China sweeps aside civilians in rush for hydropower

[Ray]

One would be myopic to consider that those who address 'progress and development', keeping in view the environmental impact and human costs, are 'nincompoops'.

The presbyopic are those who look at 'progress and development' in terms of dollars, cents and yuans and not in terms of human and environmental costs.

To believe that creating dams and industry is positive development is a rather lopsided and dull witted manner of addressing progress.

Progress is indeed essential, but it has to be cost productive in a holistic manner.

The fact that China is now spending huge sums on battling smog and foul air related diseases due to industrialisation is hardly progress without a heavy cost. China's pollution costs $112B in annual health care (http://content.usatoday.com/communi...r-pollution-hikes-health-costs/1#.Unc7JfnI0a8).

What are the human costs when Dams are constructed?

The Jinsha River Valley & the drainage is as below:

It may be worthwhile to read this

Decade River Project 2010 (7) Environmental Impact Assesment on the Jinsha River
http://eng.greensos.cn/Content.aspx?articleId=1163&c=78

The General impacts of dams are as below.

Villages are lost and so are farmlands and areas on which locals are dependent on their livelihood.

Would compensation (and it is never fair) be adequate? What about a livelihood means? Would it be possible for a farmer to suddenly become a factory hand and have the same expertise or job satisfaction as having been a successful farmer or a fisherman? What would be the mental trauma of a successful and well to do farmer being saddled as a second rate helping hand in a factory, on a paltry pay and being continuously yelled at for incompetence?

What about the immediate family of the displaced farmer? Would they find jobs that match their skills or would they too be a square peg in a round hole and be satisfied at being taken to be rustic dolts? And the education of the children.

What about the social effects of having lived with neighbours known for ages and being cast asunder? What about the debts that have to be paid to locals or collecting money from the loans that given to others? Those who are not aware of dislocations would not understand the huge social disarray displacement causes, and therefore satisfy themselves with the 'benefits' and razzle dazzle that 'progress and development' promises to bring.

The other effects that have serious repercussions on the national ecology and economy are as below.

What is missed out is that the dam wall itself blocks fish migrations, which in some cases and with some species completely separate spawning habitats from rearing habitats. The dam also traps sediments, which are critical for maintaining physical processes and habitats downstream of the dam (include the maintenance of productive deltas, barrier islands, fertile floodplains and coastal wetlands).

Another significant and obvious impact is the transformation upstream of the dam from a free-flowing river ecosystem to an artificial slack-water reservoir habitat. Changes in temperature, chemical composition, dissolved oxygen levels and the physical properties of a reservoir are often not suitable to the aquatic plants and animals that evolved with a given river system. Indeed, reservoirs often host non-native and invasive species (e.g. snails, algae, predatory fish) that further undermine the river's natural communities of plants and animals.

The alteration of a river's flow and sediment transport downstream of a dam often causes the greatest sustained environmental impacts. Life in and around a river evolves and is conditioned on the timing and quantities of river flow. Disrupted and altered water flows can be as severe as completely de-watering river reaches and the life they contain. Yet even subtle changes in the quantity and timing of water flows impact aquatic and riparian life, which can unravel the ecological web of a river system.

A dam also holds back sediments that would naturally replenish downstream ecosystems. When a river is deprived of its sediment load, it seeks to recapture it by eroding the downstream river bed and banks (which can undermine bridges and other riverbank structures, as well as riverside woodlands). Riverbeds downstream of dams are typically eroded by several meters within the decade of first closing a dam; the damage can extend for tens or even hundreds of kilometers below a dam.

Riverbed deepening (or "incising") will also lower groundwater tables along a river, lowering the water table accessible to plant roots (and to human communities drawing water from wells) . Altering the riverbed also reduces habitat for fish that spawn in river bottoms, and for invertebrates.

In aggregate, dammed rivers have also impacted processes in the broader biosphere. Most reservoirs, especially those in the tropics, are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (a recent study pegged global greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs on par with that of the aviation industry, about 4% of human-caused GHG emissions). Recent studies on the Congo River have demonstrated that the sediment and nutrient flow from the Congo drives biological processes far into the Atlantic Ocean, including serving as a carbon sink for atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Large dams have led to the extinction of many fish and other aquatic species, the disappearance of birds in floodplains, huge losses of forest, wetland and farmland, erosion of coastal deltas, and many other unmitigated impacts.

Variations in moisture percentage, temperature and air body movements of air caused by the big stationary water body differentiate microclima related to region topography. In addition, regional scaled climatic changes can be observed. These alterations may seem not very harmful for human health, but they are notable for many plants and animals. Their secondary effects influence human being.

Progress and development is necessary, but it also requires to be carefully chalked out.

For those who do not understand the human cost and trauma, it is advised that they may seen the Bengali film 'Subarnarekha' directed by the famed Ritwick Ghatak appended below. It is heart wrenching and real!


It has English subtitles.

 

[bennedose]

does that make India's relocation different?

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2

Yes. Very different because the right to protest ensures delays and raises the compensation to an amount that is acceptable to most. The stragglers get screwed exactly like in China.

