Hi Centra

FYI summary Three Gorges.

Originally proposed for flood control.

1958. Chinese and Soviet experts advised Mao that flood control alone could not justify construction. Redesigned for hydropower generation and shipping navigation.

Domestic and foreign experts warned flood control capability was exaggerated and that cheaper and more effective options were available. This advice was ignored.

Canada alone initiated the project by funding the US$14M feasibility study, restricting dam height to 160m and forecast seismic and other activities that would trigger landslides in over 150 areas. China wanted 180m to meet SNWDP demand.

Landslides occurred in 1500 areas when reservoir water level reached only 135m, 10 times predictions. That increased to more than 4,700 by 2007 with more than 1,000 villages forced to relocate. Slips and relocations continue.

Another critical problem being experienced is that new residential buildings constructed in the 3GD area were not designed to withstand tremors. Moderate to severe seismic events could prove catastrophic for residents.

Existing dam design cannot meet current demand plus the additional South North Water Diversion Project requirement to meet Beijing's increasing demand.

Three Gorges has an operating storage capacity of 22.15Bm3 from which 16.50B m3 (75%) is allocated for Power generation and Yangtze navigation, whilst only 5.65B m3 (25%) is allocated for flood-control. The Yangtze one month flood peak can be up to 100Bm3.

3GD cannot control downstream flooding caused by inflow from Yangtze's 6 major middle/lower reaches. Check on non drought reasons for downstream sedimentation resulting from dam discharge.

Construction of upstream dams is to minimize 3GD sedimentation rather than hydro generation. Because of the nature of the particles in the sediment, turbine damage could be severe.

There are many verifiable technical data sources on 3GD worldwide.

If I can help just ask, dynamics is the key to both rivers.

AgScientist

Romany

I am afraid I can no longer take you seriously and concur with Expat China Journo's response to your last comment in "Does China Deserve a Fair Go etc". Your choice of some website references did not help.

My associates and students formed dedicated teams to focus on identifying specific problems and biased sites on the internet. Without first determining the capability or tertiary level of the students, you consider them incapable of reason and hold yourself out as the only one capable of sorting through the mire of China web reporting, while at the same time appear to rely solely on the web for your comment.

The students have received a comprehensive and detailed presentation by a respected foreign journalist on media protocols for those operating in China. He also provided an invaluable and detailed insight into what can and does happen. True there are many brave souls trying desperately to make a difference, but look at the personal price they pay. Change in China will come, and it will come from Beijing's ongoing mistakes,abuse and those who protest.

Today, another presentation by a consulting engineer with experience in China took us through energy in China and also reviewed David DuByne's excellent article on biogas, explaining the problems, failures, limitations and successes of alternative energies in China.

Because of David's ecxcellent explanation of "face" and the intense role that it plays in Chinese culture, business, government and media, do you consider that biased or that he is ill informed?

Selective quoting is useless without seeking all relevant and balancing arguments.

Yet as Expat China Journo pointed out, you admit a lack of extensive experience in China yet you try to impose your ideas on others. When you criticize, apply your own rules before commenting.

Cyclops

cyclops "True there are many brave souls trying desperately to make a difference...Change in China will come, and it will come from Beijing's ongoing mistakes,abuse and those who protest..."

But, survey shows that support to Chinese central government or CCP is soaring recently, not only in mainland, but also in HongKong etc.

Most TianAnMing protestors who embraced west 20 years ago, now turn to embracing Chinese government, although they are not satisfied with CCP.

Falun Gong, Free Tibet, pro democracy dissidents etc, all get a lot of supports from west governments, including media and financial support; but they all share poor reputation, if not notorious, in Chinese societies who know both sides stories. Even CCP found the catholicon: let the dissidents go to west democratic countries. Then all the influence of these dissidents will die out, at the same time, CCP avoided dispute with west in human rights etc. In past 30 years, no dissident was successful in getting support from Chinese societies.

Cyclops,

If you would rather not take me seriously and prefer to believe that I am a Chinese bloke who works for the CPP and has to get special government clearance to post here, then that is your prerogative.

However, I repeat the offer I made to Expat Journalist: I will readily give permission to either Grahame Young or Susan Prior to confirm that I am exactly who I say I am: Western, female, journo now into her third year of living and working in China where I teach at a University.

Thus my experience is not "extensive" but does have the advantage of having been gained through living and working here. It will also clear your mind of the idea that: "[You] appear to rely solely on the web for your comment".

I am at a loss as to how you arrive at the conclusions that I "hold [myself] out as the only one capable of sorting through the mire of China web reporting". I read back over my posts and consider I made it abundantly clear that I was merely illustrating how web sources can be manipulated to back up differing points of view.

My objections to lack of balance hold true in regard to any subject, not just China as I also made perfectly clear.

I remain at a lost to know why I am continually being accused of railing at, deriding or in any other way insulting Arthur. I don't even know the man. He put an article out into the public domain. I commented on it.

It was a valid comment regarding provenance and anyone who has ever written for the public domain would recognise this.

Co-incidentally those who have been so shrill in their denunciations have a) never before posted on OLO, b) posted only on Arthur's threads.

If I WAS into conspiracy theories I would probably assume that these posters have some personal agenda which drives their rather over-heated and highly imaginative responses to my posts.

Centra Three Gorges Data

Your claim that "most based on pure scientific international periodicals" is incorrect.

China began seeking funding from the world's financial markets in the 1990s. World Bank, Asian Development Bank, aid and loan facilities from many countries plus international commercial banks were but a few. Many seminars were held in China and major global commercial centres.

Construction of a dam this size is not just an exercise in civil and mechanical engineering. It is a highly complex undertaking requiring detailed multi disciplinary input beyond dam design and construction.

Potential lenders and investors subjected the concept to detailed investigation that included expert opinion in geology, hydrology, seismology, soil and water sciences, environmental sciences, meteorology, demographics, logistics, town planning and infrastructure development, economics to name but a few.

3GD is the world's most scrutinized dam project with information stored in databases spread across the world (not just international periodicals). These include confidential corporate, consultancy and individual professional's databases not available on the net. Assessment of any project of this magnitude does not rely on the data, calculations or assumption provided by the client. Extensive independent assessments range from on ground inspections, analysis of logs and methodologies used, to remote sensing and imagery plus research through available current and historical data. This is not only relative to the Yangtze itself, but also includes the contributing seismic and catchment factors of the Three Parallel Rivers region and the Qinghai Tibet plateau as well as the projected economic planning and returns from the dam itself. Much of the projections have been proven correct, even underestimated. Seismic activity, other than that from the reservoir water itself, has yet to be experienced. The monitoring is ongoing and data is continually updated from reliable technical sources, networking and regular site visits.

Arthur Thomas

Centra on Yarlung Tsangpo Data

Included in the 7th and 8th 5-Year Plans, it is part of the budget and planning for the Western Route of the SNWDP and expenditure is incorporated in the latest 11th 5-Year Plan.

Since first announced there has been considerable interest in this project and China has sought foreign advice on several related matters.

Your conclusions unfortunately are over simplistic and do not address the multiple inputs that contribute to the highly complex dynamics of a river from headwaters to delta. The flow of course is not constant year round. There are also substantial problems to be addressed in the transfer of the flow to the Yellow and possibly the option of the Yangtze headwaters.

China is already experiencing severe problems on many of its major rivers by failing to address many problems. Sanmenxia is only just one prime example while downstream from 3GD the Gezhouba reservoir and the Yangtze itself are experiencing the problems of reduced velocities and sedimentation.

Arthur Thomas