actually, the lesson from Helene is the opposite from that being promoted.
In 1933, the Tennessee Valley Authority was given the mandate for flood control in the valley of the Tennessee River and its tributaries. Over the next 40 years, they built 49 dams, which, for the most… https://t.co/ReG402Ye86
actually, the lesson from Helene is the opposite from that being promoted.
In 1933, the Tennessee Valley Authority was given the mandate for flood control in the valley of the Tennessee River and its tributaries. Over the next 40 years, they built 49 dams, which, for the most part, accomplished their goal. Whereas floods in the Tennessee were once catastrophic, younger people are mostly unaware of them.
The French Broad River (Asheville) is an upstream tributary where flood control dams weren’t constructed due to local opposition.
Rather than the devastation of Hurricane Helene on Asheville illustrating the effect of climate change, the success of the flood control dams in other sectors of the Tennessee Valley illustrates the success of the TVA flood control program where it is implemented.
Hurricane Helene did not show the effect of climate change, but what happens to settlements in Tennessee Valley tributaries under “natural” flooding (i.e. where flood control dams have been rejected.)
I should add that, in its first 40 years, the TVA built 49 flood control dams, of which 29 were power-generating. In the subsequent 50 years, TVA built 0 flood control dams, However, in the 1980s, they established the Carbon Dioxide Information Centre (CDIAC) under their nuclear division, which sponsored much influential climate research, including the CRU temperature data (Phil Jones) and Michael Mann’s fellowship from which Mann et al 1998 derived.
In 1990, the parents of Crowdstrike’s Dmitri Alperovich moved from Russia to Chattanooga, Tennessee, where his father was a TVA nuclear engineer. Dmitri moved to Tennessee a few years later.
One can’t help but wonder whether TVA’s original mandate for flood control got lost in the executive offices, attracted by more glamorous issues, such as climate change research. If so, one could reasonably say that a factor in the seeming abandonment of TVA efforts to complete its original flood control mandate (e.g. to French Broad River which inundated Asheville) was partly attributable to diversion of TVA interest to climate change research, as opposed to its mandate of flood control.
another thought. As soon as the point is made, it is obvious that flood control dams have reduced flooding. Not just in Appalachia. I’ve looked at long data for water levels in Great Lakes and the amount of fluctuation (flooding) after dams installed is much reduced.
And yet my recollection of public reporting of climate is that weather extremes, including flooding, is getting worse. But in areas with flood control dams, it obviously //isn’t// getting worse than before. It’s better. Note to self: check IPCC reports for their specific findings on flooding.
Here is a diagram of the proposed system of dams and reservoirs proposed to provide flood control for Asheville – located in center of diagram (h/t reader Jack Brown). This was the project that was abandoned in the face of some local opposition. To be fair, it is my understanding that the wild rivers are very scenic, but the flood risk in the watershed was well known from the flood of 1916 and seemingly ignored by state and local governments.
@Revkin also cites NYT article on development in North Carolina zones known to be at risk
Andy reported that the report stated that developments around Asheville “would cause these great floods of the past to be higher if they occurred again. Land fills and buildings in the flood plain and the many bcidges across the streams have seriously reduced flood flow capacity.” “On the French Broad River a flood of the same discharge as the 1916 flood would today be 3 to 4 feet;.higher between Pearson Bridge and West Asheville Viaduct than the actual flood elevation. On the Swannanoa River, a repetition of the 1916 flood would be up to 2. 5 feet higher today at Biltmore and up to 15 feet higher upstream from the Recreation Park dam.”
A corollary is that the contribution of site development to any modern “record” flood level has to be accounted for before comparing to past record levels.
To understand the baseline risk of flooding around Asheville, Buncombe County and surrounding steep-sloped, fast-developing regions of WNC, I recommend this incredible 1960 (!) @TVAnews report – "Floods on French Broad and Swannanoa Rivers around Asheville,… pic.twitter.com/MtOkTYr63w
I comprehend your point but must point out that wind and solar and batteries are engineering solutions that are touted as being able to solve weather events.
