Yingluck govt had role in 2011 flood: Atthawit

[Grubster]

Just now, halloween said:

BS.

Why is Bangkok flooding now?  

[pookiki]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

Actually statistics support my views not yours and you keep ignoring what I said about her going over the head of the experts. By doing so she made it WORSE because the high tide then coincided with her letting the water from the dams and the extra rain. So do I think there would not have been any flooding.. NO. Do i think she made it a lot worse YES. 

 

So she is liable for the extra damage. 

 

No government can prevent all flooding (unfortunately) but no need to make it worse because people wanted to capitalize on the rice program. That was what happened. 

Actually, there was plenty of evidence that refuted your position.  Either way, it is all speculation and conjecture. 

 

But I tell you what.  Here is what I propose.  I think TVF should sponsor and establish a 'Disaster Relief Fund' for the current flooding and future natural disasters.  I think if all expats on this forum donated 1,000 baht, at a minimum, it would show that we are more concerned about the welfare of people affected by such disasters than we are about bickering over 'fault'.   What do you say?   Are you in?

[robblok]

11 minutes ago, pookiki said:

Actually, there was plenty of evidence that refuted your position.  Either way, it is all speculation and conjecture. 

 

But I tell you what.  Here is what I propose.  I think TVF should sponsor and establish a 'Disaster Relief Fund' for the current flooding and future natural disasters.  I think if all expats on this forum donated 1,000 baht, at a minimum, it would show that we are more concerned about the welfare of people affected by such disasters than we are about bickering over 'fault'.   What do you say?   Are you in?

For a 1000 bat why not i know how bad it was to be flooded, as long as long as you get a honest man or woman to manage the fund.

 

Actually I read an article in Dutch supporting my views, they also said that the delay of the water release from the dams made it worse. They had computer models to back it up. Wish I had saved a link and I do have trust in Dutch watermanagers. But its also logical that a delay made thigns worse.. you keep forgetting that a delay cause the water to come during the high tide month, instead of during the low tide months. That makes a major difference with how much water you can drain and how much damage you have.

 

Also.. by starting earlier with releasing water you have a longer period to spread it out and can release less. Could you tell me how you would counter those facts. Because its a FACT that if you have 2 months extra to release water you can drain more and at a slower rate. Also tell me how you can refute the fact that delaying the water release came in the high water months instead of the months with lower water also impeding the release. 

 

I don't get it how facts can be called speculation. 

 

example.. i have to drain 1000 liters.. if i drain it in 1 hours i flood things.. but if I have 3 hours I dont.. now do the same thing and add the extra months we would have had if YL had not delayed the release. 

[pookiki]

14 minutes ago, robblok said:

For a 1000 bat why not i know how bad it was to be flooded, as long as long as you get a honest man or woman to manage the fund.

 

Actually I read an article in Dutch supporting my views, they also said that the delay of the water release from the dams made it worse. They had computer models to back it up. Wish I had saved a link and I do have trust in Dutch watermanagers. But its also logical that a delay made thigns worse.. you keep forgetting that a delay cause the water to come during the high tide month, instead of during the low tide months. That makes a major difference with how much water you can drain and how much damage you have.

 

Also.. by starting earlier with releasing water you have a longer period to spread it out and can release less. Could you tell me how you would counter those facts. Because its a FACT that if you have 2 months extra to release water you can drain more and at a slower rate. Also tell me how you can refute the fact that delaying the water release came in the high water months instead of the months with lower water also impeding the release. 

 

I don't get it how facts can be called speculation. 

 

example.. i have to drain 1000 liters.. if i drain it in 1 hours i flood things.. but if I have 3 hours I dont.. now do the same thing and add the extra months we would have had if YL had not delayed the release. 

Rob,

 

You're beating a dead horse in repeating the same arguments to me.  The flooding exceeding a 100 year event according to two reports that I read and this was based solely on rainfall.  I think that any finding as to how the release from the damns added to a situation of such magnitude is speculation and conjecture.  Also it was a situation in existence when the Yingluck administration took office.  Two reports support these findings. Facts are relative to whose report to which you want to ascribe credibility. 

 

But the more important thing is how we get TVF to establish a disaster relief fund.  Any ideas?

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, pookiki said:

Rob,

 

You're beating a dead horse in repeating the same arguments to me.  The flooding exceeding a 100 year event according to two reports that I read and this was based solely on rainfall.  I think that any finding as to how the release from the damns added to a situation of such magnitude is speculation and conjecture.  Also it was a situation in existence when the Yingluck administration took office.  Two reports support these findings. Facts are relative to whose report to which you want to ascribe credibility. 

 

But the more important thing is how we get TVF to establish a disaster relief fund.  Any ideas?