If one really wants to compare objectively, there has to be an open system where people are allowed to protest and the court records and hearings regarding those protests should be available. This is a terribly slow process. The danger is that development wil not keep pace with increase in population and that population rise will always outpace this slow development with consensus but that is the path India has chosen.

China has chosen to fast track these things by sweeping away opposition. In a sense China has burned the candle at both ends to get more light. On the one hand population growth was curbed by coercion and development projects are forced on populations without consensus. The net effect is very quick development and amazing changes. Since the world feels that western style lifestyles are the best, the changes in China are stated to be equal to the best.

Where all this will lead in 30 years remains to be seen. Today's cockiness can be tomorrows shame.

IndexMundi has this age structure for China:

Age structure:
0-14 years: 17.4% (male 125,528,983/female 107,668,285)
15-24 years: 16.1% (male 113,504,233/female 102,285,206)
25-54 years: 46.5% (male 319,710,444/female 305,378,723)

And this for India

Age structure:
0-14 years: 29.3% (male 187,386,162/female 165,345,284)
15-24 years: 18.2% (male 116,019,042/female 103,660,359)
25-54 years: 40.2% (male 249,017,538/female 235,042,251)

In 20 years over half of China's population will be over 50 years while about 35% will be in the 25-50 productive working years

For India the corresponding figures are about 40% above 50 years and 45% working

That means that China will have to invest more in care of the elderly. The cocky warriors of today will be doddering fuddy duddies by that time. It's not a long time - all of us will live to see it come. India will have to invest more on education and employment. Like China has done, India can choose to employ an extra few million men in security services and the military - so the ability to occupy territory and put men into a war will be enhanced for India in 20 years, and it will be declining for China.

The demographics of India are necessarily more "normal" because there is no coercion, only "encouragement" to have fewer children. The Chinese have already damaged their demographic distribution. The number of children born per woman is 1.55 for China and 2.58 for India. That definitely means that India's population will overtake China's population, but will contain more young and fit-to-work people in the medium term. If China reverses its population policy a lot of things will change, but the effects will be seen only after 30 years.

Every time any Chinese problem is mentioned I see a tendency to immediately change the subject to India's problems. Some people even think that is good debate LOL! India may have serious problems, but if we are talking about China it is totally uninformative to talk about India's problems. China too has big problems looming in the future. Cockiness won't cut it.

 

[happy]

One would be myopic to consider that those who address 'progress and development', keeping in view the environmental impact and human costs, are 'nincompoops'.

The presbyopic are those who look at 'progress and development' in terms of dollars, cents and yuans and not in terms of human and environmental costs.

To believe that creating dams and industry is positive development is a rather lopsided and dull witted manner of addressing progress.

Progress is indeed essential, but it has to be cost productive in a holistic manner.

The fact that China is now spending huge sums on battling smog and foul air related diseases due to industrialisation is hardly progress without a heavy cost. China's pollution costs $112B in annual health care (MIT: China's pollution costs $112B in annual health care).

What are the human costs when Dams are constructed?

The Jinsha River Valley & the drainage is as below:

It may be worthwhile to read this

Decade River Project 2010 (7) Environmental Impact Assesment on the Jinsha River
River Decade Project

The General impacts of dams are as below.

Villages are lost and so are farmlands and areas on which locals are dependent on their livelihood.

Would compensation (and it is never fair) be adequate? What about a livelihood means? Would it be possible for a farmer to suddenly become a factory hand and have the same expertise or job satisfaction as having been a successful farmer or a fisherman? What would be the mental trauma of a successful and well to do farmer being saddled as a second rate helping hand in a factory, on a paltry pay and being continuously yelled at for incompetence?

What about the immediate family of the displaced farmer? Would they find jobs that match their skills or would they too be a square peg in a round hole and be satisfied at being taken to be rustic dolts? And the education of the children.

What about the social effects of having lived with neighbours known for ages and being cast asunder? What about the debts that have to be paid to locals or collecting money from the loans that given to others? Those who are not aware of dislocations would not understand the huge social disarray displacement causes, and therefore satisfy themselves with the 'benefits' and razzle dazzle that 'progress and development' promises to bring.

The other effects that have serious repercussions on the national ecology and economy are as below.

What is missed out is that the dam wall itself blocks fish migrations, which in some cases and with some species completely separate spawning habitats from rearing habitats. The dam also traps sediments, which are critical for maintaining physical processes and habitats downstream of the dam (include the maintenance of productive deltas, barrier islands, fertile floodplains and coastal wetlands).

Another significant and obvious impact is the transformation upstream of the dam from a free-flowing river ecosystem to an artificial slack-water reservoir habitat. Changes in temperature, chemical composition, dissolved oxygen levels and the physical properties of a reservoir are often not suitable to the aquatic plants and animals that evolved with a given river system. Indeed, reservoirs often host non-native and invasive species (e.g. snails, algae, predatory fish) that further undermine the river's natural communities of plants and animals.

