03-10-2007, 09:52 PM
Summary observations of what I see on that BLOG:
1. A lot of claims that any studies done for the project are "inadequate", but without advancing any competing, credible, specific points that would point against the conclusions of these "inadequate" studies. This is the "Snail Darter" all over again.
2. The comments attributed to Dr. "Ted" (Edward, I presume?) Murthy are grossly overblown. Yes, there are simulations showing that the Palk Strait coast line between SL and TN was sheltered - it was in the lee, and a narrow channel. NO, there is absolutely no basis for claiming that a small increase in depth across 300m will have any noticeable impact. The Opposers twist this basic problem with their theory, to claim, now: and this is most interesting: That the bends in the canal WILL obstruct any severe/ sudden waves/ flow increase, BUT THAT WILL ERODE THE CANAL SIDES!!!
Ooo! So now, instead of all Kerala and the entire coast from Delft Island to Ernakulam being devastated BECAUSE of the canal, we see that only the bends in the canal would be devastated.
3. Cyclones are predicted to occur every 4 years there - but their net effect is apparently to sweep out the sediment accumulated in the canal, and make the dredging job much easier.
4. The BIG concern cited now is that the project will hit rock under the sediment - thus vastly increasing project cost. Er... doesn't that mean that the sediment acculumation problem is overblown?
1. A lot of claims that any studies done for the project are "inadequate", but without advancing any competing, credible, specific points that would point against the conclusions of these "inadequate" studies. This is the "Snail Darter" all over again.
2. The comments attributed to Dr. "Ted" (Edward, I presume?) Murthy are grossly overblown. Yes, there are simulations showing that the Palk Strait coast line between SL and TN was sheltered - it was in the lee, and a narrow channel. NO, there is absolutely no basis for claiming that a small increase in depth across 300m will have any noticeable impact. The Opposers twist this basic problem with their theory, to claim, now: and this is most interesting: That the bends in the canal WILL obstruct any severe/ sudden waves/ flow increase, BUT THAT WILL ERODE THE CANAL SIDES!!!
Ooo! So now, instead of all Kerala and the entire coast from Delft Island to Ernakulam being devastated BECAUSE of the canal, we see that only the bends in the canal would be devastated.
3. Cyclones are predicted to occur every 4 years there - but their net effect is apparently to sweep out the sediment accumulated in the canal, and make the dredging job much easier.
4. The BIG concern cited now is that the project will hit rock under the sediment - thus vastly increasing project cost. Er... doesn't that mean that the sediment acculumation problem is overblown?