then tell the people, assist them and get them out of there. Rehouse them and give them everything they need to get out. However, if anyone finds a bit of paper that says from the irrigation department that to send the water through central Bangkok would have caused 2 weeks of 50cm flooding, don't be surprised if their are riots.

[viathais]

A lot of business is done in Bangkok, and a lot of tourists come to Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded for a month, the tourists will disappear and the business won't get done.

A lot of people are employed in Bangkok, whether they are living in currently flooded areas or not. If Bangkok is flooded, more people will be out of work than already are. More people will die or get sick than already are. More hospitals will need to transfer patients than already have.

You said it yourself, those ppl working in BKK might be living in flooded areas for the majority; they are under water, they are the one been at health risk...

I do not see any health risk staying on 2nd 3rd or any other floor of any area.

Most place on ground floors in Bangkok are shops, banks and so on, move the PC and equipment to higher floors and let the water flow....

What do ppl eat in Thailand? Rice.. Plains...

Warehouses. I mentioned already.

Bet when goods starts to become very scarce and ppl very hungry, then they will find a water to flow water much faster to sea...

As Thai as Heart said, get the ppl out, secure the buildings and empty the plains...

Remember last Nov, huge rains in Thailand and floods until Dec in Southern parts....

BKK is between 12 B m3 of water and the sea... Holding 12 billions like they won the battle???

Raining season is not finished...

Dangerous gamble imo.

Actually the rainy season finished a week ago...just saying

[spectrumisgreen]

A win for the poor.

This should be the way to fight double standard.

Why should bangkok be kept dry? Do bangkok people pay special tax for this privilege?

A pretty fair point!.. if that's what the outcome is, that other (inner) Bkk areas should suffer likewise not just the poorest!!!

[whybother]

As I have said, the only reason to do this, would be to make the WHOLE problem go away significantly quicker. The problem is, everyone with any pull has a political bias behind the statements that they make. If someone with enough pull could state, that opening it up would make the whole issue go away a quicker, I would go for it, providing they move as many people out of the way first and have a weeks notice to prepare to protect vital stuff that is dry right now.

I have asked the question if anyone can state whether it makes the problem go away quicker or not, and no one can give an answer because none of the politicians want to discuss it because it is such a divisive issue. If the priority is 100% to protect downtown Bangkok, then tell the people, declare an SOE and protect the dykes, floodgates and every part of the flood prevention. However, this should be stated clearly and the politician who stands behind it has to take the fallout. But expecting people to sit upto their necks in water for months more isn't going to be a practical answer. Just wait for the disease to come, and then I believe they will really wish they had tried everything they could to get this water out as quick as possible irrespective of the damage.

If there is nothing to be done, but wait it out, and suffer being underwater for more months up country, then tell the people, assist them and get them out of there. Rehouse them and give them everything they need to get out. However, if anyone finds a bit of paper that says from the irrigation department that to send the water through central Bangkok would have caused 2 weeks of 50cm flooding, don't be surprised if their are riots.

No one will give an answer because it's such an unrealistic issue.

There is no way that everyone would leave. Where would they go? Who would make them go? How would they get there?

There is no way they could protect vital stuff in a week. Look at how well they are protecting vital areas now?

Would the issue go away quicker? Quicker than what? It's taken a week or two for Don Mueang flooding to move a few kilometres down the road. If all the embankments were brought down, Bangkok might flood a bit quicker than that, but where is the evidence that it would drain in a week or two?

Even if it was somewhere that had the logistical organisation, it would be near on impossible. In Thailand ......................

[whybother]

A win for the poor.

This should be the way to fight double standard.

Why should bangkok be kept dry? Do bangkok people pay special tax for this privilege?

A pretty fair point!.. if that's what the outcome is, that other (inner) Bkk areas should suffer likewise not just the poorest!!!

Ever been to Bangkok? Never seen the poor areas in (inner) Bangkok?

[erobando]

It's very important to flood all areas evenly.

It's kind of like when you have the cold or flu. It's best to cough or sneeze in other peoples' faces.

That way they can share your misery. Also, by making others sick, your own sickness goes away quicker.

[anon8]

It's very important to flood all areas evenly.

It's kind of like when you have the cold or flu. It's best to cough or sneeze in other peoples' faces.

That way they can share your misery. Also, by making others sick, your own sickness goes away quicker.

Exactly!

Also, having the satisfaction that ALL your fellow men are suffering comforts your soul

[projectionista]

Why should bangkok be kept dry? Do bangkok people pay special tax for this privilege?

Somebody had to pay for the sluice gate, and my guess is that it was the people of Bangkok....through a tax.

[plumeria]

To hell with " technically appropriate".

To hell with a reasoned approach based on water dynamics and science.

To hell with a plan.

To hell with rule of law.

"I've got the mobs."

"And I'm am going screw the Democrat Governor of Bangkok whatever it takes".

We are all just spectators to this pissing contest.

The Governor just doesn't have enough power to do what is right no matter how hard he may try and regardless of how much reasoning with facts he tries to use.

Enough soldiers with appropriate non-lethal force could keep things under control and heading toward the best possible conclusion for the entire country.

Reason, science, math and the common good are not the national government's guiding parameters so even the beloved "foreign" investors and "tourists" are screwed now.

"Destroy it all as long as I WIN!"

"Victory over the Democrat Governor at any price!"

"Bring on the holocaust! I've got a waterproof bunker with bottled water and food for a year and all my most cherished designer clothes!"

Edited November 3, 2011 by plumeria