The alteration of a river's flow and sediment transport downstream of a dam often causes the greatest sustained environmental impacts. Life in and around a river evolves and is conditioned on the timing and quantities of river flow. Disrupted and altered water flows can be as severe as completely de-watering river reaches and the life they contain. Yet even subtle changes in the quantity and timing of water flows impact aquatic and riparian life, which can unravel the ecological web of a river system.

A dam also holds back sediments that would naturally replenish downstream ecosystems. When a river is deprived of its sediment load, it seeks to recapture it by eroding the downstream river bed and banks (which can undermine bridges and other riverbank structures, as well as riverside woodlands). Riverbeds downstream of dams are typically eroded by several meters within the decade of first closing a dam; the damage can extend for tens or even hundreds of kilometers below a dam.

Riverbed deepening (or "incising") will also lower groundwater tables along a river, lowering the water table accessible to plant roots (and to human communities drawing water from wells) . Altering the riverbed also reduces habitat for fish that spawn in river bottoms, and for invertebrates.

In aggregate, dammed rivers have also impacted processes in the broader biosphere. Most reservoirs, especially those in the tropics, are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (a recent study pegged global greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs on par with that of the aviation industry, about 4% of human-caused GHG emissions). Recent studies on the Congo River have demonstrated that the sediment and nutrient flow from the Congo drives biological processes far into the Atlantic Ocean, including serving as a carbon sink for atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Large dams have led to the extinction of many fish and other aquatic species, the disappearance of birds in floodplains, huge losses of forest, wetland and farmland, erosion of coastal deltas, and many other unmitigated impacts.

Variations in moisture percentage, temperature and air body movements of air caused by the big stationary water body differentiate microclima related to region topography. In addition, regional scaled climatic changes can be observed. These alterations may seem not very harmful for human health, but they are notable for many plants and animals. Their secondary effects influence human being.

Progress and development is necessary, but it also requires to be carefully chalked out.

For those who do not understand the human cost and trauma, it is advised that they may seen the Bengali film 'Subarnarekha' directed by the famed Ritwick Ghatak. It is heart wrenching and real!

Sir, you have left out earthquakes. But, we know all this very well because we weigh pros and cons and until we reach a consensus the most important projects are also stalled.

But, do you honestly think that a Commie would agree with all this ?? IMO NO !!!

They are ass bent on solving the most immediate problem with whatever means possible irrespective of repercussions.

 

[Ray]

Sir, you have left out earthquakes. But, we know all this very well because we weigh pros and cons and until we reach a consensus the most important projects are also stalled.

But, do you honestly think that a Commie would agree with all this ?? IMO NO !!!

They are ass bent on solving the most immediate problem with whatever means possible irrespective of repercussions.

Actually, it really does not worry me if anyone agrees or disagrees.

I tend to put the issues as I know it, and use links extensively to back up the facts that I mention so that it does not appear that I am on a fanciful trip on gossamer wings, living in a silver woven filigree world !

 

[bennedose]

Villages are lost and so are farmlands and areas on which locals are dependent on their livelihood.

Would compensation (and it is never fair) be adequate? What about a livelihood means? Would it be possible for a farmer to suddenly become a factory hand and have the same expertise or job satisfaction as having been a successful farmer or a fisherman? What would be the mental trauma of a successful and well to do farmer being saddled as a second rate helping hand in a factory, on a paltry pay and being continuously yelled at for incompetence?

What about the immediate family of the displaced farmer? Would they find jobs that match their skills or would they too be a square peg in a round hole and be satisfied at being taken to be rustic dolts? And the education of the children.

What about the social effects of having lived with neighbours known for ages and being cast asunder? What about the debts that have to be paid to locals or collecting money from the loans that given to others? Those who are not aware of dislocations would not understand the huge social disarray displacement causes, and therefore satisfy themselves with the 'benefits' and razzle dazzle that 'progress and development' promises to bring.

One of the problems here Ray is that the facts you have posted tend to go off the scale of knowledge of most people. They are sociological issues that are generally regarded with an "I'll bury my head in the sand and the issue will remain invisible to me" attitude. Be that as it may - societies are the sum total of a history of life and survival for long periods of time. In China there must still be villages where society has survived for centuries, not just decades. This is certainly true for India. Societies develop habits and lifestyles based on memories of climatic events and other disasters. A given society may be very poor or not modern, but they retain some insights and knowledge which exists as their "culture". When you wipe out that culture you don't even know what you are wiping out. Unknown unknowns are being erased and this is what China did in the cultural revolution and its aftermath - including Deng's reforms.

Displacing people and putting them in a new environment destroys a lot of cultural memories but can retain many "negative" features that were sought to be erased. For all the talk about open defecation - the fact is about 200 to 300 million Chinese still do open defecation. These people are largely poor and rural and when they need to take a dump they take a dump in an open area where the crap simply degenerates over a period of time. If you shift this chap into a concrete jungle what does he do when he needs to take a dump? He may learn to use a toilet in his new home - but in a railway platform - when he is in trouble he will likely do exactly what was posted by you in a photo in another thread. In a clean railway platform this man is "uncultured". But he is simply continuing the culture he knew - of taking a dump anywhere when needed. It is the forcible transposition of this man into a "western environment" that makes him take a dump on the platform - the most convenient open space where is was always accustomed to crapping.

