Three Gorges Dam Begins Storing Water

Anonymous Coward writes "The Three Gorges Dam, the largest hydroelectric project in the world, and one of the largest engineering projects underway right now, has begun accumulating water in the reservoir."

Comments

WHo wants to start the pool?

[Unknown Poltroon]

I say it holds for 6 years before it starts an earthquake that wipes itslef out and kills 10,000 people.

AS i recall, EVERYONE told them this was a bad idea.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[ThatDamnMurphyGuy]

I give it less.

From:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto ry&cid=57 0&e=6&u=/nm/china_dam_dc

The project also has been plagued over the past decade by corruption and discovery of hundreds of cracks in the dam, though the Guangzhou Daily on Sunday quoted officials as saying the cracks, some tens of yards long, were not a danger.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[outsider007]

unless those damn mutants find a way to blow it up sooner.
we're probably living in a simulation anyway so it doesn't really matter.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[sllim]

Animal extinction crap is over-rated.

This idea that a couple of mice outweighs million dollar projects in the US and projects in China that will result in people not getting killed by annual floods is just flawed.

Nature itself causes animal extinctions every day. Nature doesn't need our help with that.

Thing is you need balance. And right now the damn animal activists are against that.
18,000 people dying a year overweighs the extinction problems.

And as far as less important projects, we need balance. If I own a house and an endangered turtle shows up then tough shit for the turtle. I guess if a zoo or foundation wanted to grab it then I wouldn't protest. Course I might be inclined to say they pay for it, or the right to come on my property and take it.

But these rulings that say that people cannot improve property they own, that is nuts.

I say it boils down to this. If there is an ecosystem that can support the creature then a fair amount of that land should be protected (notice I didn't say the contested ecosystem) and an intelligent amount of animals moved to it.
Then construction should follow.

Down with ecoterrorists.
They are just like normal terrorists, except for the eco- part.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[burns210]

"I say it holds for 6 years before it starts an earthquake that wipes itslef out and kills 10,000 people."

10,000? Buddy if this things goes at full capacity, it would be more like 1,000,000.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[maxpublic]

Because, as we know, the human race is on the brink of extinction itself and cannot sustain such losses.

If you want to volunteer for suicide to help with the population problem, you have my complete support in your endeavor!

Max

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[sllim]

I fail to see how I am a troll.

OOOHHHHH I disagree with the animal rights movement. Gotcha. Better sensor my ideas. Wouldn't want any impressionable kids to see my line of reasoning.
Next thing you know they will be conservatives, and we couldn't deal with that.

I have a question for you people that think I am a troll.

Since we have instituted the Endangered Species List what percentage of the species we have put on that list have been taken off that list as being 'No longer in danger of extinction'.

Back up your claim.

See the system is broken. I know you find the idea offensive that somehow my life is worth more then say a bunny rabbit, or a turtle, or possibly the SARS virus. I know the mere thought of Capitalism is offensive.

Speaking of that.
Has anyone else taken notice to how this whole 'Green' thing is really bent around 'anti-capitilism'?

Look at the yearly G-8 fiascos.
Since when is rioting and looting gas stations doing anything to help the environment, or poor people.

From where I sit if you think I am a troll then you look like a troll to me.

Speaking of that, am I alone out of getting more satisfaction out of modding people up then modding trolls?

I let other people modd trolls, I mod people interesting and informative. I like rewarding.

Oh, there is that conservative liberal thing again. Sorry about that.

Now back to our regularly scheduled ranting.

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[GMontag]

Headline in 10 years:

New York Times
Three Gorges Rapids Project Complete
by Jayson Blair and Peter Arnett

China's first theme park, the Three Gorges Rapids, opened last week. A massive engineering feat, the proud and resourceful free peoples of China who independently banded together collectively to form a theme park around the largest rapids ever created by man or nature.

The process included building a massive temproary dam, filling the resivour, then the controlled destruction of the dam resulting in the rapids forming where the dam once stood.

The road building and hotel construction will begin soon, as the Chinese wished to keep the area in it's pristine, natural state as long as possible . . .

Re:WHo wants to start the pool?

[cluckshot]

Might make some interesting wagers and results. I have seen some design info on the dam and I think it might just fail in a mass break. Much of the "Wall" was built as a series of rectangular structures filled with rubble rather than a full concrete structure. If these leak they cause the full pressure of the dam to successively progress to the face of the dam. This makes all of the strength of an Earth fill dam (Not recommended over about 50 meters in height) with a slight concrete core when dry. When it leaks and it will, this threatens the failure of the cores. At base pressures over 340psi the loading on only a few feet of concrete is doomed to failure and violently so.

Dams should be designed to crack and not fail. All Dams will and do crack.

Ths dam is so big that the lake is likely to kick out 7.5 an 8.0 earthquakes. US TVA lakes routinely kick off 3 and 2.5 quakes some 55 years after construction. They happen less now but they do occur.

The failure of the dam here would be in the hundreds of millions killed. It would essentially "Take Out" about 30% of China.

US Dams of much smaller size used refrigeration to help the concrete set. Had the Bolder Dam not used such or the Grand Coulee Dam not use it, they would be waiting some 200 more years to have the concrete set. I really distrust the Chinese engineers on this one. I wish them luck and hope none of this happens.

I swear to god...

[craenor]

Thought that said Three Gorgeous Dames begin storing water...was like, wtf?

Re:I swear to god...

[secolactico]

What? Never heard a woman complain of "feeling bloated" because she is "retaining water"?

And so we mourn

[metalhed77]

As many historical sites dating hundreds, even thousands of years old are washed underneath, and even more tragically, the beautiful vista of the three gorges is irrevocably marred by the claws of "progress".

Re:And so we mourn

[phatvibez]

bah, who needs history, we never seem to learn from it anyway...

Re:And so we mourn

[tnak]

Better than mourning the thousands killed every year by the flooding.

The Yangtze killed a million peopele over the course of the twentieth century. As many as 30,000 in a single year. If the Mississippi or the Missouri killed a thousand people this year, there'd the twenty dams on it within five years.

But a lot of Westerners apparently think it's ok to bash the chinese for protecting their people, there's so many of them what's a million prematurely dead?

Re:And so we mourn

[cioxx]

it's not the historical sites, as much as it hurts the ecology as a whole. People don't realize that diverting massive streams of water to create artificial dums in places not intended by nature could have catastrophic results.

I direct you to study the history of Aral sea, which was the biggest man-made clusterfuck in USSR history aside from the obvious.

more than thirteen thousand hectares of fertile soils were flooded by the Toktogul Reservoir. In addition to constricting the downstream water supply to Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and eventually to the Aral, the dam destroyed the fragile ecological balance within the region and the once beautiful area surrounding the reservoir was transformed into a desert

...
There is much more

And to put this into perspective, it was such a small sea but had so much impact on surrounding areas as a result of artificially invoked desiccation.

Re:And so we mourn

[pjt48108]

"But a lot of Westerners apparently think it's ok to bash the chinese for protecting their people, there's so many of them what's a million prematurely dead?"

Well, that philosophy worked for the Chinese during the Korean War. Why else do you think we never fought the Chinese (officially)? There were too many of them, and they were all too willing to just keep sending Chinese soldiers 'over the hill' to their deaths in any conflict. We had limited human resources, and were never so committed to the war as to send millions of Americans back 'over the hill.'

Just my $.02!

Re:And so we mourn

[jericho4.0]

Flood proof housing has been around for age. They are usually refered to as 'boats'.

Re:And so we mourn

[DG]

I guaren-damn-tee you that had there been any reasonable alternative to human-wave attacks at the time, that the Chinese generals would have been all over that.

But war is an ultimate expression of policy. You do whatever you have to do to win. You make use of whatever resources you have, no matter how unpleasent.

A Chinese-style human wave is not indicitive of a lack of regard for human life - it is instead an indicator of how badly they wanted to win.

DG

Re:And so we mourn

[aminorex]

> If the Mississippi or the Missouri killed a
> thousand people this year, there'd the twenty dams
> on it within five years.

There already are.

The problem with 3 Gorges is not that they are
building dams. The problem is that they are
building a DAM. If they built 20 dams on valid
engineering and economic principles, everyone
would be cheering. Instead, they are building a
vast monument to communist ego, destroying the
lives and livelihoods of thousands, the historical
heritage of thousands of years and millions of
lives, the ecological heritage of millions of
years and the billions of humanity. In the
process they are creating a steaming cesspool of
corruption, and threatening the lives of millions
of people.

I'd be quite happy to see 20 dams on the Yangtze.
Those 20 dams would achieve a much better effect
at a much lower cost, and in the process preclude
the 3 Gorges project.

Disaster looming?

[mosch]

Let's just hope this one works out better than the Gouhou dam did. It's my understanding that there are longstanding questions about the build quality, and that there have already been problems with cracks appearing in the dam.

Just Jump!

[Ianworld]

Now if they're so against it they just need to do what the US government was afraid of during the cold war. All the chinese people have to stand on it and jump at the same time... thats 1 billion people times about 150 pounds each. or 150 billion pounds of force. Thats how you get rid of a controversial dam... damn it :)

Re:Just Jump!

[Phroggy]

That's because they're in the United States, aren't they?

The Ents'll take it out

[YeOldeGnurd]

I dunno. Will Jiang Zemin start building mines below the dam and end up pissing off the Ents? If so, I don't think his plan holds water, if you pardon the expression

Thanks a lot

[awtbfb]

Now I have to go pee.

No offense to the chineese but

[Rooked_One]

Why are they ahead of us in any way?

Sure we have the hoover dam, which powers 3 states? Right? We know the oil supply is diminishing, and we will have to rely on either hydro or wind power within the next decade if we want to be able to go outside without suits to protect us from the thinning ozone layer.