Environmentalism (not to be confused with conservationism) is culpable to some (if not all) degree.
Uh, no.
Helene was a weather event, and the TVA dams were built to mitigate risk against such a known event (known in that it had occurred in 1916).
Solar panels and windmills are engineering proposals to mitigate a supposed global climate, not weather, issue.
Actually, TVA was built for three reasons. First, to improve inland navigation (the TennTom is an example that I personally navigated when bringing my big powerboat from Fort Lauderdale to Chicago) thru lots of locks, nestled aside tug/barge strings). Second, to produce hydro electricity. Third was flood control.
Technically your verbiage matches the mainstream narrative. However, the definition of climate change is long term changes in weather patterns. Climate is the long term average of weather. I refuse to use the alarmist rhetoric as that adds credibility to their otherwise unjustifiable claims.
mebbe somebody that claims to be a risk management expert should take a very quick cursory look at cost/benefit, with respect to installed flood control vs. failed flood control facilities.
are any of those risk management experts out there?
As you know, there is a difference between a flood control structure that is well designed and one that is not. Extreme weather events happen. Even properly designed system are not designed for 1 in a thousand year events (and we don’t have enough data to actually establish that level). We lived through Harvey. The flooding was a bit like Helene in that the storm moved quite slowly.
Sparta Nova 4
October 4, 2024 11:54 am
He who fails to learn, ignores, or denies the lessons of history is doomed to repeat the mistakes.
I just wrote a historian about another loss of history which while not new seems to be especially high now. We survived pulling a not very large trailer across some 40 or so US states which required considerable research about slopes. There was a necessary R/V – Trucker west and another east guide to those, the east I recall as somewhat worse. Such was I 68 going west in the Maryland peninsula with interesting names around like Savage River. There was a notable R/V park in West Virginia next to a substantial river which ran everybody off and secured their electric hook-ups when there was a flood warning. We have friend who lost his trailer in a west Texas park flood and there was a more recent exceptional flood on the Blanco River that did exceptional damage including taking out a bridge. Such is widespread but natives and geologists surely know a lot about Appalachian floods. Similar expensive coastal problems exist about susceptible properties. It’s nice to live next to the water.
A long way from the ocean they are taking out dams on the Klamath River to “save the salmon.”
Very well done, Charles. I was intending to write this story up, but you’ve done a far better job than I could have.
Best regards,
w.
Duane
October 4, 2024 12:08 pm
It’s entirely understandable if North Carolinans do not want dams built on their beautiful natural rivers. There’s plenty of formerly natural rivers that were destroyed by dam building – a free flowing river is a natural good, both recreation wise and environmentally speaking.
The moral of the story is not that they shoulda built the dams. The moral of the story is that if you don’t build the flood control dams, then don’t bitch when you get flooded. It’s a trade off. But of course, nobody remembers the trade off, especially when the warmunists and their handmaidens in the media would much rather blame the flooding on “climate change” instead of unprotected rivers.
“There’s plenty of formerly natural rivers that were destroyed by dam building – a free flowing river is a natural good, both recreation wise and environmentally speaking.”
Destroyed? Altered is more like it. Many people like the recreation on a man made lake behind the dam.
Also many like to be on the beach in summer. If we calm down the rivers building dams, sediments will no longer reach the ocean and beaches and deltas will disappear.
Beaches and dunes are also a natural protection against storm surges. So yes it’s a trade off. Less flooding is less beaches.
I should think engineers could deal with the sediment build up, if they focus on it. They should be able to install pumps behind the dam and pump the sediment downstream periodically. Doesn’t sound like a mission to Mars or even the moon.
Dam builders long ago leaned how to do this. That doesn’t mean the episodic silt release will be allowed to take place – after all, “What about the fishes?” they will scream. As if rivers never transport silt.
In the absence of flood controls, There will be floods. Duh.
