Chula Team Proposes Super-Express Floodways: Thailand

[FangFerang]

Another crackpot plan from an obscure university professor to whom no one paid any attention for all these years.

Chula is one of two Universities in Thailand, the other being Mahidol, that are ranked among the 200 best Universities in the world. The "obscure" professor quoted is respected at Harvard, Cambridge and the University of Tokyo. I believe his reference to not needing foreign help is in creating a workable plan, not executing it.

Why are your feathers ruffled so much--would the tax affect you, or do you have other motivations for this flame?

[Bakseedaa]

The plan has a major deficiency in that it accepts that factories and other large scale developments can be built in high risk flood zones. If people want to build there, then they should assume 100% of the risk and they should be held liable for the cleanup of their pollution caused when the flood waters hit them spreading toxic waste and the like. Why collect tax for compensation for these people? The tax will never be enough to cover the losses. In effect ,he is advocating the subsidization of the greedy land developers. If the academic was academically inclined, he'd open a text book on river systems and flood plains and learn about the benefits of leaving some lands undeveloped and the benefit of leaving swamps and marshland in place. They are nature's sponges.

And the Thai peoples...... Natures Spongers..?

[animatic]

The plan has a major deficiency in that it accepts that factories and other large scale developments can be built in high risk flood zones. If people want to build there, then they should assume 100% of the risk and they should be held liable for the cleanup of their pollution caused when the flood waters hit them spreading toxic waste and the like. Why collect tax for compensation for these people? The tax will never be enough to cover the losses. In effect ,he is advocating the subsidization of the greedy land developers. If the academic was academically inclined, he'd open a text book on river systems and flood plains and learn about the benefits of leaving some lands undeveloped and the benefit of leaving swamps and marshland in place. They are nature's sponges.

And the Thai peoples...... Natures Spongers..?

Yes, nice global flame of all Thais...

He is accepting the reality that what is now on the ground will not easily be torn up, but that there are ways to deal with this in the here and now of politics and business, that are doable and help in the long term. Don't imagine for a moment you are going to get retroactive land zoning ordinances tearing down factories just because it 'makes sense geologically'. Real politics dude in the land of the doable. Not in the fantasy land of the blinkered idealists wishes fulfilled.

Likel this Prof as written the books you tell him tol go read.

Edited November 12, 2011 by animatic

[erobando]

The plan has a major deficiency in that it accepts that factories and other large scale developments can be built in high risk flood zones. If people want to build there, then they should assume 100% of the risk and they should be held liable for the cleanup of their pollution caused when the flood waters hit them spreading toxic waste and the like. Why collect tax for compensation for these people? The tax will never be enough to cover the losses. In effect ,he is advocating the subsidization of the greedy land developers. If the academic was academically inclined, he'd open a text book on river systems and flood plains and learn about the benefits of leaving some lands undeveloped and the benefit of leaving swamps and marshland in place. They are nature's sponges.

The textbook, would that be the one he wrote? High property taxes on flood zones for flow obstructing use would encourage those thinking of building there to alter plans and those already there to move. How you manage to distort that into a subsidy for land developers trying to sell land that has become uneconomical is beyond logic.

Yeah, I'm not sure how g-kid reached the conclusion that this is to subsidize land developers.

They're taxing the land developers because their developments in those areas are part of the problem... they are taking away from drainage and water retention areas. So the tax will... 1) Discourage people to build elsewhere (unlikely due to the lower real estate costs); or 2) Raise money to help create alternative drainage solutions.

And just because we haven't heard of him, it doesn't mean that he is some "crackpot" or "obscure" professor. How many of us here are in academia and study soil erosion? I'd guess few or none. So why would anyone expect to hear of him? Research scientists aren't able to do research in academia if they can't get their work funded; they get funding because qualified people think the research is worthwhile.

And why are people claiming this is self-serving? Do people think he's leading a public campaign for his ideas?

More likely, the media are seeking out people that study flood management, soil erosion, etc., because there is public interest in the subjects now.