Take Oklahoma for example... TONS of rivers and lots of space where you could easily and very cheaply recreate another hoover dam. WHY DOESN'T THIS HAPPEN??? (rhetorical question, we all know the answer there)

You know, I drive around on a golf cart every day, and it goes a good 20mph and requires minimal charging. I wouldn't mind in the least bit switching over to an electric car providing it would be cheap to recharge. And with hydro power on the scale that is talked about here, electricity would be at a super abundance. If you made a dam in Oklahoma say, you could power texas, arkansas, kansas, missouri, and perhaps even some states as far as colorado, with basically no problems at all. In case you haven't been to oklahoma, its full of rivers AND LOTS AND LOTS of open land where this sort of project would be VERY viable.

I wonder if any bank would lend me 25 billion dollars to build one? :)

Re:No offense to the chineese but

[abbamouse]

The Three Gorges Dam is a disaster. Frankly, even the Hoover Dam isn't all roses. Large dam projects flood huge areas of land, eliminating entire ecosystems, displacing large numbers of people, destroying archaeological evidence, and submerging economically productive land. There's something to hate for everyone, whether liberal or conservative. Check out the ecology of the Colorado River sometime. Interestingly, the things can even increase CO2 concentrations by flooding green areas. The effect can be quite substantial.

There are also practical difficulties, like the buildup of silt (which always seems to happen much faster than anyone anticipates) and the costs of construction and maintenance (they aren't as cheap as one might expect).

Are they better than fossil fuel plants? Probably. Personally, I like them a lot more than nuclear plants (largely for economic reasons). But I just can't find it in me to be happy about their construction.

A quick and dirty summary of the downside of dams can be found here, though a quick Google search will reveal many more pages for and against.

Re:No offense to the chineese but

[asparagus]

Well, you may be pro-dam, but the hard-line enviromentalists are against dams for ecosystem reasons. From a politican's standpoint, if you don't have their support, there's little point supporting building them because they'll still attack you come election time for destroying the enviroment.

That being said, I'm glad got the chance to visit the Three Gorges before they destroy them.

This thing is big. Really big.

-Brett

Re:No offense to the chineese but

[anagama]

There is a lot of opposition to damns in Pacific Northwest where I live (salmon habitat). It's hard to say this without sounding republican (which I most definetely am not), but people must realize that having energy requires trade-offs. I'm not saying damns are absolutely better than coal/gas/oil fired energy plants, but it seems fairly intuitive that the overall negative effects of damns on the environment at the worldwide scale, is far far less than that created by combustion. Plainly, local impacts are more severe with damns, but it seems this places the environmental burden on the users of the power, whereas with combustion, the costs are spread to non-users. In a sense, damns seem a more fair way to distribute the costs associated with power production. With combustion, neighbors who do not share the benefits of the power generated, still share the detriments of the pollution generated.

I'm currious if anyone knows of studies which look at power generation costs from a global, as opposed to local, perspective. For example, even with damns, I could forsee global impacts that would effect others not benefitted by the power, e.g., fewer salmon mean less seal food and thus, fewer seals. Cultures reliant on seals for whatever reason, may be unfairly burdened with the costs of power generation.

This obviously doesn't address the archeological destruction caused by the Three Gorges Damn - significant archeological evidence should be considered a world heritage asset, and be taken into consideration when constructing a damn.

Re:No offense to the chineese but

[oarsman17]

I'm unsure if you're being facetious or not, but firstly the Hoover Dam principally serves power to a majority of the Los Angeles metropolitan area and powers a rather small stake in Nevada and in Arizona (article). Secondly, the ecological costs incurred when erecting some dams exceed the benefits of providing the power.

You know, I drive around on a golf cart every day, and it goes a good 20mph and requires minimal charging. I wouldn't mind in the least bit switching over to an electric car providing it would be cheap to recharge

Battery-powered automobiles are incredibly inefficient (avg. range: 90 miles) and the energy sources that would power such automobiles output as much CO2 as an appropriate number of internal-combustion automobiles (sorry I don't have enough time to corroborate the findings I've read from /. and other sources). You'd be paying as much or more to recharge that battery-powered car compared to what you're paying to refuel your internal-combustion-powered car. (Again, google for the info or go to the library to inform yourself about these things.) Golf carts, mind you, probably weigh one-eighth the weight of an average automobile, so indeed they travel a long range because they are light in weight! Driving battery-powered hatchbacks for short-range trips in a bustling metropolis may be more beneficial than driving the comparable gas-powered hatchback, but I'll leave that to another discussion.

Take Oklahoma for example... TONS of rivers and lots of space where you could easily and very cheaply recreate another hoover dam. WHY DOESN'T THIS HAPPEN???

If I'm not mistaken, Oklahoma is not incredibly rugged (mountainous). If you wanted to produce as much energy that is produced from the Hoover Dam turbines, then you'd need enough an immense volume of water to flow at an appreciable velocity to achieve such energy, thus an immense amount of land would be consumed in Oklahoma to achieve such power and would damage the ecosystems of the Red River and the Arkansas River, if they aren't doing so now. Take the Missouri River, for instance, where the dams that have been erected along the river have decimated the total fish populations that were once ubiquitous in the Missouri.

Read up on the benefits and costs of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. The vehicles may be environmentally sound, but the means to power the vehicles end up failing to reduce greenhouse gases, at this moment (if only fusion power were implementable). Same thing goes with battery-powered vehicles (cars, not golf carts.)

As for the Three Gorges Dam, it is an environmental, anthropological, and economical disaster unfolding before our eyes. I trust the majority of posts that have been or will be posted reflect what I would like to mention in this post, and indeed this post is grossly offtopic, but someone needs to inform those who may not wholly understand the totality of internal-combustion, battery-powered, and fuel-cell vehicles and the totality of all energy sources.
</two_cents>

Re:No offense to the chineese but

[the argonaut]

and what is it with people who think that the "new" ecosystems are going to be an improvement on what was there before?

and while we're considering the impact of the land under lake mead, let's also consider all of the land downstream, up to and including the (dying) colorado river delta. as somebody who lives in the desert, i can tell you that the riparian areas are even more vital to the integrity of the bioregion than they are in wetter climates.

as much as i dislike the hoover, parker, and glen canyon dams, i'd have to say the thing that pisses me off the most is what they're doing with the water (and remember, the primary purpose of these dams is not generating electricity, but water storage). golf courses, lush green lawns, fountains, artificial ponds, etc. great, let's store lots of water so we can build the big cities in the desert and waste it all.

Life goes on as usual for Chinese peasants

[hoggoth]

In a related story,
life goes on as usual for Chinese peasants in the villages behind the dam.

link to Dam story

[handy_vandal]

Correct link here

As Stupid as Aswan

[bstadil]

This is as stupid as building the Aswan dam.

Destroyed irreplacable historic artifacts in exchange for more Farmland. Farmland, for crying out loud. As if the world need more Farmland.

We need educated people not bloody peasants.

Why do undeveloped nations think they need big ill thought throught project like this. Free the people and let them do the thinking and drive the economy.

Curious about the Aswan flop

Quote:

Aswan Dam was unwise. The project was far more expensive than expected. Further, the annual floods carried silt, which created the topsoil needed for plants. Since the creation of the Aswan Dam, the farms on the formerly flooded banks have had to use expensive fertilizers in place of the silt. Formerly, fish have fed on the silt, and the people downstream depended on fishing from the riverhere

Re:As Stupid as Aswan

[The Master Control P]

In short, the problem isn't food production, it's food distribution. There is PLENTY food to feed every single person in the world right now. It's just that most of them don't have enough money to buy it, and that the countries with a major surplus (The US exports > half it's corn) aren't willing to forgo enough profits to at least prevent people from starving to death.

Now, I'm not suggesting that the Proletariat sieze the means of production. Just that enough food be given away, in addition to paid exports, to make sure that people at least get a basic diet.

In addition to this, the most crucial thing is EDUCATION. Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day; Teach him to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime. Teach people modern farming methods, give them the necessary equipment, and you'll suddenly see that no one is starving anymore.

Re:As Stupid as Aswan

[shfted!]

Before you mod me down as a Troll, think about this:

Why do undeveloped nations think they need big ill thought throught project like this. Free the people and let them do the thinking and drive the economy.

Right now, China's economy is experiencing an incredible boom. They are not "free" so being free is not a requirement for a successful economy. Right now, the G8 leaders are discussing how to fix the worlds three "economic engines" -- the U.S., Japan, and Europe -- all of which are stagnating. These people are all free. Therefore, freedom does not imply a successful economy.

It's not just "undeveloped" nations that do mega projects like this. All nations do them, and for good reason. The U.S. dammed the Colarado with a giant dam. Funny, they claimed to haved needed it for electricity. I guess China is too "undeveloped" to need electricity.

Re:As Stupid as Aswan

[el-spectre]

Teach him to fish and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day...

Boy, that sucks.

[twiztidlojik]

After relocating people from their kinda-nice homes to concrete grottos (it was on the Discovery special a few years ago) and losing their livelyhood, don't you think a million Chinese would get a little pissed off? Aside from the historical, economic, and environmental damage this will cause, what prevents this new lake from silting up (you do recall the Yangtze has about as much silt as the Mississippi) as soon as the dam is "turned on", so to speak? Will they have to dredge it every few weeks? How do other dam engineers prevent silting?

The Chinese government really should put a bit of importance onto Chinese history. After all, how can they point to their "glorious history" if they've destroyed all the evidence?

lamenating progress

[lingqi]

Maybe, but you have got to realize how badly they need the power.

1.4 BILLION people. consider.

And do you really think it's possible to have China start to rely heavily on nuclear power, without the US getting nervous? Heck, the US is twitchy enough as it is.

So, yes, three-gorges is a beautiful place, but if this allows that many people to afford heat in the winter, or lights under which to read, so be it.