But the Chinese are ashamed of some strange things. they have taken western criticisms to heart and have simply tried to wipe out their old ways. They have done a great deal of damage to an old and intelligent civilization in a crass hurry to copy the west and be admired in the west. Every act of shitting requires a flush and every flush takes at least 10 liters of water. That is 10 billion liters per day for 1 billion Chinese - that is 10 cubic kilometers of water per simply to flush one shit per day per Chinaman. Since only 700 million Chinese have toilets - China will have to find an extra 2 or 3 cubic kilometers of water per day simply to proudly say that Indians shit in the open while Chinese shit in toilets. Now where is that water going to come from. And where will it go?

Development has its own problems and "fast development" simply to appear good and be praised adds an extra layer of issues that were solved over a century or more in the west. Western culture is the product of several centuries of evolution. Chinese culture used to be the product of millennia of evolution - and they are wiping that clean to copy paste western culture and imagine that it can be done in a few decades.

 

[ice berg]

If (by some remote chance) a Chinese felt that his quality of life was made worse by his having to be kicked out of his home/village and housed in glass fronted flats. What could he do?

Nothing

One could assume that Indians and Chinese are a different species and that Indians are fractious and the Chinese simply band together and 100,000 people simply agree that they should move out.

However they are as human as each other and have similar likes, dislikes, joys and sorrows. So what recourse does a citizen have if he dislikes what the government is doing. I would like to see one poll or one interview of people who have been moved out saying that all is hunky dory.

Of course I want electricity, but in a country that claims equality for all citizens, clearly some citizens are less equal than others. This accusation can be made of every country in the world - so why let off China lightly in this regard. China is, according to most reports, far worse than most countries in the way they coerce people and those people have no right to protest.

No idea what you talking about. There are hundred thousands of protests in China every year.

I hear too many people saying "Do not underestimate China". How about a bit of honesty and not overestimating them and pointing out glaring issues as and when they do exist. In 30 years there will be more old men in China than any other country in the world because of the forced one-child policy. It will be interesting to see what sort of coercion will happen and who will coerce whom in China.

How did Japan cope with the age problem? And for the record the one-child policy is been abandoned as we speak. Try google.

If one looks at what the tinpot politburo is doing - it is perfectly logical and not at all surprising. But it is also not right. Over the last 30 to 40 years the communist power brokers have a well thought out plan to simply employ China's huge population to work, become "prosperous", build cities, roads and railways and shift people from villages into prefabricated cities. By itself the idea sounds good because the Chinese too bought the idea that what is "western" is good. They rejected their own culture and past to copy the west and fast forward their country to achieve western ideals of standards of prosperity. An important part of the fast-forwarding was forcibly reducing population growth rate by a one child policy as well as strict coercive rules about migration, travel and settlement within China.

All this has made what is visible of China (what the Chinese want everyone to see) a shiny westernized nation., Since the west have always claimed that their model is the best, they have no way of arguing and saying that China is not good by catching up with western styles of living. China is trying to copy and catch up with the US in every visible parameter, but it is the invisibles that make the difference. China is now competing for resources with the west and the west can be said to be facing serious competition for the first time, and facing the possibility of shrinking of western economies for the first time in many decades.

But China will face the same sort of competition from other countries that China itself is offering to the west. That is where the crunch comes. China started competing with the US after they (the US) had achieved almost uniform prosperity. China is now facing pressures that threaten to slow it long before it has achieved the uniform development and prosperity that the west achieved. This means that about half of China's 1.3 billion have a taste of those greatly admired westernized lives, concrete jungles, consumer goods etc, while another 650 million are still living somewhat like 700 million Indians, 100 million Pakis and 100 million Bangladeshis.

And while the prosperous 650 million in China may be satisfied with what their lives have brought them - it is the other 650-700 million that are still being coerced and pushed around without receiving the benefits that others have received. Whether the Chinese admit it or not these people need to be handled with some care and sensitivity. I am sure that China could continue to grow provided there is peace. But if China starts a war that is bound to pinch its economy, its internal progress is going to get hit. I am sure the tinpot politburo know that they could face outbursts of internal rebellion if economic growth stagnates - especially if it stagnates due to war started by China.

Agree most of your points.

India faces many of the same problems as China, but has taken a far slower "consent and consensus" route. This allows internal security to be easier and less coercive because internal policies are not forced. It also slows economic growth. But the Indian model does work, albeit slowly. There are some things that one can learn from China and some things that must not be copied from China. China has not done everything right. In terms of India-China relations there are some opportunities that India needs to take - and one of the things to do is to make a military and military industry that makes it unacceptably costly for China to oppose. This can only have benefits for India in the long term in terms of technology, employment and security. China may or may not suffer more internal strife - but in case it does we must be prepared for a politburo that wants to fight a war over resources or to try and divert attention from internal strife.

Not entirely agree here. You are implying the Indian way is somehow "consent and consensus" which couldnt be further away from truth.
Anyone following indian progress in the past decade will know that it is full of red tapes, high level of corruptions and indeciveness. Nowhere is your "consent and consensus". The votes can be bought and are been bought. I assume the term "votebank" is something you are familiar with.