As for NC communities, you caved to the pleadings of a vocal minority and reaped the consequences of inaction. I’m really sorry, but that is what reality looks like. If flood control measures and blocked and people are allowed to build in the flood plain, it will happen again and again. I will be sorry then, too. You can lead the greens to water but you cannot make them control it. They want control of you. You have take charge to do it to protect them, in spite of themselves.
An analogous situation persists in California with respect to the water supply to people living there. The master plan was laid out in the ’50’s when engineers were respected. None of the necessary additional dams have been built in the last 60 years. What is the inevitable consequence? No drinking water. Blaming climate change won’t help one whit. Bad math climate mongering does not compensate for bad decisions about community protection.
Oroville reservoir was completed 56 years ago. In order to achieve flood control during the rainy season they have a plan to reduce the level of water when a storm is approaching. A few days warning of a storm that will result in 15″+ of rain in three days wouldn’t help much.
They build houses and towns in the Mississippi fool plains. When they are flooded, everyone gets government (aka our tax dollars) to rebuild on the very same site. Next flood, rinse, spin, repeat.
Somewhere along the way, someone should get an idea that building there will result is serious water damage, not if but when.
There has been more than one example where the US government bought out the town and relocated it to higher ground nearby. However after decades, the town wants to grow on that ‘prime’ recreational riverfront land and pressures the Corp of Engineers to grant the land to the city and allow development. After that step, it’s just a few more years until the city promotes prime housing development in the same region that was condemned decades earlier as a flood zone.
0perator
October 4, 2024 12:39 pm
Great article! Many, if not all, of the dams in the area were at or near “full pond.” There was as much as 20” of rainfall in a short amount of time in certain places. Some towns were washed away, like Chimney Rock. The government’s response has been pitiful. If it weren’t for neighbors and citizens getting to work clearing roads, flying personal helicopter rescue missions and the like, the loss of life could be much greater.
They aren’t really giving $$$ to Ukraine- it’s mostly old weapons, which allows the military industrial complex to produce newer weapons. And, if the Soviet Union is born again- we’ll be spending trillions resisting them, as was done for half a century, mostly forgotten by many people. But I agree about the Middle East and illegals.
But back then, the US was a superpower and produced everything it needed. Today, the same country is in deep debt and imports most of the stuff it needs. Even most of its medicines are made in China.
Only because it prints dollars like there is no tomorrow (inflation) it stays afloat.
It’s still a super power. Trump would like to reduce the imports. It can print dollars because the dollar is international currency. No other nation can do it- only the world’s greatest super power. For decades, it’s been claimed that this privilege won’t last- but it continues. Some of the inflation is due to excessive pay for certain powerful labor unions (the port workers just got a 60% pay raise over 5 years) – and excessive pay for some professional classes, like some medical doctors, corporate executives, university honchos, etc. Probably the biggest cause of inflation now is increasing energy costs thanks to the climate whack jobs.
Minimum wage increases can’t possibly have much effect on the macro-economy. Compared to the huge salaries of “burros” and many professionals and tradesmen with excessively powerful labor unions. Here in Wokeachusetts, I know many essentially worthless people on the state payroll making a 6 figure income.
For flood control to have any effect the hypothetical dams would have to be significantly below full pond. However most of the dams in the region were at full pond so in this storm they would have had no effect. FEMA had resources in the area 2 days before the storm and as the governors have said the president has been providing all the resources they wanted, do not repeat Trump’s misinformation!
Waited a full week before deploying 1000 troops to assist. Waited more days before deploying 500 more. It was neither as effective nor efficient as you make it seem.
Why didn’t they lower the water level during hurricane season?
Rud Istvan
October 4, 2024 12:53 pm
I am of two minds about this. It is OK not to have flood control dams in order to preserve wild scenic mountain waterways. But then it is NOT ok to build on their banks when they are known to be prone to flooding.
At Patricia’s mountain cabin in northwest Georgia, we are quite near the wild and scenic Toccoa River—excellent kayaking, tubing, trout fishing. Feeds Lake Blue Ridge, a TVA power dam reservoir downstream. It is prone to some flooding when thunderstorms hit the watershed. The solution is that NOBODY is allowed to build right along the river. Everybody along the river is set back and up the mountainside by about 15 feet. So is ASKA road, the only access to that entire area. In 20 plus years, never been a problem.