Otoh, I really think the current party do partly hope that the dam will turn out to be like the great-wall - legendary, etc. To that I go "huh?"

side-note: Tibet will get its natural gas deposit pumped next, probably...

last side-note: The one thing I thought that was kinda unfortunate is that three-gorges is purely a gravity dam, which might not be necessary considering that the place of the thing, after all, is a GORGE...

Re:lamenating progress

[asparagus]

In addition, it creates a water pathway from 1500 miles inside of China to any place in the world. Chongking, the largest city in the world, is now a seaport!

-Brett

Re:lamenating progress

[12ahead]

So, yes, three-gorges is a beautiful place, but if this allows that many people to afford heat in the winter, or lights under which to read, so be it.

Absolutely correct. But never forget, what America has done in the past is good (Hoover Dam anyone?), if another nation out of similar reasons wants to do the same, it is bad.

Have you noticed how concerned all the first world super powers become when someone says that 1 billion Chinese will eventually want to drive a car? Or need a fridge? While fuel-guzzling SUVs with super power air condition are purchased for junior to complete the American dream of three cars for every family?

Not to worry though, if the "west" gets too concerned about environmental issues in the three gorges region, they might just claim that it was built with the pure intention to hide weapons of mass destruction in it. Outcome obvious.

grrr....

Re:lamenating progress

[junkgrep]

We don't need to do anything: just wait for the inevitable earthquake and yet another "Great Leap Forward" moment of head-slapping idiocy by our beloved party.

Re:lamenating progress

[junkgrep]

The amount of power this will generate wont even remotely cover what China needs as far as their long term energy plans. This project has been a party glurge for decades: it was announced by the party to be a big demonstration of China's industrial might, and it's more of point of desperate pride-at-all-costs than a wise infastructure decision. The silliest thing is that no one, not even people in China, are really all that impressed by it. It's not exactly a truly groundbreaking feat of engineering: all it is is an ambitious scope. And it may well turn out to be a very, very dumb idea in a region that has huge earthquakes not so infrequently.

Re:lamenating progress

[_ph1ux_]

I just finished reading all the comments - and this one really strikes me.

I dont know if you saw that special on discovery about the project - or have read about it or maybe even talked to people about it, but here is my biased opinion that will offend many.

Fuck the chinese.

Not the chinese people - but its government and its corrupt power system (political not energy)

Fuck the chinese because they have no clue how valuable their culture really is. They have no respect forthe human accomplishments that they have made in the past - although almost all of them come at large human cost. (Ironic I know)

There is one town that is being destroyed by this project in particular that gets me. I cannot recall of find the name of the town - but it has been in place for many hundreds of years. Some of the people were crying because the houses that they live in (one family in particular) has been the family home for 450 years. That is some long tradition. Their temple was built ~700 years ago - and the place is BEAUTIFUL.

no matter how you justify any project today there is one thing that is not being even thought about or designed into any major building endevor currently - lasting beauty.

You may look at a skyscraper that going up - or recently built, or see a large structure that was designed - and it may SEEM to be beautiful, but generally they are not. We are currently confusing awe with beauty. We may be in awe over the size of a project or structure - and awe is a beautiful thing - but it is not beauty.

This is a seriously important aspect of design. If you look at all the buildings in your city as you drive around - find any that are beautiful works that will alst and be appreciated for their beauty alone for any length of time. It will be exceeedingly difficult to find any large number of structures that can actually be classified as beautiful and meaningful.

We are currently building a world of garbage. Architecture and design is sick with the cancer of modern technology.

My grandfather was a nuclear engineer - he designed hanford and many other nuclear facilites. I do technical architecture - I design networks to fit into large buildings - and design buildings to accomodate large networks. The process behind doing projects like this takes asthetics into account hardly at all... it continues to push the garbage of the modern world - and ruins the quality of our life.

You would be surprised at just how much an affect of a beautiful environment can actually have on your life.

The point with the Chinese and the dam is that this project is taking the trash designed life to the extreme expression. The largest piece of man made trash in the world - so big that real beauty and human creative effort is obliterated in its shadow, the real and true principles of the human creative spirit are ignored and killed in the name of progress.

not to mention the fact that silt will kill this dam very very quickly - making the whole "people need lights to read by, power to heat their pitiful little huts in the winter" moot as the warm little scholars are utterly destroyed by the fallacy of engineering that is this corrupt project.

Dont try to fool yourself with a "think of the children" type touchy-feely outlook. there is one thing for sure that this project is designed to do (if its structurally sound enough to last (hopefully)) - and that is REVENUE... who gives a shit if the little peasents are even literate, so long as they pay that bill!!

Re:lamenating progress

[metalhed77]

Someone allready pointed out that it won't make much power. What also should be noted is that the main purpose of the dam, controlling water for souther farmland, is highly criticized. Whether or not it will actually be economically justified (lets not forget that it dislocated quite a few people (over a hundred thousand I believe).

Re:lamenating progress

[Rasta Prefect]

And do you really think it's possible to have China start to rely heavily on nuclear power, without the US getting nervous? Heck, the US is twitchy enough as it is.

Ummm....given that the Chinese already have a number of nuclear weapons (if not particularly great delivery systems) this probably isn't an issue...

Re:lamenating progress

[BxT]

Or visit www.HetchHetchy.org

So when do we flood the Grand Canyon? At what point does the needs of a growing population make this acceptable?

Re:lamenating progress

[asparagus]

With 30-35 million people, Chongqing is the largest municipality in the world. Most people have never heard of it.

-Brett

Re:lamenating progress

[DoraLives]

largest municipality

Be glad you don't live there. From the link: The city currently lacks a wastewater collection and disposal system; virtually all domestic and industrial wastewater discharges through some 600 random discharge points into the two rivers, which run through the city. Since these two rivers are the source of the city's drinking water, the lack of wastewater management facilities gives rise to a daily risk to public health.

Phew. No thanks.

Re:lamenating progress

[73939133]

1.4 BILLION people. consider. [...] So, yes, three-gorges is a beautiful place, but if this allows that many people to afford heat in the winter, or lights under which to read, so be it.

If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, at the end of all of this is a world in which every resource is devoted to the survival of a population that fills the planet to capacity.

The only solution to our problems is to get our population under control now. And the only way to do that peacefully is to reduce birth rates to below maintenance levels and shrink down to a global population of 1-2 billion again.

Reducing population growth to below maintenance levels is a very hard thing to do: individual countries see it in their interest to grow just a little more than their neighbors, and our entire economic system is based on ideas of growth and youth. But if things keep going the way they are, global pandemics and wars will decimate populations for us. Which do you prefer? Being limited to one child, or billions dying in wars and epidemics?

Otoh, I really think the current party do partly hope that the dam will turn out to be like the great-wall - legendary, etc. To that I go "huh?"

Oh, it will be legendary alright: if humanity survives long enough, it will be an infamous symbol to the idiocy of the 20th and early 21st century.

Re:lamenating progress

[73939133]

Fuck the chinese because they have no clue how valuable their culture really is. They have no respect forthe human accomplishments that they have made in the past - although almost all of them come at large human cost. (Ironic I know)

If anything, China is a lesson for how ineffective and sterile large, stable empires are. China had all the resources to become a technological powerhouse when Europe was still living in the dark ages. But China's centralized government and bureaucracy prevented that.

It took the squabbling mess of dozens of little kingdoms, nation states, and business empires in Europe to bring about modern science and the industrial revolution.

This is a lesson the US should keep in mind when basking in the glory of being the world's most powerful nation and the single largest economy: size is not good when it comes to innovation.

And it is also the EU should be way of before going too far in terms of integration. The right path for the EU is to restore the free movement and trade effectively enjoyed by Europeans without destroying the individuality and competition among European nations.

Re:lamenating progress

[maxpublic]

What you fail to realize is that the decision to build the dam or not is up to the Chinese *and the Chinese alone*. No foreigner has any business telling them to do otherwise - especially one who seems to think he has some moral imperative that supercedes that of the people *who actually live there and own the land*.

Goddamn, but I am sick and tired of assholes who think they have some right to tell other people - especially people in other countries - how to live. If the Chinese want to build this dam, then more power to 'em. If it collapses due to lousy construction well, perhaps they'll do a better job next time.

Either way, I don't have any right to tell them what to do - and neither do you.

Max

Re:lamenating progress

[maxpublic]

And the only way to do that peacefully is to reduce birth rates to below maintenance levels and shrink down to a global population of 1-2 billion again.

Ah, yes. What we need is an Orwellian superstate with the power to 'license' how many children we'll have. Who gets to decide? No doubt the people you personally approve of to make the decisions, eh?

Which do you prefer? Being limited to one child, or billions dying in wars and epidemics?

What I prefer is for assholes to tend to their own house, and stay out of my business. If I choose to have one child or ten, that isn't your concern. Don't like it? Too bad - that's something called 'freedom', and if you want things to be different then offer an incentive that tempts people to keep down the birth rate. In the First World it appears that affluence is a decent way of doing this, without any need for some fascist state to enforce draconian measures.

You can choose the carrot, or nothing - the stick isn't an option, at least not to people who believe in little things like 'liberty' and 'rights'.

Max

Re:lamenating progress

[Ilgaz]

Don't blame people over that. I am interested in huge projects like that, so I naturally checked the yahoo,google etc for info etc.

Half of the stuff was from the "green" organisations, some of them clearly gets money from "rival" goverments to bitch about the project.

I don't go mad to such stuff, we had similar problems (not naming country for needless off topic crap).

Its how International rivalry works, since beginning of 20th century.

One of the main reasons of building three gorges is interestingly to stop floods which effects hundreds of millions of people. Not just the power.

Anyways, this old green-politics game will go on like that...

Re:lamenating progress

[bastion_xx]

So when do we flood the Grand Canyon?

Probably once we've flooded some of the uptream portions, like the Glenn River Canyon, errr, Lake Powell?

