Water Influx Outpaces Drainage: Bangkok Governor

[webfact]

Water influx outpaces drainage

THE NATION

Sukhumbhand says big bags marginally successful in holding back water but floods spreading in Bangkok

The volume of water entering Bangkok is much greater than the amount being pushed out, according to Bangkok Governor MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra.

"The difference is about 100 million cubic metres a day," Sukhumbhand disclosed yesterday.

He pointed out that the big bags placed in areas north of Bangkok had not fully prevented the run-off water from the upper part of the country from seeping in.

The big bags, so far, have managed to lower flood water levels in Bangkok's Bang Phlat, Don Muang and Lak Si districts by between 15 and 20 centimetres.

"That's good news," Sukhumbhand said.

However, he pointed out that flood water had continued to spread wider in the capital.

The Bangkok governor yesterday ordered evacuations as more areas became heavily flooded. Residents on Soi Khu Bon 6, 21, 23 and 31, Ram-Indra Road, Kanchanaphisek Road, and Seree Thai roads were ordered to leave their flooded homes.

According to the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, 14,818 people are now staying at BMA-provided evacuation centres. Many other flood victims have moved to live in their relatives' houses or rented places or to stay in the provinces.

"The Lat Phrao subdistrict of Lat Phrao district has been declared a surveillance area now," Sukhumband said.

In Chatuchak district, flooding has hit one of the country's biggest fresh markets - the Marketing Organisation for Farmers-run market. Flood water there is about 20 centimetres deep.

As many as 17 pumps along the Bang Sue Canal are working hard to channel the water out to the Chao Phraya River and into the sea.

Thanks to the canal's ability to drain 51 cubic metres of water per second, flood water has not yet raged into inner Bangkok.

But the canal has overflowed in some areas, prompting the evacuation of people in canal-side communities.

Concern is growing that if run-off water along Lat Phrao Road reaches the Bang Sue Canal, the waterway could be overwhelmed.

Some water from the Bang Sue Canal is now being directed via moats along the Vibhavadi-Rangsit Road to the Samsen Canal, which will help push the water out to the Chao Phraya.

Water was seen welling up from drainage pipes near the Skytrain's Saphan Kwai station on the Paholyothin Road and also near the Dusit Zoo. However, the area has not yet been flooded.

To date, the capital's subway and Skytrain systems are still operating as normal.

In eastern Bangkok, flooding now poses a serious threat to the Bang Chan Industrial Estate. Flood-water levels were climbing up the one-metre-high embankment around the estate.

In western Bangkok, flood water has almost reached the Rama II Road, the main route to the country's South.

"The flood water is now less than one kilometre away from Rama II Road," Tha Kham Police Station's deputy superintendent for traffic Lt-Colonel Avudh Whamuk said.

Sanya Sheenimit, who heads the BMA Department of Drainage and Sewerage, yesterday refused to comment on whether some districts of Bangkok would escape the raging floods.

"We have to check the efficiency of big bags and water drainage ability," he said.

According to the Flood Relief Operations Centre director Pol General Pracha Promnok, big-bag embankments are being reinforced and more pumps installed in the capital.

"If big bags can stop more water from entering Bangkok, flood-water levels on Bangkok's main roads will significantly reduce within two weeks," Sanya said.

On complaints about garbage in flood water, Sukhumbhand said BMA had already hired some locals at Bt300 a day for garbage collection in areas where the flood-water level was more than 80 centimetres deep.

According to the 24/7 Emergency Operation Centre for Flooding, Storm and Landslide, flooding has now ravaged 24 provinces and claimed 529 lives. At least, two flood victims are reported as missing.

-- The Nation 2011-11-10

[zydeco]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

[whybother]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

Yep. It would have been better to flood Bangkok and make things worse for another 10 million people.

If they had let the water in uncontrolled, there would be more than a few districts flooded. And the water has been sitting at Don Mueang for how long, with nothing stopping it and all the drainage available to get rid of it?