And your theory of how country waging wars to divert internal strife does not correlate well with known chinese behavious.
The CCP didnt started any wars in 89. They were really close getting toppled.

 

[amoy]

Three Gorges Dam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia was first initiated by an American. ROC government (then based in Chongqing the wartime capital) invited the expert and did some research. But that plan was shelved owing to continuous wars. Debates lasted decades in PRC.

In 1944, the United States Bureau of Reclamation chief design engineer, John L. Savage, surveyed the area and drew up a dam proposal for the 'Yangtze River Project'.[17] Some 54 Chinese engineers went to the U.S. for training.

Before the Dam was completed, Wuhan China's "largest" city suffered from floods year and year

An important function of the dam is to control flooding, which is a major problem for the seasonal river of the Yangtze. Millions of people live downstream of the dam, with many large, important cities like Wuhan, Nanjing, and Shanghai situated adjacent to the river. Plenty of farm land and China's most important industrial area are built beside the river.

The reservoir's flood storage capacity is 22 cubic kilometres (18,000,000 acre·ft). This capacity will reduce the frequency of major downstream flooding from once every ten years to once every 100 years. The dam is expected to minimize the effect of even a "super" flood.[80][81] In 1954 the river flooded 193,000 km2 (74,518 sq mi), killing 33,169 people and forcing 18,884,000 people to move. The flood covered Wuhan, a city of eight million people, for over three months, and the Jingguang Railway was out of service for more than 100 days

The memorial rilievo for PLA efforts in 1954 flood

Thanks to the Dam, apart from hydropower it generates, no more flood hitting the downstream incl. Wuhan in addition. . And Chongqing now is China's largest inland port

 

[bennedose]

Not entirely agree here. You are implying the Indian way is somehow "consent and consensus" which couldnt be further away from truth.
Anyone following indian progress in the past decade will know that it is full of red tapes, high level of corruptions and indeciveness. Nowhere is your "consent and consensus". The votes can be bought and are been bought. I assume the term "votebank" is something you are familiar with.

And your theory of how country waging wars to divert internal strife does not correlate well with known chinese behavious.
The CCP didnt started any wars in 89. They were really close getting toppled.

The Indian way IS consent and consensus. Indecisiveness is a consequence of lack of consensus. Corruption would be there in any situation or any country.

It is OK to have 20/20 hindsight and say that "war did not happen when the conditions I stated were present". But that is not a useful pointer to dictate Indian behavior simply because India has been exposed to wars after Indian leaders have naively assumed that there would be no war. It is better to prepare for war. It makes peace more likely, and could make the outcome of war less negative.

Today's news is that a Chinese military commander in Xinjiang has been replaced. This may be connected to the Tiananmen car incident. China puts a lot of resources into internal security to guard against "internal enemies". At the same time China makes aggressive statements about Japan, the US and Vietnam, and sometimes India. There are minor border incidents with India which are usually seen in India in the context of China's belligerence. China appears like an aggressive militarized state to many outsiders. And it is aggressive towards outsiders as well as people within its own borders. This gives the impression of a leadership that is constantly paranoid and afraid of being deposed. It is right for others to be prepared for war with a country whose government behaves like a cornered rat. If China does not want war and wants peaceful rise it has to behave in a way that appears like a country prepared to rise peacefully. Or else everyone will prepare for war and war may be imposed on china by people who feel they need to hit China. This is not that China will lose the war - but it will hit China's image and its economy - and that in turn will shake up the communist politburo. So China too must tread carefully and think of how it appears to others.

There were a lot of things that Mao and "his clique" did not do right and not all of it has been corrected. What he did right was putting China on the path of unity (even if forced) and self reliance. His successors inculcated deep pride of China among current day Chinese. These are all positives. But they hide the negatives. Those negatives are there and I think Indians should be informed about the negatives so that they can learn to avoid the mistakes China made and not simply copy everything imagining it was all right. Nothing is completely right or wrong, but one must choose with care.

 

[p2prada]

One would be myopic to consider that those who address 'progress and development', keeping in view the environmental impact and human costs, are 'nincompoops'.

The presbyopic are those who look at 'progress and development' in terms of dollars, cents and yuans and not in terms of human and environmental costs.

To believe that creating dams and industry is positive development is a rather lopsided and dull witted manner of addressing progress.

Progress is indeed essential, but it has to be cost productive in a holistic manner.

Believe it or not, it has indeed lead to huge amounts of progress. We simply don't have enough data to prove that on forums. Every single watt of electricity that comes from dams is more essential and profitable than what the land delivers as produce.

Cities wouldn't exist as they are today if it wasn't for our ability to build dams.

The fact that China is now spending huge sums on battling smog and foul air related diseases due to industrialisation is hardly progress without a heavy cost. China's pollution costs $112B in annual health care (MIT: China's pollution costs $112B in annual health care).

This is the cost of progress.

The Great Smog of 1952

This is London in 1952. 12000 people died due to immediate respiratory symptoms in just a few weeks. The death toll was greater than the immediate death toll in Bhopal after the accident that we all know of.