Re:lamenating progress

[vidarh]

Ah, yes. What we need is an Orwellian superstate with the power to 'license' how many children we'll have. Who gets to decide? No doubt the people you personally approve of to make the decisions, eh?

No, what is needed is for the world to take poverty seriously. History shows that birthrates in a society drops dramatically as education is improved and society becomes wealthier. Further, immigration patterns in Europe shows that this is a pattern that is stronger than cultural differences - second and third generation of people from immigrant families mostly adapt to the birth rate patterns of the country they have moved to, regardless of cultural differences.

That said, China has had considerable success with it's one child policy. Yes, there are problems with it, but China would be in a shitload more problems if they hadn't instituted the policy. As it is, by limiting the number of children, usually to one per couple (there are exceptions), some estimate that China has reduced the number of births since the policy was instituted in 1979 by 250 million, and that China's birth rate is now 1.8, meaning they will actually likely start to see a decline in population in a decade or two if the policy is kept as is.

Yes, it is draconian, and yes it does cause human suffering. But China is struggling to feed it's current population - close to 250 million more people would have cause immense human suffering as well. Not to mention that on the longer term a continued growth rate like that would put devastating pressures on world resources.

Re:lamenating progress

[guanxi]

Chongking, the largest city in the world

This city covers more than 31,000 sq.miles / 82,000 sq. km! It would rank between Maine and Indiana if it were a state. It's larger than Ireland.

I don't think it's a real city; a few years ago the Chinese gov't merely decided to call it a
municipality.

Re:lamenating progress

[autocracy]

Nearly every other species in history has been self-limiting in growth - either by means of predators or lack of resources holding natural balance. We make a great exception to that - we expand past our natural constraints. China's policy certainly seems wise to me. 6 billion people in the world seems to be enough, and considering they have 17% of that population in their country, it's a good move for 'em.

Think of all the stresses we have in a country of 265 million people. Everybody takes a certain amount of resources, and limiting the number of people around by preventing birth in the first place seems like the best solution for them. And in case you haven't noticed, as far as China's concerned, you can take "freedom" and shove it. Despite some of the fallout from the policy, I still agree with 'em on this one issue. Nobody has a "right" or "freedom" to dump the toxic waste from their house (or business, or whatever) into a river. It's the rest of the world's business because it has effects against other people.

Just to put the reservoir in perspective

[romec]

This is 7 times the size of Washington DC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2953420.s tm)

Going to the handy dandy CIA fact book(http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ fields/2023.html)that is
A little larger than Hong Kong
Twice the size of Bahrain
Twice the size of Singapore

A Nice Target

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone want to wipe out the lower half of China has now been given a perfect missle target. Although much ignored by Western media, note that China also faces Uygurs terrorist (otherwised called "freedom fighters" by Western media) threats connected with al Quaeda in the XinJiang Province.

Re:A Nice Target

[Moridineas]

Anyone want to wipe out the lower half of China has now been given a perfect missle target. Although much ignored by Western media, note that China also faces Uygurs terrorist (otherwised called "freedom fighters" by Western media) threats connected with al Quaeda in the XinJiang Province.

Fact: Some Uyghurs have been implicated in bomb attacks (I don't believe any attacks took place outside of Xinjiang).

Fact: The Communist Chinese government has forcibly moved millions of Han Chinese into Xinjiang over the past 50 years in an attempt to pacify the Uyghur population.

Fact: The Uyghurs are neither Han nor Chinese--they are ethnically Turkish, look different from the Chinese, and speak a language that is mutually intelligible (with difficulty) with the language of Turkey. Before they were conquered by China over 50 years ago they were an independent nation. It is true that this area had been under MARGINAL Chinese control off and on for centuries (there were 42 results under Manchu rule for instance). As a side note, this area has oil. Coincidence that China cares about it?

Fact: The Chinese have not had the best track record dealing with minorities or hunman rights in general (Inner Mongolia, Tibet, East Turkestan, etc etc).

Fact: AFAIK (and AFAAK) the rumored links to al-Qaeda are just that--rumors. Until proven otherwise, they are as insubstantial as links of Saddam to al-Qaeda.

So in conclusion, this is simply another minority group (again, see Inner Mongolia and Tibet for the other two most publicized examples) that is being horribly treated in China--and no one cares because of business opportunities...

a sad day

[lnoble]

The environmental and social impacts of this are massive. Many rare species will likely go into extinction, ancient temples and archeological site will be flooded under the dams 400 mile reservoir. Over a million people who live in relitive harmony with the natural will have to be relocated out of the area, and one of the worlds pristine places will face destruction.

This is one building I wouldn't mind seeing crumble.

some notes

[customs]

it should be noted that the world bank, more specifically the international bank for reconstruction and development did not bank roll this project, because the human and environment costs were too great, even for them. this project was funded mainly by private contributions, lots of which are American, such as Morgan Stanley, just to name one.

This project will displace 1.9 Million people over the next year, including many unexplored aracaelogical sites in the canyon walls.

And lastly, it is believed that the amount of water being formed in the reservoir will be so great that it will put *a lot* of stress on the surrounding tectonic plates. So, casual earthquakes could become common.

But you know, anything in the name of progress...and socialism.

Re:What?

[mosch]

Actually I was thinking of the wrong thing when I mentioned the Gouhou dam collapse, which killed a couple hundred people. The collapse of the banqiao and shimantan dams were far more destructive, killing between 80,000 and 250,000 people.

As far as sources go, this is a forum not an academic paper. If you want a source, go ask google.

Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[3770]

I visited the Hoover Dam and they said that the life expectancy for it was about 1800 years and they said it was considered being hugely over engineered.

Also, apparently the concrete in the middle hasn't quite finished baking yet so it is still emitting a lot of heat.

It is also interesting that Las Vegas only gets about 4% of its power from the Hoover dam, which is interesting since it is so close to the dam. It turns out that when they built the dam they wrote long term contracts for who would get the electricity. The officials of Las Vegas thought they got their share, it was just that they had no idea that Las Vegas would grow so fast.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[sllim]

Maybe he is making stuff up, maybe not.
Back when the Hoover Dam was built over-engineering was considered the best way of building, well almost anything.

You have to consider that it is the computer that has helped us under-engineer stuff.
When the Hoover dam was built you had little choice. If you tried to use the correct amount of concrete on the correct scale you might have gotten it wrong.
If you multiplied that number by a factor of 10 (consider the poster did say 1800 years, 180 years is 1/10th that) then you know that even if you did make a mistake somewhere you still wouldn't have a problem.

Look at the difference between old time skyscrapers (Empire State) and new ones (not a completley fair comparison, but the World Trade Center).
The Empire State building has taken at least 2 plane hits during its lifespan.

Once during WWII with a twin engine bomber.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Look at the difference between old time skyscrapers (Empire State) and new ones (not a completley fair comparison, but the World Trade Center). The Empire State building has taken at least 2 plane hits during its lifespan.

Once during WWII with a twin engine bomber.

That's an unfair comparison (and a little more than "not a completley fair"). The WWII bomber is smaller than a 757, would have been moving at a slower speed, and wouldn't have been carrying as much fuel. Don't forget, it was the fire that caused it to collapse.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[EvanED]

>>The WTC was designed to withstand a hit from a 707, one of the largest planes around at the time. It was purposely hit by larger planes flying at maximum speed and chosen for their full fuel load. As for withstanding the impact, the towers did that remarkably well. The steel warping from the intense fires were what ultimately brought them down.

Not only that, but it's possible that if the second plane didn't hit, both towers could still be standing. I heard the tremors from the first tower's collapse could have triggered the second.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[burns210]

"Look at the difference between old time skyscrapers (Empire State) and new ones (not a completley fair comparison, but the World Trade Center)."

You know you are right, that isn't even close to a fair comparison.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[MillionthMonkey]

No, the concrete in the interior of Hoover is not done curing, and it will not finish curing until sometime in the middle of this century. The curing time was calculated when they built the dam and the heat buildup was foreseen to be a problem. It structurally weakens the dam and may even cause failure.

They fixed it by laying metal radiator tubes through the concrete at regular intervals. The dam is essentially a giant concrete radiator. They run water through those tubes, and it carries away the heat from deep within the mass of concrete. The dam's temperature is fairly easy to regulate this way.

The rumor you hear sometimes of workers being buried in the concrete as they died is just an urban legend. People did die building Hoover dam, but the builders of the dam would never have allowed a human body to be buried in the concrete. That would have introduced structural weaknesses in the dam.

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[Vaughn Anderson]

Hardly a troll here, people need to open their eyes, WTC 7 dropped straight down in a perfect demolition, even in the videos (I've seen 4 completely seperate views) the edges of the buildings don't even waiver a bit, it looks almost like the build is being erased from the sky it goes down so straight...

Re:Hoover dam will stand 1800 years!

[Vaughn Anderson]

Because if it was a non-planned demolition, one portion of the building would have dropped first and not necessarily the whole building, and certainly not uniformily as it did.

The claim was that a huge diesil feul reserve exploded which brought the building down. Sorry, but explosive experts have proven you cannont cut steel support beams with an air explosion, it will never happen, the only way support beams could be cut with explosions is with explosives on direct contact with the supports...

Long story short, perhaps that building would have been messed up really, really bad, burnt to a crisp, partially collapsed, but no way, ever in a million years would a feul explosion drop a building like that...

construction standards aren't that great

[abhisarda]

According to this story, story1 - the construction is suspect. If anything goes wrong in this kind of project- the ramifications are immense.

This is an environmental disaster in the making. Maybe 150-200 years later when the dam is all gone, all those villages and that lost ground will reappear.

Re:construction standards aren't that great

[Strudelkugel]

I've read not too encouraging things about the construction of the dam. Guess I would much rather be one of the people displaced upstream of the thing than live downstream after the water fills in the reservoir. I also read that the weight of the water will likely cause earthquakes. One H*** of an experiment they are running...