The water wouldn't just rush through Bangkok to the sea. It would just sit there for a few weeks. It moves very slowly because the terrain is generally flat ... except that some areas are lower than others, so those areas will get much more flooding which will stay there a lot longer.

Edited November 10, 2011 by whybother

[zakk9]

Sandbags won't stop the water from entering downtown Bangkok. They can't sandbag every possible entry point anyway. It will however slow the water down, making life more difficult for those already under water. How this will turn out for Bangkok depends on the efficiency of the drainage system downtown. If it is as good as they claim, Bangkok shouldn't be under water for long, unless they keep holding the water back. And even with some water in the streets, Bangkok won't stop. Most businesses and homes are well above street level, unlike some industrial estates that did get flooded.

[mdechgan]

The big bags are doing nothing but delaying the inevitable and making the flood worse. The big bag barriers will overflow within a week unless the locals are fedup and break the barriers sooner.

[MaxYakov]

"The difference is about 100 million cubic metres a day," Sukhumbhand disclosed yesterday.

That's 20-25% of the Chao Phraya's daily flow (depending on your reference). At what daily flow rate should a moving body of water be termed a 'river'? The Bangkok River (East/West branches)?

[AleG]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

Brilliant!, now how do you plan to provide relief supplies and evacuation space to the whole population of Bangkok?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

One of the FROC related scientists today is predicting that BKK south of the Saen Saeb Canal, including the Suk corridor, won't flood.

Dunno whether to believe that...but that's what he's saying.

Source via Twitter. Terry is from the BKK Post.

@terryfrd Terry Fredrickson

More "light at the end of the tunnel" talk today. Froc advisor Dr Anong says inner city areas south of Saen Saeb unlikely to be flooded.

@terryfrd Terry Fredrickson

Dr Anong says that water "mass" from the north is coming in gradually and on BKK side should be absorbed into river, canal & drainage system

Edited November 10, 2011 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[hammered]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

Yep. It would have been better to flood Bangkok and make things worse for another 10 million people.

If they had let the water in uncontrolled, there would be more than a few districts flooded. And the water has been sitting at Don Mueang for how long, with nothing stopping it and all the drainage available to get rid of it?

The water wouldn't just rush through Bangkok to the sea. It would just sit there for a few weeks. It moves very slowly because the terrain is generally flat ... except that some areas are lower than others, so those areas will get much more flooding which will stay there a lot longer.

A lot of the ten million you refer to are actually in the suburbs of BKK that are flooded. Not many actually live in central BKK. The decision was places over people. That is very well known by those affected. Go to a shelter and talk to people about it. It is very informative. Take some goodies to give out too if you do.

[whybother]

A lot of the ten million you refer to are actually in the suburbs of BKK that are flooded. Not many actually live in central BKK. The decision was places over people. That is very well known by those affected. Go to a shelter and talk to people about it. It is very informative. Take some goodies to give out too if you do.

Bangkok's flood protection walls cover most of Bangkok which would mean it would cover most of the 12 million people estimated to live in the Bangkok area.

Decisions were made (a long time ago) to protect Bangkok's infrastructure and the people living in it. With the higher density of people living within Bangkok, flooding a small area would affect more people. If infrastructure is not protected, the amount of time and money spent on recovering the infrastructure would mean that less would be spent on the people.

If the water at the Bangkok water plants had been ruined, that would mean millions of people wouldn't have had access to fresh water. The relief organisations can't cope with delivering water to the people that are already affected. How the h3ll do they support another few million?

If the MRT had been flooded, that would have meant that the system would have been out of action for many months, not just affecting the people that need to use it every day, but also those that use the other public transport and roads that would be overcrowded with all the MRT users.

Every baht spent to recover a flooded Bangkok would be less to be spent on the people already affected, and who would have been affected regardless of whether Bangkok was flooded or not.

[animatic]

Sorry I don't buy the flood everything idea.