No mate not a dead horse.. Just imagine how much water could have been released extra in those months. I am not saying it was not a once in a 100 year.. that is a fact. But just imagine how much extra water you can drain in 2 months the amount is huge and it would have had a big impact. It took 2 months to drain from my home.. now that shows how much can be drained in 2 months that is a lot .. a real lot. 

 

You only have reports that say its 100 year thing..  1000 cubic meters a second (that is what can be discharged without too much flooding now they are doing 2000) 

 

So 1000 x 60 * 60 * 24 * 60 = 5.184.000.000  cubic meters extra drain. that is MORE then half of the active capacity of the Bhumibol Dam.. do you think that is a little bit and has no impact ? You can't beat science.  (and this is without causing floods now they are releasing close to 2000 cubic meters).

 

I have no idea.. i think its hard to do.. first you need to find people who are trustworthy.. then setup kind of a company.  Then find a way to distribute it.. we are taling about a huge operation. This is not something you do just yourself. 

[pookiki]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

No mate not a dead horse.. Just imagine how much water could have been released extra in those months. I am not saying it was not a once in a 100 year.. that is a fact. But just imagine how much extra water you can drain in 2 months the amount is huge and it would have had a big impact. It took 2 months to drain from my home.. now that shows how much can be drained in 2 months that is a lot .. a real lot. 

 

You only have reports that say its 100 year thing..  1000 cubic meters a second (that is what can be discharged without too much flooding now they are doing 2000) 

 

So 1000 x 60 * 60 * 24 * 60 = 5.184.000.000  cubic meters extra drain. that is MORE then half of the active capacity of the Bhumibol Dam.. do you think that is a little bit and has no impact ? You can't beat science.  (and this is without causing floods now they are releasing close to 2000 cubic meters).

 

I have no idea.. i think its hard to do.. first you need to find people who are trustworthy.. then setup kind of a company.  Then find a way to distribute it.. we are taling about a huge operation. This is not something you do just yourself. 

Rob,

First of all, the two major reports that I read, and I don't have any reason to doubt their veracity, indicates that YL inherited the problem and was left with little choice about the timing of the release. I know you will dispute that.

 

Yes, the release from the dams would add to the volume of the water.  What's the percentage compared to the volume of the rainfall?  It made things worse.  You keep talking about drainage.  Is that your only issue?  Was the flood worsened in the amount of land inundated?  The high level water level reached?  If it was worse can you ascribe a percentage value in comparison without the dam release?   I remember that many of the areas flooded in your area stay inundated because flood barriers were breached.   After the waters started to recede, the flood barriers themselves acted as dams and water pumps had to be used to pump the water out. My girlfriend's house in Bang Yai, Nonthaburi was flooded for several months.  Rob, it was the biggest flood on record in the Chaophaya basin!   I know you don't like YL but I really think this flood was beyond anyone's control.

 

The situation now is very similar but on a smaller scale.  The government is doing a slow release of water to avoid higher levels of water hitting affected areas but the flood will last longer since it will take longer for the water upstream to return to safe levels.  I'm not a hydrologist and I don't think you are either.  Experts rarely agree on everything.  We dealing with reports that differ in their facts and findings.  That's why I say that it's speculation and conjecture.

 

As for the disaster relief fund, I want TVF to establish and sponsor it.  Do you trust the people at TVF?  If so, I will draft an email for your review and adding your name.  Will you do it?  People need help now. 

Edited September 28, 2016 by pookiki

[pookiki]

5 hours ago, robblok said:

No mate not a dead horse.. Just imagine how much water could have been released extra in those months. I am not saying it was not a once in a 100 year.. that is a fact. But just imagine how much extra water you can drain in 2 months the amount is huge and it would have had a big impact. It took 2 months to drain from my home.. now that shows how much can be drained in 2 months that is a lot .. a real lot. 

 

You only have reports that say its 100 year thing..  1000 cubic meters a second (that is what can be discharged without too much flooding now they are doing 2000) 

 

So 1000 x 60 * 60 * 24 * 60 = 5.184.000.000  cubic meters extra drain. that is MORE then half of the active capacity of the Bhumibol Dam.. do you think that is a little bit and has no impact ? You can't beat science.  (and this is without causing floods now they are releasing close to 2000 cubic meters).

 

I have no idea.. i think its hard to do.. first you need to find people who are trustworthy.. then setup kind of a company.  Then find a way to distribute it.. we are taling about a huge operation. This is not something you do just yourself. 

Rob,

 

Please refer to the following report.  I think it is very good information.

 

http://web.stanford.edu/~meehan/floodthai2011/FloodNotes17.pdf

 

The relevant section starts on page 8,  "Flooding Geography"   According to the report, the release from the Sirikit and Bhumibon dams were done in accordance with guidelines established in 1997.  The report adds that the release from the Bhumibon dam in October for five days was roughly 1% of the flow rate of the Chaophaya.