Not Unix, Eunuchs

[3770]

No, you got it wrong. They are using bits of Eunuchs. Ewww, that was bad.

as big as lake superior

[goombah99]

the washington post has a better article.

The dam will ultimately be able to crank out 18,200 megawatts of energy a year, the equivalent of 26 nuclear power plants or 10 big coal-fired power stations burning 50 million tons of coal.

or about 36 watts per person! China better invest in transmeta or low power dragon cpus if they ever want to make computers ubiquitous. However because of falling energy prices in china, its unlikely the overrun cost of this damn will be recouped quickly, making future investments in energy production in doubt.

With as much water as Lake Superior, the reservoir will stretch 385 miles east to west and more than one mile north to south and 600 feet deep. unlike lake superior all of this water is held back from a lower flood plain by a single entity--the dam. THis could be a spectacular flood if it breeched.

but there's reason to worry. small cracks are appearing in the damn and construction officials arrested for corruption. 60 percent of the waste entering the reservoir comes from sources that can't be treated, such as fields laden with fertilizer and insecticide. Of the 90 tributaries entering the reservoir, 60 are now considered heavily polluted. It may well become a cesspool the size of lake superior.

One might also worry how this will shift the eco system and farmland down stream. THe river has traditionally created havoc with its floods but presumably also renewed farmlands and sustained eco systems down stream.

Re:as big as lake superior

[navigator]

With as much water as Lake Superior, the reservoir will stretch 385 miles east to west and more than one mile north to south and 600 feet deep

How can this dam store as much water as Lake Superior? Superior is 350 miles long and 160 miles wide. The reservoir is about the same length but roughly one mile wide.

Superior averages 489 feet deep. The surface area is 7000 square miles. Meanwhile the reservoir has something like 400+ square miles of surface area.

Superior stores 440 trillion cubic feet of water while the reservoir is designed to store 1 trillion cubic feet 39.3 billion cubic meters.

There are 35 reservoirs in the world with storage capacities topping 30 billion cubic meters, and the Three Gorges Reservoir ranks 24th.

Superior it is not. And neither is the Washington Post.

A story like this...

[Dissonant]

It would be great if news submitters would provide a bit more context for stories like this. I'd like to be able to get at least a vague idea of what this means without having to read the article. In this case, after reading the little blurb there, I have no idea what or where the Three Gorges dam is (or what its significance is), nor do I understand what accumulating water will do. Yeah, so there'll be a bunch of water back there. Does this mean that it's going to stop generating power, or maybe start? I don't know how a dam works.

I'm not asking for a dissertation here, just a sentence or two telling me what's happening and why I should care.

Re:A story like this...

[cyril3]

That nasty old Chinese goverment is building a big ugly dam in a pretty spot. You should care because they are also going to hurt some cute fluffy animals. They say its so they can make some electricity and stop water getting into their houses but I don't believe that for one minute.

What do you think?

As if I fucking care what someone who wants to contribute on the basis of a two sentence synopsis of the 3G project thinks.

No offence to America

[zakezuke]

Well, it's not like there wasn't history for the Hover then known as the Bolder Dam. The Anasazi people were known to dwell in that region. There is some speculation that the Anasazi were pretty impressive as far as their achievements go, but alas we thought it was a good idea to flood that area all but destroying that evidence.

Now typicaly i'm actually a fan of hydro power. It's better then chemical fuel because of that pesky issue of waste gases and having extract and bring in stuff to burn. It's better then nuclear because of the fact that it doesn't have the same issues with waste, and should let's say a dam fail, the area can be habitable soon after the water has washed away. You can't really say the same thing about nuclear. I would very much prefer china experiment with dam power rather then resorting to more toxic methods.

But it does have a sad side effect of reaking havic with fish and wildlife populations. And the lost of history is most tragic.

While I'm a big fan of what the Hover Land Reclamation project has done for america, I can not dismiss the negative impact that it has caused. You have regions like Phoenix and Los Angles who's enviroment doesn't naturally support humans, creating a dependence on these rivers that, in some cases, no longer flow into the sea. I'm not a fan of foolishness like in pheonix requring home owners to have a grass lawn visiable, which sorta increases demand on the water supply for something not really bloody useful.

But also i'm for the freedom of choice, and the inteligence of a people to weigh in the good and the bad. While I don't know the specifics, i'm willing to wager that these were taken into account. China has a population issue. Part of their immidate need is the ability to provide water, power, and food for these people. Dams can be great for this if properly managed. I'm sure they have issues with polution, dams are good for this too. Unforutnatly I feel that a dam is a good idea.

Dam collapses killed 220,000 in China in the 70s

[TheNarrator]

It's a little known fact that in the 1970s a dam project in Henan Province of China was responsible for the deaths of more than 200,000 people. This was in fact the biggest technological diaster of all time. Here's some more information about this and other dam collapses.

repeat after me: it's a Good Thing(tm)

[lingqi]

wtf are you talking about. Besides huang-he (the other really long river in china), yangtze is one river that kills a lot of people and destroys many homes because it floods and changes courses constantly. since the ancient times, farmers that depended on it loved it (irrigation) and hated it (floods often) because of this.

Heck, I was in Nanjin (city with several million population) back when when it *almost* flodded. The water was some 10 meters higher than the ground near the port! damn good thing all the sandbags held, because otherwise a LOT of people would have died - myself probably one of them.

if I had to move because I'd be saving people's lives? well fuck, wouldn't you? Btw, did you know that when shit like this happens (government forces you to move), they pay you a whole lot of money, at least in chinese standards? I am not personally familiar with that particular province, but in nanjin and shanghai, when farmers were kicked from their lands (when building new airport / new highway / mag-lev train / etc), the farmers got a LOT of cash for their land - in fact many of them are off to quite a good living, even better than some of the city-folks.

btw; most man-made channels silt. there are specific ships that dig those out. read about them. the technology is there. and don't forget that yangtze is a lot bigger than mississipi; so percentage-wise the silting should not be as bad.

btw; i mentioned it in another post but i say it again here - partly I think the government believes that this will become like the great-wall, etc, where they are creating a new legacy; at least thats what i think they thinks about when confronted with destroying the archeological stuff that lies the river's side.

Re:repeat after me: it's a Good Thing(tm)

[Nept]

Btw, did you know that when shit like this happens (government forces you to move), they pay you a whole lot of money, at least in chinese standards?

That's a load of shit, or you're not acquainted with the facts. 1.5 million people have been displaced and were not given a lot of money.

Resettlement: In the 1980s, China passed regulations to protect the rights of those displaced by the dam projects and assure them of adequate compensation. But human rights activists asserted that rural dwellers are being discriminated, that they are not being consulted about their eviction, that they are often crowded onto poor land with unsatisfactory living conditions and few job opportunities, that they are not being taught new job skills, that corruption is diverting the funds meant to compensate them, that their local culture is threatened and that the government has provided no channels for them to express dissatisfaction

source: http://www.chinaonline.com/refer/ministry_profiles /threegorgesdam.asp

There is much debate on this dam

[btempleton]

With many arguments positive and negative. Remarkably, however, nobody after reading the arguments think the pro-dam case is a "slam dunk." At most it's slightly on the positive side.

Yet if you step back, you realize that in a free country, there is no way a project of this sort could go ahead, unless it was such an immense and overwhelmingly positive step, a necessity -- and even then I have doubts that you could arrange for the relocation of 1 to 3 million people, even with bribes of nicer houses on less fertile land.

So if you couldn't approve of this in a free country, how can you approve of usuing authoritarian techniques to make it happen, if the benefits are under any question at all?

I toured the dam and the river last year. You may be interested in my many photos and notes, which are on my China and Yangtse photo pages

Re:There is much debate on this dam

[foonf]

Yet if you step back, you realize that in a free country, there is no way a project of this sort could go ahead, unless it was such an immense and overwhelmingly positive step, a necessity -- and even then I have doubts that you could arrange for the relocation of 1 to 3 million people, even with bribes of nicer houses on less fertile land.

This is complete nonsense, unless you define "free country" to means something which does not actually exist right now in the real world. There are large dams in every "first-world" country with a representative government, and when they were built they were certainly portrayed as "immense and overwhelmingly positive" steps to develop backward regions, regardless of whether that was actually the case. People were displaced in the construction of all of them. In the part of the US I am from (the pacific northwest), there are Native American tribes whose entire traditional way of life was destroyed by the damming of the large rivers, and the subsequent flooding of land and decline of salmon stocks.

Sure, there aren't any dams anywhere in the US or other developed countries that approach the scale of this Chinese project, but then most of them were built before the 1950s when the technological level was (worldwide) not as high. There are no major dams under construction in the US now because almost every "river" of significant length has been dammed along its entire length already, not because it is a "free" country whereas China isn't. Look at the history of the large-scale engineering projects anywhere that play a big role in any modern society, whether you are talking about roads, railways, canals, dams, and so on, and there are people who have been displaced and whose lives were degraded against their will as a result. There are legitimate criticisms of these things, and many people in China are criticising thie project. But for those of us who live in developed countries and benefit from similar projects, to use China or other developing nations' attempts to do the same thing as proof that they are "unfree" (and China certainly isn't a free country) is pure hypocrisy.

Re:There is much debate on this dam

[btempleton]

What I mean is envision a project in the USA where, to make it happen, the entire population of Dallas or Detroit or some similar city had to be displaced, by force if necessary.

Can you imagine a project of sufficient benefit that this would be politically possible in a democratic nation like the USA? Certainly not 18GW of power, or even flood control, for we would not buy displacing all the people who don't live in the flood plain for the sake of protecting those who insist on living within it.

A lot of land was flooded with major U.S. dam projects, but it didn't have a million people living in it!