If people want to know details of what researchers are studying in these areas, you need to seek out and read scientific journals.

Of course, the basic research isn't going to be covered by the general media in times that there is little public interest. So, therefore, we won't know any of these people and they will seem like they are "coming out of nowhere."

[geriatrickid]

The plan has a major deficiency in that it accepts that factories and other large scale developments can be built in high risk flood zones. If people want to build there, then they should assume 100% of the risk and they should be held liable for the cleanup of their pollution caused when the flood waters hit them spreading toxic waste and the like. Why collect tax for compensation for these people? The tax will never be enough to cover the losses. In effect ,he is advocating the subsidization of the greedy land developers. If the academic was academically inclined, he'd open a text book on river systems and flood plains and learn about the benefits of leaving some lands undeveloped and the benefit of leaving swamps and marshland in place. They are nature's sponges.

The textbook, would that be the one he wrote? High property taxes on flood zones for flow obstructing use would encourage those thinking of building there to alter plans and those already there to move. How you manage to distort that into a subsidy for land developers trying to sell land that has become uneconomical is beyond logic.

I recognize that the gentleman is an expert on coastal soil erosion. However, land development in Thailand is a completely different field of expertise. Yes, the lecturer is known for his concrete triangles that were placed off a coastal town. Although his theory on land reclamation has drawn praise from local Thais, unfortunately, the long term benefits of his theory have yet to be tested. Soil erosion on the coast is quite different from the floods occurring in the Bangkok region. The coastal area where the Chula lecturer is demonstrating his concrete eyesores suffered from indiscriminate removal of the mangroves and of development close to the shoreline. His "solution" is to attempt to reclaim land through extension of the shoreline, rather than to restore the actual damaged areas. This is quite contrary to the very effective method used in other regions, The alternative approach was demonstrated in the state of Florida USA, where mangrove swamps were protected and replanted and , development encroachment stopped. I do not see anywhere in the lecturer's proposal a position that would stop the ongoing paving over of land, the filling in of natural drainage areas nor the removal of structures from key catchment zones.

The gentleman's position remnds me of the silly proposal to reclaim land off of Bangkok. People like you ridiculed the proposal because it came from former PM Thaksin,.

The reason I call the "taxation" proposal a subsidy, is because it would become just that. So what if the property developers were taxed. The funds collected would be inadequate to cover the costs both from direct flooding damage and indirectly from pollution damage. The developers really wouldn't get stuck the tax, because they would pass it on to the leaseholders. In case you didn't realize it, large land developers transfer the responsibility and liability for the structures on their land to the tenants wherever possible. It would be the leaseholders responsibility to cover the tax. the land developers would be able to operate as usual. Tenants would be told, no worries, teh government has "flood insurance" through the tax. No one would be the wiser until the first floods came and the injured parties realized that the funds available were inadequate. Subsidy is an appropriate term because these schemes always work out that way. One need only look at the results in western countries where people living in flood prone areas can buy insurance from the government or qualify for government aid programs. A classic example are the people that build houses in the most dangerous parts of the OBX in North Carolina. Every year, there is hurricane and flooding damage. And every year the government pays them so they can rebuild. The only way to deal with the problem is to stop the encroachment and to remove the deelopments that interfere with natural drainage or that have blocked the drainage canals. That can only be done through;

1. Proper urban planning,

2, Enforcement of the laws by demolishing illegal developments and by prosecuting lawbreakers and,

3. Reclamation of some developed areas.

[noitom]

To FengFarang:

The "excellence" of Thai universities is a myth. Yes, Chula and Mahidol are normally ranked one and two in Thailand depending on your specialty, and Thammasat is generally third. Just to set the record straight, none of the Thai universities is anywhere near the top 500 in the world and Mahidol barely makes the Asia 400 list

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/asia.html

Again, just to set the record straight , my comment about him being an "obscure" professor was hooking in to the fact that his pop up "suddenly" after 12 years on the current flooding after three months in to it, and calling for a press conference regarding the flood crisis to promote his 50 year plan, was after never showing up in the media until yesterday. One could assume that he presented hs plan a few times to no avail since 1999, and that would entitle him to be "obscure" and not of interest or visible to any government, business, commercial or military decision makers in all that time. He may be a genius for all I know, but he's not connected to reality and he certainly has been obscure. Thai elite ruling class high sakdi na groups that run things don't like highly intelligent folks like Thanawat who question the way things work and recommend change as pointed out by another post.