Save what you can, ANYTHING you can, and what you can't get it over with as soon as possible.

It's a forgone conclusion most things all get trashed, but not everything, and sorry saving some of inner Bangkok is really going to mean very little to the inevitable and unescapable trashing of the surrounding areas.

It was going to happen anyway, no matter of downtown got trashed or not. Anyone who really understood the aerial and satellite photos would know this.

Sharing the pain just means more pain for more people, and the overall crippling of the recovery for those who can't be avoided, not less pain for some already getting hammered.

Edited November 10, 2011 by animatic

[robblok]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

Yep. It would have been better to flood Bangkok and make things worse for another 10 million people.

If they had let the water in uncontrolled, there would be more than a few districts flooded. And the water has been sitting at Don Mueang for how long, with nothing stopping it and all the drainage available to get rid of it?

The water wouldn't just rush through Bangkok to the sea. It would just sit there for a few weeks. It moves very slowly because the terrain is generally flat ... except that some areas are lower than others, so those areas will get much more flooding which will stay there a lot longer.

You love your numbers, but many of those people you count are in the parts of Bangkok already submerged or gone. They are admitting the big bags arent helping it slowing it down only. That is bad especially with high tide coming.

I don't mind them placing big bags.. but as they said it only slowed it down not stopped it. Made it worse for other people in your precious Bangkok. Anyway i hope you guys keep it dry but those chances dwindle by the day.

Here in the north west of BKK the water has slowed down dropping. It was not much to begin with but now its almost zero. I don't think a dam is the cause of it. Might be high tide or something like that. But at least the house is dry since today.

Thing that bugs me the most that it could have been over sooner without all those dams. Now in a few weeks ill be dry and it still does not do me any good as BKK is flooded.

[jimbeam1]

I suppose it must be quicker to use the big bags? But I wouldn't have thought that they were as effective as the small ones. Especially as the big ones are 50-50 sand and gravel.

jb1

[animatic]

A lot of the ten million you refer to are actually in the suburbs of BKK that are flooded. Not many actually live in central BKK. The decision was places over people. That is very well known by those affected. Go to a shelter and talk to people about it. It is very informative. Take some goodies to give out too if you do.

Bangkok's flood protection walls cover most of Bangkok which would mean it would cover most of the 12 million people estimated to live in the Bangkok area.

Decisions were made (a long time ago) to protect Bangkok's infrastructure and the people living in it. With the higher density of people living within Bangkok, flooding a small area would affect more people. If infrastructure is not protected, the amount of time and money spent on recovering the infrastructure would mean that less would be spent on the people.

If the water at the Bangkok water plants had been ruined, that would mean millions of people wouldn't have had access to fresh water. The relief organisations can't cope with delivering water to the people that are already affected. How the h3ll do they support another few million?

If the MRT had been flooded, that would have meant that the system would have been out of action for many months, not just affecting the people that need to use it every day, but also those that use the other public transport and roads that would be overcrowded with all the MRT users.

Every baht spent to recover a flooded Bangkok would be less to be spent on the people already affected, and who would have been affected regardless of whether Bangkok was flooded or not.

" If infrastructure is not protected,

the amount of time and money spent on recovering the infrastructure

would mean that less would be spent on the people. "

I can not fault this logic. And we need to deal with this with logic, not emotion.

People can move around, infrastructure like MRT and water plants can not,

either way, it costs money to repair ANYTHING flooded.

If it's flooded now, it needs repair later,

if it's NOT then one less thing to pay for later.

And believe me we will need revenue coming in,

sooner than later, to pay for this massive reconstruction.

This may seem cruel to those flooded now, but on an emotional level,

not the one that MUST look Long Term and Big Picture.

That is not one of Thailands best traits, but some do, and they MUST do that.

The idea that this would be 'over sooner' is wishful thinking, if you look at the gargantuan mass of water sitting above Bangkok. Slow or fast exiting, inundated neighborhoods are still trashed, there is no noticeably quicker fix in this horrible scenario. The pictures from above don't lie.