But forbidding property owners from building where there is even temporarily land fit to build on and where there is already propery ownership, would be a taking. Eminent domain confiscation requires compensation. Without the will of the electorate, voting for the code and its enforcement, and coughing up for tax money to pay for it, no government would have been able to do this.
Taking the property would have been probably too raw for even FDR, and certainly too expensive.
I don’t know much about ASKA road, but quick search seems to limit its boundaries to semi-wilderness trail systems on Federal National Forest land, located in Georgia — perhaps this is incorrect? This land is purchased by the Federal government, is it not?
In the North Carolina Pisgah National forest, there are much similar limitations to those you outline for ASKA, yet I am right now in communication (via starlink, on their end) with people who are totally isolated and running on gasoline generated power, and a complete washout of NC 276 in both directions out. How would the proposed building code have prevented this?
“Predictions are hard, especially about the future.” YB
The general area is the southern part of Chatahoochee national forest. It was created by TR as a patchwork. Whole region was logged. Those who wanted to sell to NPS were invited to do so. There are still a lot of private inholdings.
There was no taking. Each riverside private parcel extends a bit up the mountainsides. So the cabin owners own the riverfront. But cannot build there. They have gazebos and fire pits along the shore.
In Georgia? Thought we were talking about North Carolina!
Again, I can witness that the land and building codes in and near the Pisgah is much as you describe for Georgia. I don’t think the code could have been applied to Asheville, and I’m quite sure that the existing code did not help around Brevard or Lure lake.
It is very unlikely that anyone could have won an election, passed an initiative, or funded a state or federal project based on forcing such a code through in North Carolina.
Let the insurance companies weigh in. Rates are higher on the river bank than 15 feet upslope from the river. That would be encouragement without treading on landowner rights.
Over 200 acres of my Great Aunt’s land was taken by the state of North Carolina to expand a state park by claiming a need to preserve a pristine natural forest. The family had owned the land for more than 100 years. Since her husband had died and their children moved out of state, Great Aunt Susie couldn’t afford an attorney and didn’t want to cause trouble with the state over property rights, the state ‘settled’ by letting her live in her own house until she passed away. There was no monetary compensation. The government has no problem with forcing people out when they want to. Arlington Texas let Jerry Jones force the sale of houses for a little as $5k so he could get the new football stadium built. Sure, they houses were in poor condition, but the people that lived there their whole life aren’t going to be able to find a new place to live for $5k.
DonK31
October 4, 2024 1:08 pm
Teach me something I don’t understand. The article talks about Asheville and other parts of the TVA.
If I recall correctly, the State line between NC and Tennessee and the Continental Divide is the summit of the Appalachians. The tributaries of the Tennessee River do not flow from NC. Asheville has noting to do with the Tennessee Valley. Dams in the Tennessee Valley do not make the flooding better or worse on the NC side. One might call them similar but different.
In this case the flooding on the NC side was much worse because the counterclockwise circulation caused the tropical moisture to climb the mountains and precipitate on the NC side. It had nothing to do with TVA river control dams.
I usually find myself agreeing with McIntyre but this time he’s all wet.
The French Broad River does indeed make into Tennessee by way of what is known in those parts as a gap. The Swannanoa River, another that’s in the news, is a tributary.
You are correct. I just checked. The border is drawn in straight line segments from mountaintop to mountaintop. So the TVA is completely on the Tennessee western slopes, never in North Carolina eastern slopes.
The map in the article clearly shows that the TVA was involved with the French Broad River.
The map comes from the “Tennessee Valley Authority, Division of Water Control Planning”. The title of the map is “French Broad River in N. C., Watershed Map Showing Plan of Development”.
The TVA is the author of the study in the link. They made the report, and did the entire watershed mapping and history for the NC area in question.