Again, to set the record straight, while he presented on geological topics at several Asian conferences on topics relating to Thailand, I saw no affirmations whatsoever from any respected professors at Harvard, Cambridge, or University of Tokyo, so I don't know where you dreamed this up. He may have been on an agenda at an Asian conference with people from these institutions, but that doesn't mean that he is "highly respected" by them although he may be. Your leaping to a defense of him not being "obscure" with frivolous, exaggerated, and false facts is confusing. Why would you do such a thing? And, why would you think that "my feathers are ruffled?" Rather than just calling it the way that I see it.

[animatic]

Does anyone actually think Geologists are on the Pop Societal Radar except in times of crisis?

Of course he is generally unheard of, EXCEPT when large scale geological issues, are the issue of the day.

[erobando]

Does anyone actually think Geologists are on the Pop Societal Radar except in times of crisis?

Of course he is generally unheard of, EXCEPT when large scale geological issues, are the issue of the day.

Yes, exactly.

And, most likely, this specific research was from 1995-1999 because it was commissioned/funded due to public/government interest after the floods in 1994.

Edited November 12, 2011 by erobando

[chang1]

I have never heard of any Thai professors so they are all obscure to me therefore he cannot be judged just because he is unknown - being Thai does not mean he is not good at his job. He knows Thai politics, Thai ways of doing things and the local geography.

High taxes on developments in areas needed for water run off is a good idea as it brings in money while stopping future development and no need to buy expensive land - just make it unsalable! If that money is then used to build flood water canals (as well as high level roads another benefit that Bangkok needs) I think it would be the way to go. It may take 50 years for all this to be completed and allow for the present structures to come to the end of their useful lives.

This plan would cause least disruption and be very cost effective. Of course there are better and quicker solutions but they would cause too much disruption and be unaffordable. Like everyone on here I am no expert on flood prevention but anyone can see you either stop the water entering Bangkok which causes flooding in other areas or you improve drainage. So the real problems are where do you want the water to flow, how will you pay for it and how do you make the land available - all of which he has solved, although it will take time.

The first problem to overcome is when you are prime minister for only a few years why bother starting something you will not be credited for until you are long gone?

Edited November 12, 2011 by chang1

[mijan24]

This makes good reading and please note the dates 1995 - 1999 Maybe it's time people such as this were listened to.You only have to look at the major complexes that currently occupy natural flood escapes such as the new airport to understand the thinking behind his TAX thoughts - if you wish to build in such areas pay the TAX which could/should be used in the construction and maintenance of alternate water expressways.

Having read all of the posts that followed this simple statement I must acknowledge some made good sense others were full of self importance - I still believe this chap has a good point - now I would ask before you plunge in boots and all Google Monkeys Cheek read and digest how words of wisdom are often put forward but inactivity on the part of those "in charge" leave us in situation that is not going to improve until someone acts on these words of wisdom.

[animatic]

Does anyone actually think Geologists are on the Pop Societal Radar except in times of crisis?

Of course he is generally unheard of, EXCEPT when large scale geological issues, are the issue of the day.

Yes, exactly.

And, most likely, this specific research was from 1995-1999 because it was commissioned/funded due to public/government interest after the floods in 1994.

But implementation coincided with the regional crash of all countries in 1997,

instigated by Chavalit's floating the baht after saying he wouldn't 3 days earlier.

Chuan had economic recovery and IMF tightening of fiscal rules and responsibility to deal with in the immediate aftermath. Once they got Thailand recovered from the crash, this was just forgotten in the political whirlwind of Thaksinomics, and getting a piece of the newly larger pie to the most players in Thaksins TRT faux-non-coalition party.

