Lite Beer Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 Capital should be moved to Northeast, top scientist says The Nation on Sunday BANGKOK:-- Dr Art-Ong Jumsai na Ayudhya, a former scientist at the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa), has called for the relocation of Thailand's capital to the Northeast. Speaking at a seminar on climate change, natural disasters, and the future of Thailand, Art-ong said Bangkok is sinking every year because of the rising sea level. Citing the rising amount of rainfall and the rising dam water level in 2010 and 2011, he said the trend will worsen in 2012 and in coming years, so authorities have to increase efficiency in draining the excess water into the sea. Regarding the capital, he said, far-sighted leaders should consider relocating out of Bangkok, which has been the country's capital for more than 200 years, to a higher ground such as one of the 16 northeastern provinces. Relocation of the capital will take at least 20 years and a brand-new capital should be built as Bangkok will face difficulties in managing excess water in the next seven or eight years. -- The Nation 2012-02-05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I'm looking forward to my new government- provided hacienda on 2 hectares when it happens. Along with the rest of Bangkok's population. Wonder who owns all that Isaan land? Nice little earner for someone(s). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post kurnell Posted February 5, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 5, 2012 Can we drag it upriver using thousands of boats? 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Years ago Bangkok was known as "The Venice of The East", maybe in a few years it can use that name again to attract tourists. Miracles notwithstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangkokburning Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePai Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Sounds similar to Burma ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Years ago Bangkok was known as "The Venice of The East", maybe in a few years it can use that name again to attract tourists. Miracles notwithstanding. And just a few years later, they can rename it Waterworld , after the film about a drowned city ? While I agree that a gradual move to a dryer location makes sense, I would however disagree that the North-East is the automatic choice, surely there is some above-sea-level land closer to the current capital, than that ? Perhaps 50-100 miles North of Bangkok might be far enough ? Or DL might decide to favour his own home-town, ahead of Isarn, who knows what he may decide for the country's future ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exeter Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Since when has Jataporn been a top scientist! Just trying save his bus fare money! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyLew Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Was he wearing a nice red suit when he made these remarks? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lite Beer Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 Well-known Thai scientist suggests capital relocation BANGKOK, (NNT) - Thailand's well-known scientist, Dr. Art-ong Jumsai Na Ayudhya, has cautioned Thai people especially Bangkok-dwellers to prepare for more floods, which are likely to worsen each year. Dr. Art-ong, a NASA scientist forecast that Bangkok might be able to sustain flooding for no more than eight years whereas the relocation of the capital city could take as long as 20 years. Dr. Art-ong suggested that a new capital city be built, adding that one of the 16 provinces in the northeastern plateau would be a favorable location. Aside from his flood prediction, the country’s best known scientist has warned of Aurora phenomenon in the northern hemisphere which is likely to disrupt aeronautical communication systems worldwide. The impact of the phenomenon would be severe in December but would ease in early 2013. -- NNT 2012-02-05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reasonableman Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) And the Government can relocate all goverment departments and government staff there cost-free? Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Edited February 5, 2012 by Reasonableman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MikeOboe57 Posted February 5, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 5, 2012 Well, it would definitely reduce the travel expenses for future redshirt excursions to the capital. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bendejo Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Sounds like the man in Hong Kong is looking to make a killing in Issan real estate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moruya Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 It's a Thatcher-like scheme. Sell the givernment buidlings in Bangkok at a huge cost. Might help pay off some of that massive debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Thaksin would love that. Move the capital to the heart of red land and bring his dreams of a nation divided by 'colour' ever closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayday49 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The theory behind a move of Thailands Capital amounts to the former NASA scientist being a Troll Proper................come on folks ....chime in! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaltsc Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Years ago Bangkok was known as "The Venice of The East", maybe in a few years it can use that name again to attract tourists. Miracles notwithstanding. How abour "Atlantis of the East"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan3 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Capital should be moved to Northeast You've got to be kidding. The capital of Thailand in Issan.. Rediculous......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikecwm Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Petchabun - perfect place. Plus the value of our 27 rai will rocket. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakseedaa Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Petchabun - perfect place. Plus the value of our 27 rai will rocket. You can have, I like our sleepy little hollow in Chiangmai just the way it is. We don't have all the problems that places like Bangkok, Pattaya and Phuket have. Well not on the same scale that is. If Petchabun takes the capital then you get all the baggage and dirty laundry as well. Good luck with your life on your 27 rai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... Why should a capital be beside the sea? And why is Canberra "a huge mistake"? The only reason that a lot of capitals are traditionally beside the sea is that they are usually the biggest cities because of the trade at seaside ports. These days, there is no reason for the government to be near the ports. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 "Dr. Art-ong, a NASA scientist forecast that Bangkok might be able to sustain flooding for no more than eight years whereas the relocation of the capital city could take as long as 20 years". Using simple maths, this should have been initiated 12 years ago - meaning that it is Thaksin fault as it was his government that was in power and it was on his watch. You just cannot trust anything he does (doesn't do) can you!!!! Hasn't this joker got something better to do with his time?? Mind you, as he claims to be a NASA scientist why don't we be brazen and forward thinking and relocate Bangkok to the moon - I can see one insurmountable problem though and that is loss of tourism through not being able to hold full moon parties!!!! Can you have full earth parties with everyone on the earth switching on all available light sources on specific days to suit????? Another thing - as far as I'm aware you cannot grow Jasmine rice on the moon unless scientists can produce GMO rice seeds with a good dollop of mercury or lead incorporated into the rice grains, plus the seas are bereft of water so that would stuff the fisherman - it seems my idea is falling apart so why don't we keep BKK where it is and build a Bangkok barrier on the Chao Phraya river (a la thames barrier) and put a dividing wall between the North East and Central Thailand or build a massive plughole in the middle of thailand and send the water to the earth's core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... A Capital doesn't have to be near the sea, Canberra is long way from the ocean and functions quite well in the modern world. (get rid of some of the pollies and it will function very well) Australia's 1st capital, Melbourne was by the sea but was move to keep all the moaning Sydney siders happy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post whybother Posted February 5, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 5, 2012 Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... Unless of course Thailand follows Austria, Germany, Belgium, France, Canada, Egypt ...... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) The move need no be all at once. A gradual transfer of government offices and financial incentives to Bangkok's key employers (financial and telecom service companies) would encourage other companies to follow. To be blunt, as long as the key infrastructure was relocated, Bangkok could remain where it was, but with a reduced population. As it is, Bangkok is bursting at the seams and is at risk, so something has to be done. The Northeast offers more available land, reduced costs and a lower risk of Typhoon related exposure. Bangkok could continue as a major city. Edited February 5, 2012 by geriatrickid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... Unless of course Thailand follows Austria, Germany, Belgium, France, Canada, Egypt ...... They could follow the Tibetan Government's lead and move to India... Edited February 5, 2012 by chooka 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The move need no be all at once. A gradual transfer of government offices and financial incentives to Bangkok's key employers (financial and telecom service companies) would encourage other companies to follow. To be blunt, as long as the key infrastructure was relocated, Bangkok could remain where it was, but with a reduced population. As it is, Bangkok is bursting at the seams and is at risk, so something has to be done. The Northeast offers more available land, reduced costs and a lower risk of Typhoon related exposure. Bangkok could continue as a major city. Am I missing something??? as I thought that the floods eminated from the North East of Thailand!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnhancePlus Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Move it back to Sukothai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anterian Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I increasingly wonder if Thailand, as we know it, will survive long enough for the fate of Bangkok to matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now