The report was very interesting in numerous areas…
This data https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring-location/03451500/ shows the french river flow gage in Asheville NC cresting at 24.66 feet on sept 27th at 6 pm minor flood stage is 9.5 feet, so it crested at 15.16 feet above minor flood stage.
Per the below link, the Swannoa at Biltmore crested at 26′ in 1791 (Numerous reports in the TVA report suggest the 1791 flood was considerably worse then the 1916 flood.)
During Helena the Swannanoa at Biltmore crested at 26′ according to Fox news, https://www.foxweather.com/extreme-weather/helene-flooding-extremen-asheville The TVA link in the post shows a 21 feet crest in 1916 Download on pg 23. Also rainfall amounts over 23 inches were reported in 1916 as well. (See the excellent rain map in the TVA report) One thing is clear from the document. Flooding of these levels should have been expected as 70 to 100 year events or less Also, rainfall amounts vary greatly over short distances within singular events, so again, comparisons are difficult. For instance, per the link below, Asheville itself only received 2.85 inches of rain in the 1916 event, yet surrounding areas received almost 23 inches of rain. The included map with the rainfall amounts is far better information then todays reporters gather.
Regarding historic hurricanes, well Helena is not a record setter. Look at this 6 year period…
October 4, 1842 – A 955 mbar major hurricane which makes landfall on northwestern Florida produces a 20-foot (6 m) storm surge at Cedar Key. Strong winds result in severe damage in Tallahhasse. (note, almost double the storm surge of Helena)October 11, 1846 – The Great Havana Hurricane of 1846 passes near Key West with an estimated pressure of 902 mbar (hPa) and winds of possibly Category 5 status,[39] damaging or destroying all but 6 of the houses in the city. 50 are killed,[40] and damage amounts to $200,000 (1846 USD, $4.8 million 2008 USD). It is estimated it struck mainland Florida near Cedar Key, producing severe flooding and strong winds.[6]September 25, 1848 – The Great Gale of 1848 strikes near Tampa as a major hurricane with an estimated pressure of 948 mbar. Considered one of the most significant hurricanes in the Tampa area, the 15 foot (4.6 m) storm surge from the hurricane destroyed much of Tampa and nearby Fort Brooke.[42]October 11, 1848 – A major hurricane hits northwestern Florida, causing additional damage to the severe hurricane a few weeks before.So nobody’s SUV or cows had anything to do with this. We also have no idea what modern dropsconde and satellite Doppler 24 7 reading would have catagorized these, and many other historic storms, other then they would have been recorded as considerably stronger.
I am not certain Helena was truly a Cat 4 on landfall?
What you wrote seems reasonable but
Is it untrue that flood control dams on the North Carolina side were rejected?
Is it untrue, as a few replies state, that some rivers do flow into NC from Tennessee?
Regardless, either control of the rivers, or keeping out of the flood zone is required for any rational consideration. People who make the wrong choice, no doubt often through ignorance, have to be responsible for their own fate.
Asheville does appear to have an active flood control policy, including increasing the height of the North Fork reservoir and requiring new buildings in Biltmore village to be 2feet above base elevation. Whether the additional dams mentioned in the OP would have done any good given that they would have already been full and would have had to have been reduced to accomodate the rain from Helene with only a few days notice.
Asheville is at the very eastern end of the Tennessee Valley watershed, right near the divide. The areas shown in the provided map are all in that watershed, even though not in the state of Tennessee. The state border is not the divide. Any areas east of what is detailed in that map flow east towards the Atlantic.
But the dams proposed in that map would definitely affect the Tennessee River flow. The French Broad River that goes through Asheville flows northwest and joins the Tennessee River at Knoxville.
The Eastern Continental Divide is a few miles South East of Asheville. The water flowing through Asheville goes to the Gulf of Mexico via the Tennessee River basin. I’ve driven over the divide countless times on I-26.
The Tennessee Valley Authority was not exclusive to the State of Tennessee.
It was focused on the Tennessee River and tributaries, even those that spanned State borders.