A shame. The political will was gone by the time money was again available. We got some limited lip-service, but action... HA! We can see today how much they did.

If they had started implementing this then back in '1995-2005,

this whole mess today would have been much lighter and manageable.

It would be interesting to know if this came up on the radar during

Thaksin's 2001-2005 term, when it was still implementable.

So we've had a plan in place, but the Thaksin INC governments that controlled Thailand for 2/3 or the time since 1999, couldn't be arsed to do anything about it.

But the did put in the airport to great fan fair... nicknamed 'SWAMPY' because it took over and displaced one the areas largest water catchments, with apparently little actual thought about where that water would go.... PROGRESS.

Too bad the glamorous airport didn't come with unglamorous global water management as part of it's installation...

Edited November 12, 2011 by animatic

[travelmann]

Ive got a better plan , take all the soil from the hills and put it in all the flat low lying areas, see simple, or just dig a big hole all the water will go in it, or dig a hole thru the earth and let it drain out the other side so its "not our problem"

[Foggy Bottom]

If they had started implementing this then back in '1995-2005,

this whole mess today would have been much lighter and manageable.

It would be interesting to know if this came up on the radar during

Thaksin's 2001-2005 term, when it was still implementable.

So we've had a plan in place, but the Thaksin INC governments that controlled Thailand for 2/3 or the time since 1999, couldn't be arsed to do anything about it.

The 2005 flooding of Chiang Mai (Thaksin's home province), while Thaksin was in power, resulted in localised prevention/recovery development in Muang Chiang Mai, but the follow-on problems down stream were ignored as far as I'm aware.

[magpie3]

This thread and the original piece about the professor with the 50 year masterplan sums up what I have seen over the last few weeks and months in Thailand.

It goes like this; expert one says something, in this case, build these waterways in 50 years is the answer. Then expert 2 says, but isn't Bangkok going to be under the sea in 30 years. Not a problem because as has happened here recently the prime minister says that she has listened to experts and we are only opening the sluice gate 20 cm because that is the best option. Then those who have been up to their armpits in filthy water for a month start shouting to open it further, probably rightly so, and the prime minister says, "ok, we can open the gate another 30cm". So now we have 4 groups of "experts" and to me the only ones showing ownership of the problem are the ones up to their armpits in the water. They are dealing with something tangible.

After seeing all this I'm going to encourage my children to become an "expert". As a career it must be on a par with politics or the law.....and you may have died of old age before you are found out!!!

For only a few months in Thailand, you seem to have it sized up well.

Yep, absolutely agree.

The degree of concern is directly proportional to proximity to the problem [or how much graft is likely to be available.]

It is a human quality, but seems to transmit through a dominant gene in Thailand - expressed most fully throughout the higher echelons of public office and sets the standards for all to follow.

But as for the OP, no-one will actually KNOW the potential of the resurrected plan unless it IS examined.

The situation is serious enough to leave all options open - wouldn't you agree?

Trouble is who should present the options, and who should judge their merits? No Thai would accept the judgement of any outside 'expert' . As has been seen time and again, offers of international help or advice are rarely accepted. I guess it must be awkward dealing with someone who is not corruptable; much simpler to keep it 'in-house'.

I doubt the situation has been serious enough to change those ingrained attitudes.

Thinks - - - independent panel of experts - - ?

Nah - the word independent was a mistake.

No colours to polarise the thought processes.

[peergin]

There is an enormous loop (like a horse shoe) in the Chao Praya river where it runs through Bangkok. The government could make a short cut to allow the water to run S T R A I G H T from North Bangkok to South Bangkok and on to the sea. If it bypasses that long loop, then the water would flow much faster. Also, that short cut would be much shorter than the long, winding loop. Of course that would require expropriating land/houses to dig the short cut but the government has done exactly the same with many roads in the city.

