china don't care about anybody but it own self only, if this dam is being built, the mekong delta will not flow into the southeast asian countries anymore. Therefore, the fish resources will halt up, and river will dried up later in the mean time.
china:the three gorge dam more than 185m
the three gorge dam make a lake in Yangtse Rive wich near 1.7 km wide over 600 km long and the depth near the great dam over 175m. its capacity over 60 billion tons water and can produce 22 billion kilowatt electric power which about 1.2% of china's electric power. even in china some people say that is a crazy and impossible project now but people in big city hope it can completed however Shanghai Nanjing Wuhan Chongqing's power lack just need one dam or one nuclear power station and dozens of common power stations.(in fact every cities in these four want build a nuclear power station because of be hard up power). but most important is scientists and gocment think it can solve flood peoblem, in 1998 Yangtse Rive's big flood's loss is over 1000 people dead and over 120 billion US dollars vanished.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
1 - 20 of 313 Posts
but the Gezhou dam already cutted off Yangtse River about 20 years ago. this time china just build a more huge one not the first one.skynet126 said:china don't care about anybody but it own self only, if this dam is being built, the mekong delta will not flow into the southeast asian countries anymore. Therefore, the fish resources will halt up, and river will dried up later in the mean time.
Opponents of the dam are saying that the first thing Taiwan hits if China goes to war with it will be the three gorges dam.
This bridge looks very nice. About the damm: 
mg:
mg:of course that is a big problem. but just Taiwan force, that dam is safe, the dam in the center of chinese mainland taiwan island thousands km far and protected by high-tech weapons, taiwan force can't touch it. by the way, china used dam's modle to H-bomb explode test, they said a H-bomb must over about 1 million tons TNT power and explode very near(one general said about 100m above the dam top) the dam can be pulled down. but i am worry about terrorism, some crazy men may steal some H-bombs one day.itom 987 said:Opponents of the dam are saying that the first thing Taiwan hits if China goes to war with it will be the three gorges dam.
Opponents also say dam is just a big Belial, it can not work as scientists said, but chongqing port many disappear and no power can producted because of silt, and that big lake may bring earthquake if earthquke pull down the dam wuhan even nanjing shanghai may disappear. IMO it can finish flood history after all. if really so bad as opponents said we can open all the strobes as we never built it.
metallinestorm said:of course that is a big problem. but just Taiwan force, that dam is safe, the dam in the center of chinese mainland taiwan island thousands km far and protected by high-tech weapons, taiwan force can't touch it. by the way, china used dam's modle to H-bomb explode test, they said a H-bomb must over about 1 million tons TNT power and explode very near(one general said about 100m above the dam top) the dam can be pulled down. but i am worry about terrorism, some crazy men may steal some H-bombs one day.
Opponents also say dam is just a big Belial, it can not work as scientists said, but chongqing port many disappear and no power can producted because of silt, and that big lake may bring earthquake if earthquke pull down the dam wuhan even nanjing shanghai may disappear. IMO it can finish flood history after all. if really so bad as opponents said we can open all the strobes as we never built it.
I heard that the Chinese gov. is planning to put missles near the base. BTW if the dam does rupture the water can't go all the way to Shanghai or even Nanjing for that matter its too far.
skynet126 said:china don't care about anybody but it own self only, if this dam is being built, the mekong delta will not flow into the southeast asian countries anymore. Therefore, the fish resources will halt up, and river will dried up later in the mean time.
Every country looks after its own interest first. China doesn't have the luxury of caring other people or country, its 1.3 billion pop. needs to survive and China needs the energy for development, naturally its selfishness is understandable.
shanghai or nanjing may not be direct destroied but 60 billion tons water and rush form 100m high that is not a little case. if railways, power stations, raw and processed materials for industry and people lives near big cities are destroied and thousands refugee appear in that area no big cities can exist.zergcerebrates said:I heard that the Chinese gov. is planning to put missles near the base. BTW if the dam does rupture the water can't go all the way to Shanghai or even Nanjing for that matter its too far.
a very big flood which have 60 billion tons can destory part of Huazhong plain and Huadong plain farms roads railways and many little towns cut off that area's power, great city must disappear after that big calamity.
Thanks for sharing, saw a video about this, massive is the word to describe it.
I love this dam, I think it was a very good idea for China to build it. They're gonna benefit from one of the most efficient sources of energy using water and gravity.