What was blamed for it? Pollution. This was over 60 years ago. Look at London today. One generation suddenly suffers the ill-effects of the so-called progress. However the next generation immediately fixes the issue or becomes accustomed to it. Had London not faced this, they wouldn't be where they are today.

The Chinese cities are not even close to facing the situation that Londoners faced in 1952. And they are talking huge steps to remedy the issue, one of those is higher reliance on hydro-electric, nuclear and other renewable energy sources.

I don't know if you remember this but OOE and I had a discussion about using submarines a few years ago. He had the staunchest of opinions that India will have to lose a submarine in an accident to actually learn how to use them. I disagreed. But it was obvious that age and experience trumps youth and ignorance. This was demonstrated when we lost our Kilo class in our own harbor. The London experience is something China is facing today, although to a much lesser degree. Eventually Indian cities are guaranteed to face this type of a situation in the next few years. Lucky for us we will be able to use better technologies to lessen the burden. Yes, this is the cost of progress. One generation will end up suffering someday, but the successive generations can aim for a better life after that. This has been proven time and time again.

What are the human costs when Dams are constructed?

You can't take one-off situations to make a point. Some projects are bound to fail, some are bound to be successful.

Would it be possible for a farmer to suddenly become a factory hand and have the same expertise or job satisfaction as having been a successful farmer or a fisherman?

This is a very personal opinion. You are trying to put a label on a person without knowing him. While there are a lot of farmers who are very successful and happy with their lifestyle, there would be a much larger number who are less than happy with such a lifestyle. Not every farmer is happy.

What would be the mental trauma of a successful and well to do farmer being saddled as a second rate helping hand in a factory, on a paltry pay and being continuously yelled at for incompetence?

What about the larger and more countless young individuals who work as farmhands and are shouted at for incompetence by some egoistic farmer who is one of the successful lots. Would you value the livelihood of this one farmer more than the many unhappy farmhands under his care? At least a second-rate industrial worker with paltry pay will earn more than a young farmhand who lives on subsistence, while at the same time he can enjoy greater govt benefits as part of the industry.

What about the immediate family of the displaced farmer? Would they find jobs that match their skills or would they too be a square peg in a round hole and be satisfied at being taken to be rustic dolts? And the education of the children.

It is not a perfect life. There is no guarantee that you can claim all of the people who get resettled are unhappy.

What is missed out is that the dam wall itself blocks fish migrations, which in some cases and with some species completely separate spawning habitats from rearing habitats. The dam also traps sediments, which are critical for maintaining physical processes and habitats downstream of the dam (include the maintenance of productive deltas, barrier islands, fertile floodplains and coastal wetlands).

Dams have fishways and fishladders.

Another significant and obvious impact is the transformation upstream of the dam from a free-flowing river ecosystem to an artificial slack-water reservoir habitat. Changes in temperature, chemical composition, dissolved oxygen levels and the physical properties of a reservoir are often not suitable to the aquatic plants and animals that evolved with a given river system. Indeed, reservoirs often host non-native and invasive species (e.g. snails, algae, predatory fish) that further undermine the river's natural communities of plants and animals.

This goes both ways. Reservoirs are known to have both helped and spoiled the ecology of the area.

The alteration of a river's flow and sediment transport downstream of a dam often causes the greatest sustained environmental impacts. Life in and around a river evolves and is conditioned on the timing and quantities of river flow. Disrupted and altered water flows can be as severe as completely de-watering river reaches and the life they contain. Yet even subtle changes in the quantity and timing of water flows impact aquatic and riparian life, which can unravel the ecological web of a river system.

A dam also holds back sediments that would naturally replenish downstream ecosystems. When a river is deprived of its sediment load, it seeks to recapture it by eroding the downstream river bed and banks (which can undermine bridges and other riverbank structures, as well as riverside woodlands). Riverbeds downstream of dams are typically eroded by several meters within the decade of first closing a dam; the damage can extend for tens or even hundreds of kilometers below a dam.

Riverbed deepening (or "incising") will also lower groundwater tables along a river, lowering the water table accessible to plant roots (and to human communities drawing water from wells) . Altering the riverbed also reduces habitat for fish that spawn in river bottoms, and for invertebrates.

In aggregate, dammed rivers have also impacted processes in the broader biosphere. Most reservoirs, especially those in the tropics, are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (a recent study pegged global greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs on par with that of the aviation industry, about 4% of human-caused GHG emissions). Recent studies on the Congo River have demonstrated that the sediment and nutrient flow from the Congo drives biological processes far into the Atlantic Ocean, including serving as a carbon sink for atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Large dams have led to the extinction of many fish and other aquatic species, the disappearance of birds in floodplains, huge losses of forest, wetland and farmland, erosion of coastal deltas, and many other unmitigated impacts.

Variations in moisture percentage, temperature and air body movements of air caused by the big stationary water body differentiate microclima related to region topography. In addition, regional scaled climatic changes can be observed. These alterations may seem not very harmful for human health, but they are notable for many plants and animals. Their secondary effects influence human being.

Progress and development is necessary, but it also requires to be carefully chalked out.

