[Assam] [WaterWatch] Re: Dr Kalam's obsession with DIVERSION of RIVERS

Sat Mar 31 12:41:46 EDT 2007

<proposed 'two-way-flow' canal on a contour map of the terrains where it is expected to hold and distribute the water from high-rainfall areas to the low. A conceptual cross section of the canal, showing the cut-and fill of the hillside and/or excavation and fill of the 15 meter deep X 100 meter wide canal on level ground would be an essential item along with the contour map layout.>
TWO WAY FLOWIn a canal--will mean " no source and no sink"
Where will the water come from?
Where will the water go?
What is the purpose of this stagnant water?
This is what every unclever (like us)  would want to be enlightened .
Mukul C Mahant
Engineer (IIT'57)
guwahati,Assam

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 09:44:42 -0500To: ponchristy1952 at yahoo.com; waterwatch at yahoogroups.comFrom: cmahanta at charter.netCC: assam at assamnet.orgSubject: Re: [Assam] [WaterWatch] Re: Dr Kalam's obsession with DIVERSION of RIVERS

Dear Mr. Ponraj:

Greetings.

I am always available for discussing this subject. But since it is a public matter, I prefer to discuss it publicly only.  I encourage you to be candid and to the point. If I am not mistaken you are an engineer. While I am NOT an engineer (I am in an allied profession, Architecture) I understand topography; excavation,fill and erosion; silting; fundamental concepts of drainage and water flow etc., fairly well.

I am hoping you will be able to persuade Mr. Kamaraj and his cadre of engineering 'experts ' to place in their web-site what you said is already there: A layout of the proposed 'two-way-flow' canal on a contour map of the terrains where it is expected to hold and distribute the water from high-rainfall areas to the low. A conceptual cross section of the canal, showing the cut-and fill of the hillside and/or excavation and fill of the 15 meter deep X 100 meter wide canal on level ground would be an essential item along with the contour map layout.

If you cannot get Mr. Kamaraj's group to do that, perhaps you or your co-supporters of the concept will do that. You can scan the map and cross section concept and request the  Waterwatch website moderator to post it. But a continued refusal of Mr. Kamaraj and his brain -trust to refuse to explain their scheme could mean only one thing: That they don't know what they speak of.

And finally if you are unable to get that done either thru Mr. Kamaraj's expert panel of engineers, or with your own resources, I will be pleased to do that for you. But you will need to provide me with a contour map of a reasonable scale, such as in 2 meter intervals of elevation; something I have been unable to acquire from my many attempts internationally. You don't need to send such a map of the entire sub-continent. A segment encompassing one-kilometer of length of the proposed canal, along with the creeks, channels and rivers that occur in the area, will suffice to get the concept across.

I will be remiss if I did not caution you about the result of any such conceptual contour maps and cross sections: Those who are trained to read these, will take an extremely dim view of the engineering acumen of the people who are proposing it.

Best regards.