And even if you can propose something so wonderful, so beneficial that displacing a million people could be sold politically, that's not what we have here. We have various advantages outlined for the dam (flood control, 18GW) but we have many questions -- risk of failure, corruption, inability to do both goals at the same time, predictions by several dam experts that the reservoir will just silt up.

Would you support such a project in a free country? If not, how could you support it here?

Re:There is much debate on this dam

[Rich0]

It isn't my country, therefore *it isn't my decision*.

Uh, I think the original poster's point was that despite the fact that it is the Chineses's country, it STILL isn't allowed to be their decision.

It would probably be a bad idea to send in the marines to destroy the dam, but it isn't wrong for somebody outside of China to hold an opinion regarding it.

Consider - it is the position of the "Chinese" that Chinese citizens should not be able to browse the Internet without heavy censorship. (I use the quotes to illustrate the fact that you make no distinction between what a population wants and what a totalitarian government wants.)Would you consequently consider it wrong for a US or European citizen to create a web proxy used to bypass this censorship? After all, it should be up to the Chinese lords to decide what is and isn't safe for the eyes of less enlightened ordinary vassals.

Ya good idea fool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes instead of a renewable non-polluting energy source that can provide energy for %20 of the world let's just have them burn a bunch of coal and maybe makes some nuclear reactors, that's a lot better!

I'm sick of these racists critisizing the chinese when they actually try to produce clean power!

I bet you are out in American suburbs somewhere powered by either a giant coal plant or nuclear power.

Yes, let's have the chinese turn to nuclear power so that they don't anger any bourgeois western tourists!

Why don't you shut your hypocritical mouth.

There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China...

[caitsith01]

...but what are they supposed to do?

Yes, this dam will damage the environment.

Yes, it will displace many people.

Yes, it is dangerous in terms of earthquakes and flooding if it collapses.

BUT, it is going to generate *18.2 MILLION kilowatts* of power, indefinitely, with no ongoing pollution. The alternatives are presumably:

- coal or oil power, causing a massive amount of greenhouse gas, contributing to global warming (yes it does exist, America) and drawing fire from the same people who are criticising the environmental impact of the dam

- nuclear power, leading to large amounts of nuclear waste and with an increased risk of a meltdown occurring in a 2nd/3rd world country with dubious safety records and high levels of corruption ... drawing fire from the same people who are criticising the environmental impact of the dam

- China goes without power, and the western world continues to get fat and happy using our own dams, nuclear plants and coal fired power stations and sweet sweet Iraqi oil

Obviously the ideal solution would be for China to be able to build a project that produced this much power from solar/wind/tidal energy sources, but the cost at present would be insanely prohibitive. Quite frankly I have more respect for the energy policy of a nation that is trying to generate power without relying on fossil fuels and nuclear reactors than one that is actively trying to expand its power generation in those areas. Of course no other countries I can think of have built massive, environmentally questionable (*cough* Hoover *cough*) dams, have they?

i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[lingqi]

erm...
1/3 of power requirements in china is, ahem, what, insignificant in your book? what do you propose they do? buy hamster mills? connect all the population into a computer simulation and harvest bioelectricity? (actually, in hind sight - the harvesting bioelectricity thing might make a good movie)

you'd be surprised how much infrastructure stuff is going on in china right now. highways are beginning to connect most metropolitan areas to one another, new airports are springing into existance (ever compare the new shanghai airport (pudong) with the old (hongqiao)?

Since the dam holds so much potential in the roadblock to china's industrial and economical future (seriously - power-outages are worse there than CA) - I wouldn't call it an "show of pride." That kind of stuff would be probably be exemplified by the maglev rail in shanghai.

Now, being somewhat earthquake-prone is (i think) one of the reasons why they built a gravity dam; it's blocking water just by its weight. I am concerned about the quality of the build - but that is different from concern about the intention to build it. There are no plausible alternatives currently, you see. Besides, if Japan's nuclear powerplant can survive through the recent (last week) 7.0 earthquake, I'd think the technology is there to keep a dam steady.

Re:i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[lingqi]

Your statement "power-outages are worse there than CA" doesn't tell me a whole lot.

Maybe not, but CA is already the worst power-strapped state in the US. I can't exactly compare to Africa and have you relate to it now, can I?

Back when I lived in china, we had candles in the kitchen drawer, because power-outages were a monthly event during summer (and i lived in the city!). When that happens, all the lights in the district went out, and the fans quiets down, and everybody goes out to the balcony to look at stars, get bit by mosquitos, and fan their hand-fans profusely.

if you had homework that you havn't finished yet? well tough fucking luck because you either do it under the candle or you wait it out. And yes, people *complains* about CA power availability.

Not to mention that CA already set up the world's largest wind-farm. I don't know, but i can't harly consider that to be not having an impact on the environment. But of course - it's in the US so it's ok if it kills halfs the birds that dares fly through. And hey! it even makes discovery channel as one of the most exciting engineering achievements in the world! how exciting.

didn't want to unload this on you - because i am not precisly replying to your question, but I get quite tired of listening to people who never knew what a power-outage is to complain about "what a shame" because they rode a tour ship through the three-gorges as if that really justified keeping the place so they, on vacation, can have some place exotic to go and take pictures.

Re:i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[Kaiwen]

1/3 of power requirements in china is, ahem, what, insignificant in your book?

Because no one can predict with any certainty what China's energy needs will be ten to twenty years out, any predictions of this sort are guesswork at best -- pure marketing at worst. The fact is, over the last decade power availability throughout the area to be served by the Three Gorges dam has consistently outstripped demand, meaning there is currently a power glut. This may well change in the future, but no one can say for sure.

I had a final chance to visit the Three Gorges last August, with a tour guide who was an unabashed mouthpiece for government propaganda. Coincidentally, there was a Canadian hydro-electric engineer in our group who had worked on dam projects around the world. He asked some very pointed questions, making the tour guide very uncomfortable.

One of the biggest potential problems with the dam project is silting. All dams eventually silt up -- all the detritus normally washed down river kept afloat by the currents settles out as the currents slow, eventually building up behind dams and other obstructions, rendering all dams eventually unusable.

The Three Gorges dam is different only in the unprecendented scale of the problem. The fact that the Yangtze is both one of the largest and one of the most silt-heavy rivers in the world makes conventional de- and anti-silting methodologies utterly inadequate and makes the the success of the project heavily dependent on experimental and largely untested (Gezhouba Dam notwithstanding) methods. Should these methods fail to perform as projected, the dam -- more than twenty years in the making -- could silt in in as little as ten years, making it one of the most costly debacles in human history.

Amazingly, the project has not even attempted to address the other silting problem. As the mighty Yangtze rushes into the upper end of the reservoir near Baidicheng -- 360 miles southwest of the Dam -- the sudden slowing will deposit by some estimates thousands of tons of silt per day, eventually resulting in massive flooding problems along the entire riverway from Chongqing to Yunyang.

There are no plausible alternatives currently, you see.

This is simply not true. In the years since the Three Gorges project was begun any number of alternative technologies have appeared. Gas-fueled combined cycle plants and co-generators, for example, produce virtually no pollution or greenhouse gases, are smaller, safer, cheaper, more reliable, less sociologically or environmentally disruptive, and more adaptable -- meaning they can be constructed relatively quickly to meet demand and can be located near the need. This last point is not insignificant, as transmission leakage will consume a large percentage of the power generated by the dam. By some estimates, transmission losses from the dam to Beijing could run as high as 70%. As natural gas becomes more prevelant, combined cycle plants will become even more economically attractive.

Which leads to the next problem: the project is already facing severe financial difficulties. Nearly every original investor has fled, and the few that haven't already pulled out are in the process of doing so, leaving the government to foot nearly the entire bill. While Beijing has attempted to put a bright face on this, the fact remains that few investors expect the dam will ever turn a profit, both because of the immense (and growing) construction costs -- not helped by the massive corruption which has dogged the project -- and because newer, cheaper alternatives threaten to undercut the dam's market before construction is even completed. The fact is, hydro-electric dams are outdated both technologically and economically.

Most of the sociological impact of the dam will takes years to manifest. To date, the government has relocated less than half the two million people who are being displaced. Our tour guide gushed with pride as he showed us the shin

Re:i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[Graymalkin]

Uh, there's a few plausible alternatives. The money could have been better spent on constructing more energy efficient buildings for homes and businesses. It also could have gone into building localized power generation using solar, geothermal, wind, and small scale hydroelectric plants. Energy efficient housing goes a tremendous way in reducing the amount of power any urban area needs to maintain itself. Energy efficient policies and buildings in businesses also help out a great deal in reducing peak power demands off the utility grid. If efficient buildings and renewable electricity and heating sources are utilized the net effect is extremely low levels of pollution for equivilent levels of comfort as dirty inefficient systems.

The dam is going to devastate the local ecology to a degree not seen since the Aral Sea debacle. Most of the rivers feeding the Three Gorges are heavily polluted and hundreds of factories are being flooded by the dam. Despite cleanup efforts it is inevitable that hazardous industrial chemicals are going to end up floating about in the reservoir. Add the industrial waste to that created by the ocean frieghters navigating the new reservoir and you've got a gigantic cesspool in the middle of the country.

Besides the pollution the local wildlife is going to end up wiped out. Without the silt in the river being distributed down its bed the fish will have nothing to eat if the pollution doesn't kill them first. The Baiji dolphin is also on the list of animals to be impacted as they hunt through the river's silt for food as well. Water fowl that feed on the fish that won't be there will also begin to die off unless they manage some heavy migration. Even if they manage to find new food sources their numbers are going to dwindle drastically. Worst is the people in the area that depend heavily on the river's fish stock. They're going to have a signifigant food source closed off to them which means more food imports to the area which will only exacerbate the poullution problems.