I don't disagree. But for every dam constructed, which has both positive and negative impact on the environment, we need lesser fossil fuel and gas fired plants, which have ZERO positive impact on the environment.

Better methods of construction, better environmental studies like simulations and modeling and physical studies can help decrease the negative impact of dams. Better awareness and reach can help combat the psychological issues that crop up during and after resettlement. But for every dam we build we lessen our reliance on the "real poisons" that cause significantly much, much greater impact on the environment. Hydro-electricity is considered a manna as compared to fossil fuels. So we can't forget that either.

 

[anoop_mig25]

Comparing the partition to a rehabilitation program for dam construction isn't justified, especially considering a country like China is four times to five times richer and their rural population is 50% smaller.

The partition killed two million people. But in dam resettlement we are talking about a maximum of a million people being displaced but with a resettlement program planned at the same time and no one is killing each other in the process. Partition was an utter failure as a resettlement project.

Most of China's projects come with World Bank support which has a capable resettlement policy. It is not perfect, but the central and state govts start providing some villages the incentive for the resettled families to urbanize faster rather than lead a subsistence life. The question is whether they adapt to such a life, or even a subsistence life, elsewhere without affecting their quality of life. But that is left to their individual prowess. It is not so different in India too.

China has one advantahe they can do away with human rights group .Indian central or state gov donot have this advantages.

Eg arunchal pradesh where present gov wants to construct dam around bhramputra so as to gain first right but peresnt human rights (pro-china) are against it and persent gov is silent on it

 

[amoy]

China has one advantahe they can do away with human rights group .Indian central or state gov donot have this advantages.

Eg arunchal pradesh where present gov wants to construct dam around bhramputra so as to gain first right but peresnt human rights (pro-china) are against it and persent gov is silent on it

r u talking abt the same India we know of? Did protesters top Kulam kudan?

 

[ice berg]

The Indian way IS consent and consensus. Indecisiveness is a consequence of lack of consensus. Corruption would be there in any situation or any country.

Now that is a contradiction. Different states have different policies. Just look how economic policies and land acquisitions across different indian states.

It is OK to have 20/20 hindsight and say that "war did not happen when the conditions I stated were present". But that is not a useful pointer to dictate Indian behavior simply because India has been exposed to wars after Indian leaders have naively assumed that there would be no war. It is better to prepare for war. It makes peace more likely, and could make the outcome of war less negative.

Now you are making excuses. China has faced more wars with far more impact than India. Wars are not an excuse not providing needed reforms.

Today's news is that a Chinese military commander in Xinjiang has been replaced. This may be connected to the Tiananmen car incident. China puts a lot of resources into internal security to guard against "internal enemies". At the same time China makes aggressive statements about Japan, the US and Vietnam, and sometimes India. There are minor border incidents with India which are usually seen in India in the context of China's belligerence. China appears like an aggressive militarized state to many outsiders. And it is aggressive towards outsiders as well as people within its own borders. This gives the impression of a leadership that is constantly paranoid and afraid of being deposed. It is right for others to be prepared for war with a country whose government behaves like a cornered rat. If China does not want war and wants peaceful rise it has to behave in a way that appears like a country prepared to rise peacefully. Or else everyone will prepare for war and war may be imposed on china by people who feel they need to hit China. This is not that China will lose the war - but it will hit China's image and its economy - and that in turn will shake up the communist politburo. So China too must tread carefully and think of how it appears to others.

You are confusing foreign policies and statement with long term policies. "aggresiveness" is a matter of perception. How many indians, japanese or others have been killed by chinese for the past 3-4 decades? Have a single shoot been fired between Indian and China for the past 3-4 dacades? They are the ground realities no matter how you perceive chinese behavious personally.
Not disagree with you regarding the peaceful raise part. However there is a line between peacefull raise and getting kicked left, center and right. From the chinese perspective, they only have one unsolved dispute on land, with India. The rest is regarding to SLOC on South China Sea. Some food for thought: When Soviet union collapsed in the 90s, the chinese suddenly lost importance with the americans. Instead of US telling her allies to shut up about South China Sea. China was left to fend for her self. Chinese fishmen were routinely killed by PH in the 90s. Soon or later they are tired of paying ransoms and buying guns instead.

There were a lot of things that Mao and "his clique" did not do right and not all of it has been corrected. What he did right was putting China on the path of unity (even if forced) and self reliance. His successors inculcated deep pride of China among current day Chinese. These are all positives. But they hide the negatives. Those negatives are there and I think Indians should be informed about the negatives so that they can learn to avoid the mistakes China made and not simply copy everything imagining it was all right. Nothing is completely right or wrong, but one must choose with care.

See my answer above. The question is not about posting negative news about China. It is about how to present useful insights.
More often I see topics in China subforum which do not improve understandings among DFIs, but are solely as flamebait.
I dont see the educational value in that.
I am sure if you take a look at some of those topics and comments you will realize that.
Another thing lots people react is some of those negative things happends across the globe and is hardly unique for China.

Dont throw stones if you live in a glass house.

I am sure it is possible to present useful news about China and at the same time dont fall into the trap of trying to dictate.
The stereotyping are only increasing from my experience.