Edited November 10, 2011 by animatic

[whybother]

You love your numbers, but many of those people you count are in the parts of Bangkok already submerged or gone. They are admitting the big bags arent helping it slowing it down only. That is bad especially with high tide coming.

I don't mind them placing big bags.. but as they said it only slowed it down not stopped it. Made it worse for other people in your precious Bangkok. Anyway i hope you guys keep it dry but those chances dwindle by the day.

Here in the north west of BKK the water has slowed down dropping. It was not much to begin with but now its almost zero. I don't think a dam is the cause of it. Might be high tide or something like that. But at least the house is dry since today.

Thing that bugs me the most that it could have been over sooner without all those dams. Now in a few weeks ill be dry and it still does not do me any good as BKK is flooded.

Yes, Bangkok people are already flooded, some because the flood protection was damaged. Just because some people are flooded, doesn't mean that more should be flooded.

I think the idea of the big bags is to slow the water's march through Bangkok, which gives them more time to pump out what is getting through. In some areas they are winning. In others, the drainage is not enough to stop flooding.

Another high tide is this weekend, so that could have something to do with it. I remember reading something a couple of days ago that a new wall of water (not as much as before, but another lot) was hitting Bangkok.

It might have been over sooner, but there would have been a lot more damage to get fixed.

[haroldc]

Yesterday, Thanong Khanthong of The Nation reported on the number of pumping stations and pumps allegedly installed for the Tha Chin river vs. the Chao Phaya river.

Does anyone know if this information has been verified? Has it been reported in the Thai media?

If the report is correct, I would hope that the facts would be widely disclosed and the issue raised in Parliament. Maybe this is one for Khun Chuwit...

Edited November 10, 2011 by haroldc

[robblok]

You love your numbers, but many of those people you count are in the parts of Bangkok already submerged or gone. They are admitting the big bags arent helping it slowing it down only. That is bad especially with high tide coming.

I don't mind them placing big bags.. but as they said it only slowed it down not stopped it. Made it worse for other people in your precious Bangkok. Anyway i hope you guys keep it dry but those chances dwindle by the day.

Here in the north west of BKK the water has slowed down dropping. It was not much to begin with but now its almost zero. I don't think a dam is the cause of it. Might be high tide or something like that. But at least the house is dry since today.

Thing that bugs me the most that it could have been over sooner without all those dams. Now in a few weeks ill be dry and it still does not do me any good as BKK is flooded.

Yes, Bangkok people are already flooded, some because the flood protection was damaged. Just because some people are flooded, doesn't mean that more should be flooded.

I think the idea of the big bags is to slow the water's march through Bangkok, which gives them more time to pump out what is getting through. In some areas they are winning. In others, the drainage is not enough to stop flooding.

Another high tide is this weekend, so that could have something to do with it. I remember reading something a couple of days ago that a new wall of water (not as much as before, but another lot) was hitting Bangkok.

It might have been over sooner, but there would have been a lot more damage to get fixed.

Then don't use those inflated numbers to give your arguments more power. Personally i want Bangkok to be dry as soon as possibly. I also have nothing to gain because water won't drain faster here.

I am just not sure if its a smart idea to let more water come (dr Seri said it would amass and overflow causing more damage). For now i just want it back to normal but it wont be for weeks to come BKK will be flooded. (parts of it at least).

I will be dry but with roads leading no where, so i got everything to gain by wanting this over. I just don't think blocking water is a good solution. Did you ever try to block a stream in your youth. I have tried it many times and it always failed. It can only succeed if there are alternatives for the water to go too. Else the water will find the path of least resistance.

[hammered]

Yesterday, Thanong Khanthong of The Nation reported on the number of pumping stations and pumps allegedly installed for the Tha Chin river vs. the Chao Phaya river.