I read somewhere that they have solutions for pollution, water treatment plants, garbage management and sluice gates for sediment that the river will carry to the dam. I'm gonna have to visit this dam in the future. This dam is awesome.
I read somewhere that they have solutions for pollution, water treatment plants, garbage management and sluice gates for sediment that the river will carry to the dam. I'm gonna have to visit this dam in the future. This dam is awesome.
I actually re-read this and for some reason I thought the dam will provide much more than 1.2% of China's total electric power. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought a dam this size would do much more for energy output.metallinestorm said:the three gorge dam make a lake in Yangtse Rive wich near 1.7 km wide over 600 km long and the depth near the great dam over 175m. its capacity over 60 billion tons water and can produce 22 billion kilowatt electric power which about 1.2% of china's electric power. <snip>
[
thank you, i am very sorry, i need make clear about this. in 2004 china power wastage is 1980 billion kilowatt-hour but many area leak power and the dam producted 33.3 billion kilowatt-hour although just 12 generators was working in last year( it will be 22 or 24? in 2009), it just 1.68% of whole power but if china let Zhejiang Jiangsu Fujian province continue use electric power 33.3b just 1.4%( people in that province want have a normal lives need buy their own private generator). i find a data about 5 days ago, china need twice power in next ten years, china even plan build more than 40 nuclear generators only this plan can supply 40000MW power. but Huazhong or Huadong net can supply 40000MW now, that is mean China's 11 big net need a mass of power,even the dam's 24 very big generators are working together they just can supply about 1.4% at most in that year.FM 2258 said:I actually re-read this and for some reason I thought the dam will provide much more than 1.2% of China's total electric power. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought a dam this size would do much more for energy output.
Study Shows That Hydroelectric Power Plants Can Produce More Fossil Fuels Than Oil
By Duncan Graham-Rowe - The New Scientist
Contrary to popular belief, hydroelectric power can seriously damage the climate. Proposed changes to the way countries’ climate budgets are calculated aim to take greenhouse gas emissions from hydropower reservoirs into account, but some experts worry that they will not go far enough.
The green image of hydro power as a benign alternative to fossil fuels is false, says Éric Duchemin, a consultant for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “Everyone thinks hydro is very clean, but this is not the case,” he says.
Hydroelectric dams produce significant amounts of carbon dioxide and methane, and in some cases produce more of these greenhouse gases than power plants running on fossil fuels. Carbon emissions vary from dam to dam, says Philip Fearnside from Brazil’s National Institute for Research in the Amazon in Manaus. “But we do know that there are enough emissions to worry about.”
In a study to be published in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Fearnside estimates that in 1990 the greenhouse effect of emissions from the Curuá-Una dam in Pará, Brazil, was more than three-and-a-half times what would have been produced by generating the same amount of electricity from oil.
This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot. Then after this first pulse of decay, plant matter settling on the reservoir’s bottom decomposes without oxygen, resulting in a build-up of dissolved methane. This is released into the atmosphere when water passes through the dam’s turbines.
“Drawdown” regions
Seasonal changes in water depth mean there is a continuous supply of decaying material. In the dry season plants colonise the banks of the reservoir only to be engulfed when the water level rises. For shallow-shelving reservoirs these “drawdown” regions can account for several thousand square kilometres.
In effect man-made reservoirs convert carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into methane. This is significant because methane’s effect on global warming is 21 times stronger than carbon dioxide’s.
Claiming that hydro projects are net producers of greenhouse gases is not new (New Scientist print edition, 3 June 2000) but the issue now appears to be climbing up the political agenda. In the next round of IPCC discussions in 2006, the proposed National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme, which calculates each country’s carbon budget, will include emissions from artificially flooded regions.
But these guidelines will only take account of the first 10 years of a dam’s operation and only include surface emissions. Methane production will go unchecked because climate scientists cannot agree on how significant this is; it will also vary between dams. But if Fearnside gets his way these full emissions would be included.
With the proposed IPCC guidelines, tropical countries that rely heavily on hydroelectricity, such as Brazil, could see their national greenhouse emissions inventories increased by as much as 7% (see map). Colder countries are less affected, he says, because cold conditions will be less favourable for producing greenhouse gases.
Despite a decade of research documenting the carbon emissions from man-made reservoirs, hydroelectric power still has an undeserved reputation for mitigating global warming. “I think it is important these emissions are counted,” says Fearnside.