 

[drkrn]

How were Uttarakhand floods related to the Tehri Dam? If anything, damns absorb the full fury of the floods. If there is a case against Hydel power, this is not it.

because of miscaluculations(intentional??) from both the government and private players.vast deforestation along river banks added to the fury,had there been enough vegetation situation would have been a lot better.

 

[drkrn]

does that make India's relocation different?

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2

you ask my belief,china pays better
even by using force..

 

[Dovah]

because of miscaluculations(intentional??) from both the government and private players.vast deforestation along river banks added to the fury,had there been enough vegetation situation would have been a lot better.

You think only dams are responsible for deforestation?

 

[bennedose]

See my answer above. The question is not about posting negative news about China. It is about how to present useful insights.
More often I see topics in China subforum which do not improve understandings among DFIs, but are solely as flamebait.
I dont see the educational value in that.

We have a difference of opinion here. What is useful to you is not necessarily useful to me

I am sure if you take a look at some of those topics and comments you will realize that.
Another thing lots people react is some of those negative things happends across the globe and is hardly unique for China.

So what? No need to get defensive and start fillingt the thread with negative things about India. Clearly Chinese cannot stand it if ANYTHING negative is said about China - a fact that encourages me to push buttons to see how you guys react

Dont throw stones if you live in a glass house.

Good try. But no use. You are long on advice but nevertheless very defensive about anything negative about China. You live in the same glass house - you did say negative things happen everywhere -. What makes Chinese so extra anxious to avoid anything negative being said? Clearly there is something extraordinary going on. And I will continue to see exactly what makes you Chinese so sooo upset

I am sure it is possible to present useful news about China and at the same time dont fall into the trap of trying to dictate.
The stereotyping are only increasing from my experience.

Useful to you and me might be different. It's called difference of opinion - something that no Chinese poster on here is able to tolerate.

 

[bennedose]

@ice berg said

You are confusing foreign policies and statement with long term policies. "aggresiveness" is a matter of perception. How many indians, japanese or others have been killed by chinese for the past 3-4 decades? Have a single shoot been fired between Indian and China for the past 3-4 dacades? They are the ground realities no matter how you perceive chinese behavious personally.
Not disagree with you regarding the peaceful raise part. However there is a line between peacefull raise and getting kicked left, center and right. From the chinese perspective, they only have one unsolved dispute on land, with India. The rest is regarding to SLOC on South China Sea. Some food for thought: When Soviet union collapsed in the 90s, the chinese suddenly lost importance with the americans. Instead of US telling her allies to shut up about South China Sea. China was left to fend for her self. Chinese fishmen were routinely killed by PH in the 90s. Soon or later they are tired of paying ransoms and buying guns instead.

Now you are making excuses.

A rapist may think he is making tender love, but the person being raped has a different perception.

How many Indians have been killed by Chinese? Good question. The Indian army has captured 30,000 Kalashnikovs from Pakistani terrorists in Kashmir. The majority are made in China. So whether you get defensive or not Indians are going to hold China responsible and are not going to be taking lame excuses. That is your karma and the Chinese will be made to pay in some way.

Thank you for spelling out the grouses that the Chinese hold. I am aware of them but it is useful to look at that list. I find the Chinese very sensitive to criticism. Over the past few weeks I have had Chinese posters on this board react with mockery, denial, indignation and finally anger and personal abuse for posting the large number of things about China that I find negative. Indians rarely deny that India has problems. Why do Chinese believe that there are no problems in China? Why do Chinese react to all criticism of China by changing the subject to India's problems?

There is some "useful information" here for me. The information that is useful to me is that Chinese posters prefer to drown out any suggestion of negative news about China by simply posting negative news about India. This is a curious fact that I am going to continue to explore.

The standard Chinese reaction to anyone who posts anything negative about China is to say "India has more problems" or "Talk about yourself". If I tell you that your shirt is torn, and you respond by saying "So what, your fly is open" it does not make your torn shirt any better. It only seeks to change the subject from the embarrassing fact of your torn shirt to try and embarrass me about my open fly. That is what many communist Chinese are consistently and predictably doing on here. Is it possible that China employs some people and pays them to do this, to keep the fair name of the government and politburo far from criticism?

 

[bennedose]

r u talking abt the same India we know of? Did protesters top Kulam kudan?

Does China allow protests? Doe China allow photographs of protesters?

If yes please point me to some

 

[amoy]

Does China allow protests? Doe China allow photographs of protesters?

If yes please point me to some

hn here u go just a few clicks away
>>http://www.allvoices.com/contribute...ding-of-nuclear-facility-in-guandong-province
>>China Protest Forcing Nuclear Retreat Shows People Power - Bloomberg

now explain us what happened to kudan kulam nuclear plant in the end?

 

[nimo_cn]

hn here u go just a few clicks away
>>http://www.allvoices.com/contribute...ding-of-nuclear-facility-in-guandong-province
>>China Protest Forcing Nuclear Retreat Shows People Power - Bloomberg

now explain us what happened to kudan kulam in the end?

India is a democracy, buddy!

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2