Does anyone know if this information has been verified? Has it been reported in the Thai media?

If the report is correct, I would hope that the facts would be widely disclosed and the issue raised in Parliament. Maybe this is one for Khun Chuwit...

Does anyone actually believe anything Thanong says? His "journalism" is out there to say the least even ion issues that dont touch on his ultra-extremist yellow shirt agenda that makes the likes of Sondhi look like a red shirt!

By the way, there is also a lot of flooding that isnt only around BKK and some places have been flooded for up to four months. The Tha Chin river is a watercourse needed to alleviate the coutnries flooding,s o ther may well even be good reasons to install pumps there. Of course the media we read is totally and utterly Bangkokcentric, but there are millions who have suffered through this natural disaster who arent in BKK too.

[otherstuff1957]

The only reason that they are using the "big bags" is that dikes made of big bags cannot be disassembled by hand! Given the weight of each bag, even a small backhoe would have trouble moving one. The big bags are probably not any more effective at stopping water than regular sandbags, but they cannot be as easily moved or destroyed by disgruntled people on the wrong side of the dikes.

[monty1412]

Sorry I don't buy the flood everything idea.

Save what you can, ANYTHING you can, and what you can't get it over with as soon as possible.

It's a forgone conclusion most things all get trashed, but not everything, and sorry saving some of inner Bangkok is really going to mean very little to the inevitable and unescapable trashing of the surrounding areas.

It was going to happen anyway, no matter of downtown got trashed or not. Anyone who really understood the aerial and satellite photos would know this.

Sharing the pain just means more pain for more people, and the overall crippling of the recovery for those who can't be avoided, not less pain for some already getting hammered.

Cant argue with your logic. Absolutely spot on post

[jimbeam1]

The only reason that they are using the "big bags" is that dikes made of big bags cannot be disassembled by hand! Given the weight of each bag, even a small backhoe would have trouble moving one. The big bags are probably not any more effective at stopping water than regular sandbags, but they cannot be as easily moved or destroyed by disgruntled people on the wrong side of the dikes.

You are probably right. Lets hope they don't cut them and spread the contents out just to eventually be washed into the drainage system.

jb1

[Sydebolle]

Froc, frog, fork, fog ??????

[sparebox2]

Sukhumbhand says big bags marginally successful. Boat pusshing water is also marginally successful. Small sand bags marginally successful, EM balls marginally successful, Shut dams up marginally successful, etc etc.

Put everthing together, and you have a BIG SUCCESS.

[spermwhale]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

It's a travesty that they are allowing the people in the outlying areas to suffer in their water-drenched homes for weeks and weeks to save the downtown. Share the pain should be the Modus Operandi. It would reduce the suffering of millions of people at the cost of threatening a bit of shopping downtown. What's worse. No retail activity downtown for a while. or continued to disruptions to the lifeblood of Thailand's economy: the manufacturing sector.

The inmates are in charge of the asylum

[whybother]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

It's a travesty that they are allowing the people in the outlying areas to suffer in their water-drenched homes for weeks and weeks to save the downtown. Share the pain should be the Modus Operandi. It would reduce the suffering of millions of people at the cost of threatening a bit of shopping downtown. What's worse. No retail activity downtown for a while. or continued to disruptions to the lifeblood of Thailand's economy: the manufacturing sector.

The inmates are in charge of the asylum

Do you think that Bangkok is ONLY about shopping?

[Orac]

Yesterday, Thanong Khanthong of The Nation reported on the number of pumping stations and pumps allegedly installed for the Tha Chin river vs. the Chao Phaya river.

Does anyone know if this information has been verified? Has it been reported in the Thai media?

If the report is correct, I would hope that the facts would be widely disclosed and the issue raised in Parliament. Maybe this is one for Khun Chuwit...

Does anyone actually believe anything Thanong says? His "journalism" is out there to say the least even ion issues that dont touch on his ultra-extremist yellow shirt agenda that makes the likes of Sondhi look like a red shirt!