Of course there's the potential for a massive flood. The dam is already showing signs of wear. Saying the dam is earthquake resistant in a misnomer. Natural earthquakes pose less of a problem than the masses of water in the reservoir putting pressure on the local tectonic system. Also the massive build-up of silt in the reservoir is a distaster waiting to happen. A small earthquake that normally wouldn't damage the dam stands a decent chance of causing a mudslide in the silt bed. Megatons of silt crashing to the basin floor will cause pressure waves that can seriously damage the dam.

A number of proposals and arguments are on the books and the project was started despite them. Most proposals suggested a smaller number of power stations could be built on the Yuangtze's tributaries. They could have provided as much power as the single dam without the ecological damage and vast potential for a catastrophic flood. The lakes and wetlands downstream from the Three Gorges area also are able to hold more water than the reservoir but allow but better distribution of the water.

The dam is most definitely a political show of pride than it is a practical solution to a problem. Save for ocean freight in Chongquin the alternative solutions to the TGD provided everything the TGD did for a lower cost and less economic and ecological impact. It is arguable that Chongquin NEEDS the ocean freight, it is polluted and choked as it is, adding to those facts is not a very good idea. The corruption brought to light in the project of late and the total silencing of opposition to the project should tell you this whole plan is nothing more than the world's biggest political stunt.

Re:i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[smithmc]

This is simply not true. In the years since the Three Gorges project was begun any number of alternative technologies have appeared. Gas-fueled combined cycle plants and co-generators, for example, produce virtually no pollution or greenhouse gases, are smaller, safer, cheaper, more reliable, less sociologically or environmentally disruptive, and more adaptable -- meaning they can be constructed relatively quickly to meet demand and can be located near the need.

Gee, that's great. So where does the gas come from? If they had a large reserve of natural gas, don't you think they would've built gas-turbine plants instead of investing in this gigantic dam?

Re:i am chinese and i am pretty impressed

[Graymalkin]

I'm not a riverologist but my understanding is between the Yangtze's tributaries and itself it is one of the siltier rivers in the world. The high silt content of the river is what makes the Three Gorges region a good farming local, regular floods of the river replenish the soil in the area. It is local farming and development which has made the region such a danger to live in. Industrial and residential buildup on the shores of a river that regularly floods is a stupid idea and reflects some of the more inane central planning policies in the Chinese government.

Left to its own devices the reservoir will silt over within a few short years according to some engineers. Even if it is regularly dredged it is predicted the silt buildup in the turbines is going to cause regular downtime which means huge swaths of developed area will go without power or heavy reductions in residential power to keep industrial districts fed. If the spillways fill up with silt which many people agree is very likely, serious stress problems could crop up.

Like you mention about Florida, regions downstream from the TGD are facing a slew of environmental guesses as to the total effect of the dam. Not only will downstream inland areas be greatly affected but so will regions framing the South China Sea which is fed by the Yangtze. Over a number of years it is not infeasible to imagine large sections of the coastline receding. Tell will tell I suppose.

Re:Dam collapses killed 220,000 in China in the 70

[klasikahl]

This was in fact the biggest technological diaster of all time. You must not be considering the entire family of Windows products.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[TummyX]

nuclear power, leading to large amounts of nuclear waste and with an increased risk of a meltdown occurring in a 2nd/3rd world country with dubious safety records and high levels of corruption ... drawing fire from the same people who are criticising the environmental impact of the dam


The nuclear waste gets buried and when was the lsat time you saw a meltdown?

And what kind of impact do you think the dam bursting would have hmmm!? The dam (to me) looks far more dangerous than a few nuclear power stations. Containing a nuclear disaster is nothing compared to containing all that water.

Re:Sounds kinda nice.

[MillionthMonkey]

Except that dams aren't "cool" anymore. You can make an exception once in a while for a really well built and executed dam, like the Hoover dam. But for the most part dams are considered representative of an outmoded philosophy that the environment is something that should be "improved". We do still build dams in some cases, but we don't automatically equate their construction with "progress" anymore. (Same for swamps. We used to drain swamps as soon as we came across them- we don't do that anymore.)

That philosophy hasn't spread to China, where badmouthing this dam can get you arrested. It's politically untouchable. China is essentially throwing an adolescent temper tantrum and trying to convince the world that they're not a Third World nation by building the biggest, most destructive water project imaginable. You should see pictures of some of the areas they're flooding. It's as if we decided to flood the Grand Canyon to prove what badasses we are.

They're not only submerging archaeological sites. They're putting entire cities underwater. They're going to have to dynamite the tops of skyscrapers so that they don't sink the ships! Toxic waste dumps, landfills, it's all getting submerged. You are witnessing the creation of the largest open sewer that the world has ever seen. In fact this will be the first open sewer that astronauts will be able to see from space. This will be quite impressive. Not to mention the forced migration of a million people. Yeah, this isn't Third World behavior. "Technological prowess" speaks for itself!

Power or Flood Prevention?

[tlhp514]

One of the big, still mostly unanswered questions about the dam is whether the principal goal is to generate power or to reduce the risk of catastrophic floods. The Chinese government says that they intend to do both. However, often these two objectives clash - you are inclined to take more risks in order to generate more power. Also, in either case there are better alternatives. If you want power, it is cheeper to just build a bunch of nuclear plants. If you want flood prevention, a large series of smaller projects on tributaries would be more effective, would avoid the catastrophic risk, and would have a smaller environmental, social, and cultural impact. The only conclusion one can draw from this is that the CCP wants this because it will be impressive in traditional Chinese "big projects" style. This is probably also a large part of the motivation for their space program. They want desperatly to see themselves as a great modern power. The history of this goes back to the building of the Great Walls (there were several, built at different times) and massive flood prevention projects which often were the basis for the legitimacy of an emperor/dynasty.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[istartedi]

China goes without power, and the western world continues to get fat and happy using our own dams, nuclear plants and coal fired power stations and sweet sweet Iraqi oil

China goes without power, and the western world continues to get fat and diseased using our own dams, nuclear plants and coal fired power stations and foul smelling Iraqi oil.

In some ways, the Chinese have the advantage of industrializing at a later date. For example, when people get phones there, they are much more likely to get wireless. They're skipping over the cumbersome copper phase of telecom to a large degree.

OTOH, they've failed to learn our lessons in other areas. I recall reading an article about how the once ubiquitous bicycle is being pushed out by cars. People who try to stay with their bikes are riding around in smog, finding it hard to breath, and of course they are dead meat in a collision now. Smog was a major point of contention in granting the Olympics to Beijing. Solution? Nearby industry will be shut down during the games.

It's too bad the government there is sold on this particular vision of "progress". If I were dictator, I'd tax cars and gasoline like crazy and use the revenue to build public transit. As for electricity, many Chinese did fine without it for most of history. If China wants to play a global game of "keeping up with the Joneses" they are free to do that, but it's just a larger scale version of the yuppie who knocks himself out 70 hours a week to keep the Mercedes and the crackerbox mansion, only to discover that his wife is sleeping around and his children don't respect him.

So what if 50% of the nation plows with oxen and washes clothes by hand? With appropriate and judicious distribution of resources, with effective management, with proper education, I daresay that people will live longer and more happily in such a nation.

Of course I doubt that there are very many nations with the wisdom to persue such a course, when the shiny, jingly "stuff" of industrialization is so tempting because... well... "everybody else is doing it". Maybe Africa still has a chance.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[caitsith01]

My mistake:

"The fuel elements ruptured and the resultant explosive force of steam lifted off the cover plate of the reactor, releasing fission products to the atmosphere. A second explosion threw out fragments of burning fuel and graphite from the core and allowed air to rush in, causing the graphite moderator to burst into flames."

No need to panic, not a meltdown! Everyone return to your stations...

E=mc**2

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

Another way to express it is six kilograms of energy every year.

It would be awe-inspiring to look at the power lines leaving the dam and realize they were carrying enough to (theoretically) synthesize a gram of antimatter every 3 hours. (Not 90 minutes, because you'd have to synthesize a gram of matter at the same time).

Ahh the glass houses...

[smoondog]

How short our (generally, on /.) American memories are. Here in California, how many remember that Hetch Hetchy Resevoir (San Francisco's water supply) flooded the second tranquil valley in Yosemite. Naturalist John Muir fought long, hard an unsuccessfully to prevent the damming of one of our nations grandest wonders.

"Dam Hetch Hetchy! As well dam for water-tanks the people's cathedrals and churches, for no holier temple," Muir would later write, "has ever been consecrated by the heart of man." From SacBee.com

Yosemite Valley is beautiful, but as I look down over the lake that drowned Hetch Hetchy, I wonder what that valley looked like before the flood.

-Sean

1.21 Gigawatts ??

[Foddrick]

Finally I can power my flux capacitor without worrying about the Libyans coming to ge me.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[saitoh]

I did my term paper in my History of Modern China class this past semester and presented the findings at our university's (UMPI) annual conference during a session. As such, I'll respond and try and clear up a few things from what I found:

Coal power isn't an option if your looking at the environment. Chungqing which will now be a seaport has smog that makes LA look pristine... Its the industrial center of that section of China and holds 31 million people (to put it in perspective New York City only has 8 million during the 2000 census as per the New York City Department of Planning has on their website). So much so that there are reports that people who have asthma and journey there are expected to (and have) died within 4-6 weeks.

I honestly don't know about the nuclear power. That was outside the scope of my search so I can only estimate that yeah, there would be a buttload of nuclear waste.

I will say this though, with a body of water that is this large (long, not wide) that the salinity of the water will increase (as is found in other large bodies of water and other dam projects), as such, with this stretching long periods, the watershed is also expected to become saltier and the plant-matter close to the water is also expected to suffer.

These are only the negatives, downstream where there are large amounts of citrus fruit and the "bread basket" of China is located (presumed to be the second largest until the Taiping Rebellion) will now have stabilized flow of the Yangtze River instead of the traditional seasonal changes of approximately 30 meters in depth.