By Duncan Graham-Rowe - The New Scientist
Contrary to popular belief, hydroelectric power can seriously damage the climate. Proposed changes to the way countries’ climate budgets are calculated aim to take greenhouse gas emissions from hydropower reservoirs into account, but some experts worry that they will not go far enough.
The green image of hydro power as a benign alternative to fossil fuels is false, says Éric Duchemin, a consultant for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “Everyone thinks hydro is very clean, but this is not the case,” he says.
Hydroelectric dams produce significant amounts of carbon dioxide and methane, and in some cases produce more of these greenhouse gases than power plants running on fossil fuels. Carbon emissions vary from dam to dam, says Philip Fearnside from Brazil’s National Institute for Research in the Amazon in Manaus. “But we do know that there are enough emissions to worry about.”
In a study to be published in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Fearnside estimates that in 1990 the greenhouse effect of emissions from the Curuá-Una dam in Pará, Brazil, was more than three-and-a-half times what would have been produced by generating the same amount of electricity from oil.
This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot. Then after this first pulse of decay, plant matter settling on the reservoir’s bottom decomposes without oxygen, resulting in a build-up of dissolved methane. This is released into the atmosphere when water passes through the dam’s turbines.
“Drawdown” regions
Seasonal changes in water depth mean there is a continuous supply of decaying material. In the dry season plants colonise the banks of the reservoir only to be engulfed when the water level rises. For shallow-shelving reservoirs these “drawdown” regions can account for several thousand square kilometres.
In effect man-made reservoirs convert carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into methane. This is significant because methane’s effect on global warming is 21 times stronger than carbon dioxide’s.
Claiming that hydro projects are net producers of greenhouse gases is not new (New Scientist print edition, 3 June 2000) but the issue now appears to be climbing up the political agenda. In the next round of IPCC discussions in 2006, the proposed National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme, which calculates each country’s carbon budget, will include emissions from artificially flooded regions.
But these guidelines will only take account of the first 10 years of a dam’s operation and only include surface emissions. Methane production will go unchecked because climate scientists cannot agree on how significant this is; it will also vary between dams. But if Fearnside gets his way these full emissions would be included.
With the proposed IPCC guidelines, tropical countries that rely heavily on hydroelectricity, such as Brazil, could see their national greenhouse emissions inventories increased by as much as 7% (see map). Colder countries are less affected, he says, because cold conditions will be less favourable for producing greenhouse gases.
Despite a decade of research documenting the carbon emissions from man-made reservoirs, hydroelectric power still has an undeserved reputation for mitigating global warming. “I think it is important these emissions are counted,” says Fearnside.
I find it somewhat disturbing to hear people blatantly decry the building of this project. It is truly incredible in size and ambition. Of course this project will have an effect on the wildlife in the region. Of course there are concerns of terrorism, war, structural disaster and everything else between. For this project to even be started, more than a million people had to be relocated.
I think it's important that people realize that developing countries usually push the envelope of design and structure. Look at the US in 1930's with the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). It was the largest project of its kind to be undertaken up to that point and was necessary for many of the same reasons... the need for more electric power, inland shipping and transportation, and future wildlife and recreational areas.
I find it hard to believe that anyone today would bemoan that development, and I feel confident that 50 or 70 years from now few people will bemoan the Three Gorges project.
I think it's important that people realize that developing countries usually push the envelope of design and structure. Look at the US in 1930's with the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). It was the largest project of its kind to be undertaken up to that point and was necessary for many of the same reasons... the need for more electric power, inland shipping and transportation, and future wildlife and recreational areas.
I find it hard to believe that anyone today would bemoan that development, and I feel confident that 50 or 70 years from now few people will bemoan the Three Gorges project.
i must say some words. the three gorge dam's major is control Yangtse River flood not as a power station. it only supply 1.5% electric power, but it can stop the big flood such as what happened in 1998. china lost many money because of that flood about 3 times of the three gorge project's value and over 1000 people dead. if we had dam and we control it well, that flood can't happen.
maybe this project is the next century's peoject, human's mind and emotion can't resist this big one's impact now. 500 years ago, no people thought a bridge can connect Yangtse River's North and South, chinese called the River natural moat, some famous wars that weak force win because they used the River better, but we have more than 10 briges just in Chongqing City, people form south to north may be just for say hello to their friends.
maybe this project is the next century's peoject, human's mind and emotion can't resist this big one's impact now. 500 years ago, no people thought a bridge can connect Yangtse River's North and South, chinese called the River natural moat, some famous wars that weak force win because they used the River better, but we have more than 10 briges just in Chongqing City, people form south to north may be just for say hello to their friends.