[mijan24]

There is an enormous loop (like a horse shoe) in the Chao Praya river where it runs through Bangkok. The government could make a short cut to allow the water to run S T R A I G H T from North Bangkok to South Bangkok and on to the sea. If it bypasses that long loop, then the water would flow much faster. Also, that short cut would be much shorter than the long, winding loop. Of course that would require expropriating land/houses to dig the short cut but the government has done exactly the same with many roads in the city.

Sometimes governments have to make these hard expropriating land/houses decisions thats one of the reasons they are voted into office - A good example is the building of the now famous Sydney Harbour Bridge - google history to see some of the tough decisions that the government of the day made and wore it on the chin for the sake of progress.

[lounger]

"What we need to do is to expropriate land plots within one-km radius from these waterways and then build roads that are six metres above ground level. Together, they will deliver the super-express flood way," he said.<br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 252); "><br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 252); ">He said the high roads would ensure that if the canals overflowed, no communities would be affected. The super-express flood-way network, which should start from the Chai Nat-Pasak Canal, will stretch for about 100 kilometres. They will be able to hold up to 800 million cubic metres of run-off water from the upper part of the country."

This is a capital idea. The appropriate government dept can purchase the land and somehow transfer it to Thaksin or one of the new wave corrupt.

In time these vast swathes of land will become built up high value estate. Compulsory purchase gets round all the delays of legitimate estate developement...

[Payboy]

Another crackpot plan from an obscure university professor to whom no one paid any attention for all these years. He says he finished his plan in 1999. So he has had 12 years to get it in front of someone who would help him sell it. Thanawat states "there is no need to enlist foreign help." He adds further " the plan was finished in 1999, we can adjust the study results for the current context." What a ridiculous outlook.

This is exactly the kind of preposterous thinking that created decades of Rube Goldberg/Heath Robinson approaches to Thailand's flawed thinking and solutions. Don't bring in foreign help, we know all the answers. We are Thai, they are not, they don't understand "Thainess." When they are here with us , we don't see them. What they think makes no difference to us. I gain no face or lose none by listening to them. I will just be Thai and ignore them. If they say up, I will say down. Just to prove that I am Thai and I am in control. I will resist them. I know all. My plan is perfect. If only my own people would have seen that twelve years ago. But alas, my plan can only be completed in 50 years, but it will line the pockets of many bureaucrats and elite privileged business class. They should listen to me. I am Thai.

He computes, he analyzes, he states, he calculates, he blusters, he calls a press conference, he pounds the table, he does it all. Why didn't they listen to him 12 years ago? Why would anyone listen to this obscure university professor who was never visible before, but probably took in lots of public taxpayer funding to "take care" of his team? He states further that "handing out temporary relief" now won't solve the problem. In other words, Thanawat is saying ignore the medical and health emergency and disaster. Forget about "handing out" restoration money and tents" ..etc. Let them fend for their own food, water, medicine, supplies, and necessities. No more handouts. Work on my plan. What a self absorbed view of the world and preposterous ideas and statements. A totally over inflated sense of self importance, typically Thai.

Looks like Thanawat is planning for life after retirement.

[chang1]

Another crackpot plan from an obscure university professor to whom no one paid any attention for all these years. He says he finished his plan in 1999. So he has had 12 years to get it in front of someone who would help him sell it. Thanawat states "there is no need to enlist foreign help." He adds further " the plan was finished in 1999, we can adjust the study results for the current context." What a ridiculous outlook.

This is exactly the kind of preposterous thinking that created decades of Rube Goldberg/Heath Robinson approaches to Thailand's flawed thinking and solutions. Don't bring in foreign help, we know all the answers. We are Thai, they are not, they don't understand "Thainess." When they are here with us , we don't see them. What they think makes no difference to us. I gain no face or lose none by listening to them. I will just be Thai and ignore them. If they say up, I will say down. Just to prove that I am Thai and I am in control. I will resist them. I know all. My plan is perfect. If only my own people would have seen that twelve years ago. But alas, my plan can only be completed in 50 years, but it will line the pockets of many bureaucrats and elite privileged business class. They should listen to me. I am Thai.