China isn't *controlled* by the communist party, its controlled by the rivers. Rivers in China change course often, and when they do, approximately 1.2 million people die each year due to either flooding or starvation with a poor crop (figure obtained from in class lecture, will find an online source if asked). China lives "on the edge" of starvation constantly with only 12% of their land being arable, so when a river moves, its BIG NEWS. This will be the first time that many farmers downstream are able to install permanent irigation.

- Page

lamenating the tourist mentality

[gad_zuki!]

>You would be surprised at just how much an affect of a beautiful environment can actually have on your life.

I fail to see the beauty of thousands killed annually by flooding and no real plans to power the world's largest country.

Sadly, many westerners like our above poster come off as so elitist they can easily be mistaken for racists. To them, it seems, the rest of the world is a potential tourist attraction and the natives better be "authentic" e.g. underfed, undereducated, sheoless, and surrounded by beauty. Well, enough beauty that'll fill up the card on your digital camera so you can view all this beauty on the plane ride home. Whatever happens to the natives is their problem, right?

The rest of the world is not a potential vacation, its an active and constantly changing place. Sure, the dam has criticisms just like anything else, but spare me your thesis on the beauty of the the environment and what seems to be bad news for your vacation plans.

>You would be surprised at just how much an affect of a beautiful environment can actually have on your life.

and overvaluing it to an absurd degree makes you sound a little crazy.

Re:lamenating the tourist mentality

[Rich0]

I agree. The historical site mentality is a false sense of logic. Every current historical site was almost certainly built on top of something older than it - ironcially enough the creation of these sites involved the destruction of something even more historical. If we were to bulldoze a 12th century home to put in a shopping mall you'd go through 100 years of legal battles. If you win and put in the mall, the irony is that 1000 years from now somebody is going to want to bulldoze the dilapidated mall to put in a 10,000 story skyscraper and everyone will be arguing about the destruction of an authentic 2003 marketplace.

That isn't to say that we should just be bulldozing archaeological sites wholesale. Nevertheless there isn't any reason that you can't just give the archaeologists six months to take whatever they want out of there and take lots of pictures and then bulldoze the whole thing.

If we didn't tear down old stuff to build new stuff eventually the entire planet would be uninhabitable. It would be one big museam with "DO NOT TOUCH" written all over it.

wind power doesn't kill many birds

[js7a]

the blades are extremely fast and kills a lot of birds in the area

On the contrary, that idea is generally a myth.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[mako]

This is the most disgusting comment on this story I've read yet. And that's saying something. Individuals drag themselves out of the mud and ooze to better themselves. To have leisure time to investigate, create, and seek the meaning of their existence. Do you think it is coincidence that "old rich white men" are responsible for the United States of America? Societies should be formed around the idea of enabling extraordinary individuals to do extraordinary things. Not feeding the status quo. A properly built society will benefit from the individuals achievement. You think this is possible when 1/2 of your population lives in a fucking rice paddy?

With appropriate and judicious distribution of resources, with effective management, with proper education, I dare-say that people will live longer and more happily in such a nation.

Ahh. The agitprop is now in full swing. Careful your slip is showing. You somehow think your country of shiny, happy, brainwashed, socially illiterate shit-farmers are superior to the yuppie you deride? Why are most Chinese politically disinterested? Why is China ruled by corrupt tyrants? Could it be that sustenance living is not the motivator which gets people thinking about the philosophical underpinnings of their society and its rulers?

So what if 50% of the nation plows with oxen and washes clothes by hand? With appropriate and judicious distribution of resources, with effective management, with proper education, I daresay that people will live longer and more happily in such a nation.

And I suppose you are willing to sacrifice the wonderful life of driving an Ox around until your hands bleed to be a "Central Planner." How noble. The inner party and the people are truly in your debt.

Hypocrisy?

[Colonel Panic]

Yes, the Three Gorges dam is an ecological and cultural disaster. But most of the critisism being expressed here is (I suspect) being expressed by Americans (I'm one too). Does this make sense? Don't we Americans consume more energy per-capita than any other nation in the world? We drive to work in huge SUV's - why do we need such huge vehicles to transport one person? The US imports huge amounts of oil to power these SUVs which leads to all sorts of geopolitical problems (see: The Middle East). Instead of trying to reduce our consumption of oil we go and fight wars in the Middle East so that we can install regimes which are more favorable to us so we can keep the oil flowing - we are like the Roman Empire of old.

So China is just trying to be like US - they want a modern, industrial, consumer-based society - nevermind that that our sort of society probably doesn't scale to 1.4billion population due to the devestating ecological effects. And to be just like US they need lots of engery, hence the dam project.

Also consider that all of us typing these posts are doing so via computer. As we continue to push clock speeds higher and higher, power consumption in processors increases - power consumption in CMOS is something like cfv^2 (f: frequency, v: voltage, c: capacitance) so the faster we run'em the more power they take. Now consider that a 2GHz Athlon or Pentium packs all the power that your average Joe user will ever need - perhaps now that these processors are consuming in the 75 to 100 watt range, we should be putting more effort into reducing power consumption, instead of increasing clock speeds?

I suspect we could be doing a lot more with a lot less and since the rest of the world seems to be hellbent on emulating US, why not try to set a better example?

If they SO BADLY needed the power ...

[Taco Cowboy]

Maybe, but you have got to realize how badly they need the power.

If they so badly needed that power, then they SHOULD construct the dam PROPERLY.

The dam was constructed with not only shabby methods, but also with inferior-grade materials.

My friend works for an international construction firm that has consultation contract with the Chinese on that project, and he told me years ago that the dam would last 30 years.

I thought he was joking then, but now I know he wasn't.

The report of CRACKS, HUNDREDS of them, have appeared, and many of them are as wide as 1.3 METERS !

Now the Chinese are worried, but it's all too late!

The official press is putting up BOLD FACE EXCUSES telling the world that the cracks are of NON-CONSEQUENCIAL! They keep on repeating the PARTY-LINE that "THE DAM IS CONSTRUCTED TO WITHSTAND AN EARTHQUAKE IN THE MAGNITUDE OF 7" and the worse part of the whole LIE is that the theory of "withstanding earthquake" was NEVER tested in term of the dam construction. Plus, that assumption is based on a PROPER construction with NONE of the inferior materials that have been used.

For example, instead of using concrete that has been designed to withstand tremendous power, inferior concrete was used. Instead of using the concrete that can STRETCH and FLEX so that it won't break, much cheaper rigid and fragile concrete was used.

According to my friend, the former Chinese Premier, Zhu Yongi tried to intervene on the matter, when he learned of the dishonest practices, but he was VETOED by his CCP comrades in the politburo. Both Li Peng and Jiang Zemin prevented Zhu from taking any action, because both Li and Jiang were (and are) on the take.

So there was NO WONDER in Zhu's departing speech late last year, that he reminded the world to see him as an honest politician that did not tolerate any corruption. That remark was designed specifically to distance himself from the likes of Li Peng and Jiang Zemin, in case hyper-projects like the Three Gorges Dam breaks.

If the dam breaks, tens of millions of people will die, and they will die because of Jiang Zemin and .

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[thynk]

The fuel elements ruptured and the resultant explosive force of steam lifted off the cover plate of the reactor, releasing fission products to the atmosphere. A second explosion threw out fragments of burning fuel and graphite from the core and allowed air to rush in, causing the graphite moderator to burst into flames."

If I read my sources then the Chernobyl accident was the worst in the history of nuclear power, in fact it KILLED 10 TIMES the previos record holder of 3 deaths. Yes, 30 people died at the site. Another 10 have found to have thyroid cancer and have died. "An authoritative UN report in 2000 confirmed that there is no scientific evidence of any significant radiation-related health effects to most people exposed"
AND - if could of been avoided completely.

Not the biggest deal in the world... but since the conversation was here I thought I'd stick my nose in. Looks like for acciendent related deaths, Nukes are pretty damn safe, thus far anyway.

Tell you what, save a few lives and a ton of cash. Don't bother building your damn on one coast and your nuke plant on the other - next time both of you meet in the middle (Colorado) - I'll buy you both a beer.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[Kyn]

global warming (yes it does exist, America)

As I post, it is 41 degrees Fahrenheit in Chicago. In June. 41 DEGREES IN FREAKING JUNE! Yes, this just reeks of global warming, doesn't it?

Re:Shabby constructions - the dam is already CRACK

[javiercero]

Yeah... like depleted uranium... it kills the enemy AND poisons your own troops :)

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[ThesQuid]

So what if 50% of the nation plows with oxen and washes clothes by hand? With appropriate and judicious distribution of resources, with effective management, with proper education, I daresay that people will live longer and more happily in such a nation.

Gosh that sounds like....Communism. Sure worked great for the first 35 years of new China. Only 30 million dead, what's that all in the name of "judicious distribution of resources"?

Re:Shabby constructions - the dam is already CRACK

[yobbo]

Ugh good one, you just got slashdot banned in China.

Re:There is a hell of a lot of criticism of China.

[tnak]

I cannot believe that this elitist bunch of crap got modded up.

"As for electricity, many Chinese did fine without it for most of history"

You want to make comments like that, you shouldn't make them on an electonic device asshole.

It's ok to condemn 10-12 percent of the worlds poplulation to living in the dark, but it's ok for you to have electricity to power you computer?

Everybody here is talking about the environment, the cultural losses, and the sociological changes.

WHAT ABOUT THE POOR BASTARDS WHO LIVE BELOW THE DAMN????

The Yangtze regularly floods in the south killing thousands each year.

So what if a million people above the damn have to move? They had ten years notice to move - a one time move; the floods give a couple days notice before they come - every year.

Humm 18.2 gigawatts....

[Spyder]

18.2 Gigawatts a year? you could go back to 1955 15 times!