I agree with this post.Open Road said:I find it somewhat disturbing to hear people blatantly decry the building of this project. It is truly incredible in size and ambition. Of course this project will have an effect on the wildlife in the region. Of course there are concerns of terrorism, war, structural disaster and everything else between. For this project to even be started, more than a million people had to be relocated.
I think it's important that people realize that developing countries usually push the envelope of design and structure. Look at the US in 1930's with the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). It was the largest project of its kind to be undertaken up to that point and was necessary for many of the same reasons... the need for more electric power, inland shipping and transportation, and future wildlife and recreational areas.
I find it hard to believe that anyone today would bemoan that development, and I feel confident that 50 or 70 years from now few people will bemoan the Three Gorges project.
China is doing what it needs to do to support it's 1.2 billion+ people. If this dam is going to help with that then it should be done.
Open Road said:I find it somewhat disturbing to hear people blatantly decry the building of this project. It is truly incredible in size and ambition. Of course this project will have an effect on the wildlife in the region. Of course there are concerns of terrorism, war, structural disaster and everything else between. For this project to even be started, more than a million people had to be relocated.
I think it's important that people realize that developing countries usually push the envelope of design and structure. Look at the US in 1930's with the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). It was the largest project of its kind to be undertaken up to that point and was necessary for many of the same reasons... the need for more electric power, inland shipping and transportation, and future wildlife and recreational areas.
I find it hard to believe that anyone today would bemoan that development, and I feel confident that 50 or 70 years from now few people will bemoan the Three Gorges project.
Can't agree with you more, I second that.
WTF? it's not even on the Mekong river. It's on Yangtze.skynet126 said:china don't care about anybody but it own self only, if this dam is being built, the mekong delta will not flow into the southeast asian countries anymore. Therefore, the fish resources will halt up, and river will dried up later in the mean time.
People are protesting this project for one of three main reasons:
1 - Over 2 million people are being re-located by force, including some villages that have been in the same spot virtually untouched by civilization and technology for thousands of years. And the housing that they are building for these people is considered a "step down" in quality at best.
2 - The Three Gorges is not only naturally beautiful, but it's a huge tourist draw. And now it's going to be underwater.
3 - The reservoir the dam is creating just might be the most polluted body of water on earth, because not only are they not clearing out man-made infrastructure, they're dumping all kinds of raw industrial waste and toxins into it like it's a giant sewer. The reservoir has just begun to fill up and even by its own government standards, it's polluted... badly.
BONUS 4 - This dam is 600 feet tall and a mile wide. And during construction they've found massive cracks in it. God forbid if this dam ever failed it would make previous Yangtze floods look like a picnic.
** I'm not saying I agree with these arguments and that the pros outweigh the cons, I just thought I'd put these up for people to think about.
1 - Over 2 million people are being re-located by force, including some villages that have been in the same spot virtually untouched by civilization and technology for thousands of years. And the housing that they are building for these people is considered a "step down" in quality at best.
2 - The Three Gorges is not only naturally beautiful, but it's a huge tourist draw. And now it's going to be underwater.
3 - The reservoir the dam is creating just might be the most polluted body of water on earth, because not only are they not clearing out man-made infrastructure, they're dumping all kinds of raw industrial waste and toxins into it like it's a giant sewer. The reservoir has just begun to fill up and even by its own government standards, it's polluted... badly.
BONUS 4 - This dam is 600 feet tall and a mile wide. And during construction they've found massive cracks in it. God forbid if this dam ever failed it would make previous Yangtze floods look like a picnic.
** I'm not saying I agree with these arguments and that the pros outweigh the cons, I just thought I'd put these up for people to think about.
1 - 20 of 313 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
SkyscraperCity Forum
A forum community dedicated to skyscrapers, towers, highrises, construction, and city planning enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about structures, styles, reviews, scale, transportation, skylines, architecture, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Katarzyna DJ
6920 Replies
calatravavx
3070 Replies
Srdjan Adamovic
1672 Replies
Recommended Communities