cm

At 6:26 PM +0100 3/30/07, ponraj gnanaraj wrote:
Dear Mr.Mahanta,
Allow me to talk to you. Give me your contact details so that I can meet you in person or call you. It is people like you who are interested in the real welfare of our country. I will be back in India on 13th April. But keep writing your questions. Let us build our India.
Bye for now, Yours, G.Ponraj,  30/03/2007cmahanta at charter.net wrote:
*** First off, I was not citing the Aral Sea drying up example in opposition to Sri Kamaraj'sscheme. I cite the other more pertinent issues; like how uninformed the whole premise of the scheme is; on the basis of topoghraphy, on the basis of the enormous destruction it could, if undertaken, bring about and so forth. I also underscored what DineshMishra pointed out about the wisdom or more vaccurately the absence of which, in proposing all those numerous earthen dams the scheme must depend on. Last but not the least was the most basic physical law whose understanding is absent in the proposal that Sudhir Vombatkarte clearly piointed out: That water does NOT flow in the absence of a head, even though I mean it only literally here.I also have this uncanny feeling that the President's name is being falsely dragged into this uterly foolish concept. I cannot imagine that any engineer with an ordinary amount of understanding of the physics of water-flow and understanding of topography would touch the proposal with a ten foot pole. What this proposal means is that wherever this two-way flow canal is built, be it at a 300 m elevation or be it at 500m, it will, of necessity , follow the contours of the terrain it is set in. Thus it will block every river, every creek, every water channel and every depression on the ground in its path that ordinarily would channel the water from higher elevations to the valleys and and plains below. In other words it will DAM everey waterway in its path, creating flood plains and water storage basins upstreams of this structure.
If there ever was a more ridiculous proposal, I have not seen it yet. I have trouble believing the President somehow blessing or supporting it.But I would submit, it just might be me and others like me who is/are lacking a head here; unable to visualize the concept or realize its potential. So once again I suggest that Sri Kamaraj and/or the proponents lay bare the folly of people like this writer by laying out the schematics on an up-to date contour map of the terrain it is proposed for, together with a schematic cross section of this 100 meter wide X 10 ( ?) m deep canal that would hold the water high enough to create enough of a head from water surging into it from its catchment areas upstream and allow it to flow to those water starving areas far away.Thyat is what an engineer worth her salt would start with.cm---- ponraj gnanaraj wrote:> Note: what is the reponse of ponraj gnanaraj to the message Posted by: "Chan Mahanta">> He wrote: Mr. Kamraj and others like him who have peddled a lot of half-truths regarding ILR and now this National Water Ways Project.>> When a lay-person parrots patently untenable ideas in the guise of> technical/engineering/scientific truths, not having a clue what> those might really mean, like our other friend Dr. Kalyanraman used> to; it is one thing. But it is quite another, when these are spouted> by self-described or 'officially recognized 'experts' , be it Mr.> Kamraj or be it Mr. Pandit. Dr Dinesh Mishra gave graphic and tragic examples of it. The mere fact of Mr. Kamraj being able to cite The President's concurrence with his scheme in public is scary. We cannot not remember the SC's verdict regarding ILR, its interpretation by the administration and the fallout along with the expenditures incurred so far is nothing less than a national scandal.>> That brings me to another point: The need to go to the SC or to> petition the PM or the President for resolution of every conflict,> large or small. While it is easy to understand it in light of the> dysfunction of the normal and usual institutions of democratic> governance and the impossibility of forging the political will to the right things thru the specific institutions of state designed to> address these issues, the need to move the SC on such complicated> matters is a dangerous thing in itself. Do their Lordships have the> appropriate resources at their disposal to JUDGE the merits of such> schemes? Can they hold public hearings , receive input from affected> parties, get technical/scientific opinions from trusted and respected voices, obtain trustworthy cost-benefit reports; so on and so forth?>> The right forum for such thorough, public and transparent> examinations on matters of such national importance would be the Lok> Sabha or the Rajya Sabha. On the other hand, if the SC is moved, and> it hands out as verdict without the benefit of a thorough examination of the many factors involved and it happens to be the WRONG verdict, people will be stuck with it for ever, since there is no appeal to an SC verdict. On the other hand a bad decision by the elected bodies can be corrected later, if need be.>> Finally, Dr Mishra pointed out an extremely important element of this NWP canal to be constructed at 500 m elevation ( or 300 m): That it will be a monster earthen dam, from here to eternity. ALL of the terrain surrounding the Brahmaputra valley at such an elevation ( 500 m or even 300m) are up in the mountains where the contours undulate many times within the span of a kilometer, zigzagging in and out from ridges to ravines. So the 100 m wide canal will have to cut into the ridges, scarring the entire> rim of the valley, with massive erosion like man has not seen> anywhere on the face of this planet yet. And on the other side ,> there will have to be even more massive filling of an already sloping> face, which of necessity , will be steep, and will erode even more> dramatically with the onset of the first monsoon. Imagine the silting> of the hundreds of tributaries of the Brahmaputra and the rice
> producing low-lands that will ensue. Silting is one of the primary> causes of the present flooding of the valley to begin with.> And such silting will drown out the rich topsoil of the rich rice> lands, turning them into a clay mire. But the worst is yet to come:> Each of the thousands of valleys that the canal will block, will be> turned into minor to major reservoirs upstream of the canal. The> canal will act like thousands of earthen dams, except these could> not be built like dams. It will have to be ordinary PWD earth-moving> operations, and of commensurate quality.>> And need I go into what will happen when one such dam gives ? That it will happen is a certainty, be it from rains or from seismic activity.>> cm>> ponraj gnanaraj wrote:>> Re: Dr Kalam's obsession with DIVERSION of RIVERS> With due respect for your note I have decided to reply.> Man has been always changing the Eco system for his benefits starting from the ponds and dams he built to the cultivation he did. Your example of Aral sea is true. Please remember Aral sea is a land locked water source which is not applicable here. There is no secret in National waterways project. Fundamental details are available at www.nationalwaterways.com Contour canal of NWP is at a uniform height and that is the reason for â*˜NO PUMPINGâ*™ anywhere on the waterway. It is high time you take him seriously, understand the project and support it so that you become part of the Engineering crew to make our India a beautiful and rich country in the world. Thanks for your active participation in the discussions. Bye for now, G.Ponraj, 22/03/2007>>>

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Yahoo! Answers

_________________________________________________________________
Search from any Web page with powerful protection. Get the FREE Windows Live Toolbar Today!
http://toolbar.live.com/?mkt=en-in
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://assamnet.org/pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20070331/206c3be3/attachment.html 