Plodprasop: Bangkok Residents Should Pack And Flee If Floodwaters Reach Ayutthaya's Wang Noi

[MEL1]

Haha, you guys sound like a bunch of grumpy ole men. Be positive and be happy. Dude didn't say leave yet. He said if x happens and be prepared. Sometimes that all you can do.

Floods suck for sure and sometimes there us nothing you can do to completely alleviate the possibility, especially if, and as someone mentioned, 30 percent of Thailand us in a flood plane. If true then what do you expect?

I don't know what type of clown this guy is or even if he is one but providing people a time when and if they should be concerned and what to do at that point sounds like a very reasonable thing to do. He didn't say to run away or flee as the headline indicates but clearly says to be prepared in the event water reaches a certain point and an intelligent person may see that as being a warning that if floods reach that level then the next move "may" be the need to evacuate but obviously that will have to be determined based on numerous other factors if the water reaches the defined location.

These types of warnings are common in the US when dealing with severe weather or floods, such as; "If the storm begins to move to the north, residents are urged to be prepared to evacuate low lying areas ...."

What about the people of Ayutthaya? Is he saying, 'Sod you, there is little we can do for YOU?'

I didn't read that in either news piece or anything close to that. I also didn't see anything that said this was the nations flood plan and thing being considered. What I read was the news choosing one comment to report.

I was by no means making criticism of your post.

My post was almost rhetorical. The difficulty I see is that, in knowing the Thai mentality, the majority will think that a message of 'flee', be it translated correctly or not, is also applicable to them and will result in EVERYBODY fleeing should a flood situation arise. Can you imagine?

Ayutthaya flees first, to Nonthaburi, followed by them all fleeing to Phatumtani, follwed by all those fleeing to Don Muang, and then all those arriving in BKK, which has people fleeing...... and then where do the whole lot flee to?

But then again, daily life is organised chaos.

-mel.

[maidu]

Rather than advising Bangkok region residents to flee when water gets too high, how about advising residents move to higher ground - permanently.

Here's a comparison: Suppose you boarded dogs. Each year their kennels flooded. Every 5 years or so their kennels were submerged. Would you suggest they be moved to higher ground for several months each year, or would you instead establish their dog pound on higher ground?

In this case the "dogs" have to find and buy their own new pound, with all the associated services, commercial, recreational, health, government, financial, employment, etc., a huge, probably insurmountable, challenge for your average dog.

Move to higher ground? Abandon Bangkok and much of Thailand for a number of months throughout the year?

Granted, Bangkok has been an immense investment in past decades. Also, there's been immense investments (prior and on-going) to try and keep flood-free. At some point, the task will be acknowledged as quixotic. Put another way; it will someday be evident that the investment to maintain Bangkok is not worth it. When will the 'tipping point' be reached - when there's a meter of standing water for 6 months per year? .....when there's 60 cm of year 'round standing water? .....when buildings start leaning because of soggy foundations? .....when electricity and water are cut off for 6 months per year? ....when sewage is floating in streets?

Instead of spending trillions of additional baht, why not allocate a portion of those funds for starting to build satellite cities on higher ground?

If you have an old house (or old car) with manifold problems, you might reach a point where it's not worthwhile to keep spending large amounts of money to maintain it.

It would be interesting if Thai officialdom would hire a group of outside experts to assess the viability of Bkk - for the next 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Would that be done? No. Furthermore, if the conclusions showed (what most of us already know) that trying to keep Bkk from flooding is untenable, would Thai officials seriously consider relocating to higher ground? Doubtful.

[Nisa]

Rather than advising Bangkok region residents to flee when water gets too high, how about advising residents move to higher ground - permanently.

Here's a comparison: Suppose you boarded dogs. Each year their kennels flooded. Every 5 years or so their kennels were submerged. Would you suggest they be moved to higher ground for several months each year, or would you instead establish their dog pound on higher ground?

In this case the "dogs" have to find and buy their own new pound, with all the associated services, commercial, recreational, health, government, financial, employment, etc., a huge, probably insurmountable, challenge for your average dog.

Move to higher ground? Abandon Bangkok and much of Thailand for a number of months throughout the year?

Granted, Bangkok has been an immense investment in past decades. Also, there's been immense investments (prior and on-going) to try and keep flood-free. At some point, the task will be acknowledged as quixotic. Put another way; it will someday be evident that the investment to maintain Bangkok is not worth it. When will the 'tipping point' be reached - when there's a meter of standing water for 6 months per year? .....when there's 60 cm of year 'round standing water? .....when buildings start leaning because of soggy foundations? .....when electricity and water are cut off for 6 months per year? ....when sewage is floating in streets?

Instead of spending trillions of additional baht, why not allocate a portion of those funds for starting to build satellite cities on higher ground?

If you have an old house (or old car) with manifold problems, you might reach a point where it's not worthwhile to keep spending large amounts of money to maintain it.

It would be interesting if Thai officialdom would hire a group of outside experts to assess the viability of Bkk - for the next 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Would that be done? No. Furthermore, if the conclusions showed (what most of us already know) that trying to keep Bkk from flooding is untenable, would Thai officials seriously consider relocating to higher ground? Doubtful.

Forgetting everything else ... where is the higher ground you expect the 10s of millions of people to go?

[Reasonableman]

Each person will be given their own sandbag to stand on?

[Nisa]

Each person will be given their own sandbag to stand on?

[Thaddeus]

Each person will be given their own sandbag to stand on?

Big Bag?

[blows]

Each person will be given their own sandbag to stand on?

And a rubber ducky?

[maidu]

Forgetting everything else ... where is the higher ground you expect the 10s of millions of people to go?

Migrations happen - .....and will continue to happen. Animals do it. Humans do it. Birds do it. When weather or other conditions become unbearable, then migrations happen. If there's no higher ground in Thailand, then Thailand will cease to exist, unless it plans to segue to floating devices.

[Nisa]

Forgetting everything else ... where is the higher ground you expect the 10s of millions of people to go?

Migrations happen - .....and will continue to happen. Animals do it. Humans do it. Birds do it. When weather or other conditions become unbearable, then migrations happen. If there's no higher ground in Thailand, then Thailand will cease to exist, unless it plans to segue to floating devices.

Actually there is technology too. Humans have a way of creating or furthering problems, including Bangkok sinking, but they are also pretty good at dealing with problems such as a country like the Netherlands where over 20% of the population is located BELOW sea level and half the country at about sea level.

Technology has, for the most part, eliminated the need for seasonal human migration across the world.

Edited February 23, 2012 by Nisa

[Thaddeus]

Technology has, for the most part, eliminated the need for seasonal human migration across the world.

Hoist by out own petard then.

Mother Nature has a somewhat unwelcome reminder every now and again of who the real boss is.

[daiwill60]

So the minister plucks some figure out of the air to put the fear and importance of impending doom into the media highlights 6 months in advance, and then next rainy season when it will inevitably flood again, due to a lack of preparedness, he is in the clear because he can respond by saying, 'I Told You So', nah nah nah nanha.

[Orac]

So the minister plucks some figure out of the air to put the fear and importance of impending doom into the media highlights 6 months in advance, and then next rainy season when it will inevitably flood again, due to a lack of preparedness, he is in the clear because he can respond by saying, 'I Told You So', nah nah nah nanha.

Nope - The Nation plucked a line out of a lengthy statement to senators and quoted it out of context to sensationalise it.