He computes, he analyzes, he states, he calculates, he blusters, he calls a press conference, he pounds the table, he does it all. Why didn't they listen to him 12 years ago? Why would anyone listen to this obscure university professor who was never visible before, but probably took in lots of public taxpayer funding to "take care" of his team? He states further that "handing out temporary relief" now won't solve the problem. In other words, Thanawat is saying ignore the medical and health emergency and disaster. Forget about "handing out" restoration money and tents" ..etc. Let them fend for their own food, water, medicine, supplies, and necessities. No more handouts. Work on my plan. What a self absorbed view of the world and preposterous ideas and statements. A totally over inflated sense of self importance, typically Thai.

Or maybe he did a good job and came up with a solution that could work in Thailand and is frustrated that he was ignored by politicians with short term agendas who could not see any personal gain from this type of scheme. The plan sounds realistic and viable and I doubt there is a much better solution from anyone else that would ever be started yet alone completed. Anyone who thinks there can be a farang inspired quick fix is in dreamland.

[zydeco]

Said Thanawat: "What we need to do is to expropriate land plots within one-km radius from these waterways and then build roads that are six metres above ground level."

Expropriate? As in legalized theft? Just whose land does he intend to confiscate? Imagine how easily this "expropriation" could be used as a political club to clobber enemies and reward friends.

Edited November 13, 2011 by zydeco

[hellodolly]

<br />To FengFarang:<br /><br />The "excellence" of Thai universities is a myth. Yes, Chula and Mahidol are normally ranked one and two in Thailand depending on your specialty, and Thammasat is generally third. Just to set the record straight, none of the Thai universities is anywhere near the top 500 in the world and Mahidol barely makes the Asia 400 list  <br /><br /><a href='http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/asia.html' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.timeshigh...-2012/asia.html</a><br /><br />Again, just to set the record straight , my comment about him being an "obscure" professor was hooking in to the fact that his pop up "suddenly" after 12 years on the current flooding after three months in to it, and calling for a press conference regarding the flood crisis to promote his 50 year plan, was after never showing up in the media until yesterday. One could assume that he presented hs plan a few times to no avail since 1999, and that would entitle him to be "obscure" and not of interest or visible to any government, business, commercial or military decision makers in all that time. He may be a genius for all I know, but he's not connected to reality and he certainly has been obscure. Thai elite ruling class high sakdi na groups that run things don't like highly intelligent folks like Thanawat who question the way things work and recommend change as pointed out by another post.<br /><br />Again, to set the record straight, while he presented on geological topics at several Asian conferences on topics relating to Thailand, I saw no affirmations whatsoever from any respected professors at Harvard, Cambridge, or University of Tokyo, so I don't know where you dreamed this up. He may have been on an agenda at an Asian conference with people from these institutions, but that doesn't mean that he is "highly respected" by them although he may be. Your leaping to a defense of him not being "obscure" with frivolous, exaggerated, and false facts is confusing. Why would you do such a thing? And, why would you think that "my feathers are ruffled?" Rather than just calling it the way that I see it.<br /><br /><br />

<br /><br /><br />

Leaving out all the rhetoric here what would have happened if Thailand had adopted his plan and started work on it in 1999. Would it have made a difference twelve years into a fifty year project or would the current flood have destroyed it all.

People seem to forget this could well be a problem next year. And how is it going to help Nonkhan Si Tamarhet or other provinces south of Bangkok. Seems like a lot of work to preserve a city that is under attack from the Sea itself.

[chang1]

As the first job is to clear land of buildings to improve water flow, this flood would have helped to speed up that process. Building the embankments can then be started and should not take too long to complete.

I doubt that sufficient land would have been cleared in 12 years to make much difference yet but progress should have started to gain pace as the remaining buildings became more spread out and unprofitable.

Towns downstream would have to have similar schemes in place ready for the increased run off water.

As for flooding by rising sea level, that would depend on how fast and how high but as it will only make things worse it is better to start on a solution now. At least it will buy some time.