By the way, there is also a lot of flooding that isnt only around BKK and some places have been flooded for up to four months. The Tha Chin river is a watercourse needed to alleviate the coutnries flooding,s o ther may well even be good reasons to install pumps there. Of course the media we read is totally and utterly Bangkokcentric, but there are millions who have suffered through this natural disaster who arent in BKK too.

Quality reporting from Thanong:

A friend just sent me crucial information of Irrigation Dept about water pumping capacity.

How about a RT from another friend of his an hour ago:

Thanong

@ThanongK Thanong

@paisalvision warns that water is seeping underneath Suvarnabhumi. Might flood in 4 hours.

Can't help but notice that his tweets in the evening are getting a very melancholy look to them - last night he was rambling on about Burmese armies and Ayuthaya.

[robokop]

Futility. People have known for weeks that it was best to just let the water flow where it wanted, which was through Inner Bangkok. They delayed it and have made things worse for people in outlaying areas, but in the end it's going to happen anyway. It's just that the flooding would have ended much faster and fewer districts put under water if the prideful people in charge had just allowed things play out from the beginning the way they are inevitably fated to go.

I agree 100% with this comment. The effort to make the flood "Go Away" by blocking it's path to the sea is impossible. The flood should be over NOW. It is actually worse now than if the water was allowed to flow through Bangkok. Yes it would have caused damaged. But it is now causing more damge over a much longer period of time, placing greater hardships on the people of Bangkok and Thailand. Next poblerm will be with disease because of the long lasting standing water.

The major problem not yet resolved is the major airport. Blocking water flow to the sea has caused massive amounts of water to back up and spread. It very well can reach and shut down the last remaining airport in Bangkok, a disaster in itself. As we have seen so far, tourism is at least 50% last years levels Do not believe the false figures of reduced tourism of only 15%, it is really around 50%. Major hit for Thailand. This wil also have a negative impact on the big New Years Eve celebrations should any outbreak of disease occur.

Edited November 10, 2011 by robokop

[waterdog]

Bangkok flooding - the wet and the dry:

[submaniac]

I am one of the people here who has a home that is already under water (Thonburi) and all the first floor possessions are damaged. The water has not gone done, but appears to either be the same or increasing. The more time my stuff is underwater, the more it is screwed from being salvageable. I would really like the flood waters to recede to minimize the damage.

The way I look at it, I am already screwed. If the water goes through downtown, what does that mean for every body else? That the levels will go down a little bit? There's still going to be water and its still going to be flooded. And what good will it do even if the water goes down. Everything is pretty much destroyed already. Because I, as well as many other people, have been screwed, I don't think that justifies screwing down town BKK. The victims in the other areas are already there. But the infrastructure of downtown BKK getting screwed will screw everything even worst. Water filtration, the train system, the financial and business districts. It makes sense to save what you can, and if they can save it, then do it.

At this point, however, I think this entire discussion is moot. The satelite photos of the water is just scary. I do not think it is physically possible.

[whybother]

I agree 100% with this comment. The effort to make the flood "Go Away" by blocking it's path to the sea is impossible. The flood should be over NOW. It is actually worse now than if the water was allowed to flow through Bangkok. Yes it would have caused damaged. But it is now causing more damge over a much longer period of time, placing greater hardships on the people of Bangkok and Thailand. Next poblerm will be with disease because of the long lasting standing water.

The major problem not yet resolved is the major airport. Blocking water flow to the sea has caused massive amounts of water to back up and spread. It very well can reach and shut down the last remaining airport in Bangkok, a disaster in itself. As we have seen so far, tourism is at least 50% last years levels Do not believe the false figures of reduced tourism of only 15%, it is really around 50%. Major hit for Thailand. This wil also have a negative impact on the big New Years Eve celebrations should any outbreak of disease occur.

Maybe you should look into the floods in 1983 and 1995 and see how quickly they "were over".