The headwaters of the French Broad River are south of Asheville, NC and it flows into the Tennessee River at Knoxville. It is considered to be the oldest river in North America and possibly one of the three oldest rivers in the world which can be proven to exist at a certain geologic age. It existed before the start of the Alleghenian orogeny and cut through the spine of the Appalachians as they grew (320-340my ago). West Virginia’s New River and the Susquehanna also cut through the Appalachians during the Alleghenian, but their proven ages are slightly younger than the French Broad. The other two oldest rivers are the Meuse and Finke. The proven age of the Meuse in Europe is similar to the French Broad. The Finke in Australia and some smaller rivers predate the Alice Springs Orogeny 350-400my ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_by_age
The Laurentians in Canada are much older than the Appalachians, but the rivers around the Laurentians cannot be dated because they did not dissect those mountains as they rose.
Take a look at the Green River in Google Earth to see how it cut canyons as the surrounding land was uplifted. The meanders it had before the uplift are incised into the uplifted land.
Dan Hughes
October 4, 2024 1:24 pm
TVA was also getting set up to be an exemplar for nuclear power, planning to build 17 nuclear reactors. Seven were completed and continue to operate, but the remaining 10 units were eventually cancelled.
The French Broad River (Asheville) is an upstream tributary where flood control dams weren’t constructed due to local opposition.
This was the project that was abandoned in the face of some local opposition.
How do we reconcile repeated failure due to “local opposition” with the claim:
mandate for flood control got lost in the executive offices, attracted by more glamorous issues, such as climate change research.
If so, one could reasonably say that a factor in the seeming abandonment of TVA efforts to complete its original flood control mandate (e.g. to French Broad River which inundated Asheville) was partly attributable to diversion of TVA interest to climate change research, as opposed to its mandate of flood control.
Might we not say that the voters at the time(s) the decision(s) were made, found more important candidates or issues in opposion? Flooding in the Alps might be laid at the feet of Socialist central planners. Repeated floodng over the past 30 years, along the Texas and Arkansas Red river might be blamed on mismanagement by the Corps of Engineers (even from the same people who deliberately destroyed flood control dikes on their property). I think this is much less true in North Carolina.
Granted, people don’t evaluate risk well, and they were undoubtedly misinformed about, or completely unaware of the chance of flooding. However, to put much or any of this on misuse of funds for climate change idealogy is a little much to ask.
The city seems to be very progressive: “In June 2021, Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer was one of 11 U.S. mayors to form Mayors Organized for Reparations and Equity (MORE), a coalition of municipal leaders dedicated to starting pilot reparations programs in their cities” [Wikipedia]
As of 2023, 2,119 dams have been removed in the United States since 1912. The number of dams removed each year varies, but here are some recent examples: 2022: 65 dams were removed, reconnecting more than 430 river miles across 20 states. The top states for dam removals in 2022 were Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. 2021: 57 dams were removed. 2020: 69 dams were removed. The largest dam removal project in US history was the removal of four dams on the Klamath River in Oregon and California: Iron Gate Dam, Copco Dams 1 and 2, and JC Boyle Dam. No turning back: The largest dam removal in US history … The removal of these dams allowed salmon to swim freely in the Klamath River and its tributaries for the first time in over a century. The project was a collaboration between the Klamath River Renewal Corporation, tribal nations, conservationists, and government officials. Dams are sometimes decommissioned because they: Slow the natural flow of water Warm the water, which can promote the spread of algae and parasites Have caused the extinction of many species of mussels, fish, and even a dolphin Dam Removals Continue Across The U.S. in 2022 – – American Rivers Feb 14, 2023 — 65 dams were removed across the country in 2022, reconnecting more than 430 upstream river miles across 20 states. …Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ____________________________________________________________________________
Follow that LINK and a [Ctrl-f] search on “flood” comes up 0/0
Dunno ’bout you but as far as I’m concerned, that is pretty much all you need to know.
Have caused the extinction of many species of mussels, fish, and even a dolphin
My, “a dolphin”. There is a story in there somewhere.
sherro01
October 4, 2024 4:50 pm
Hi Steve,
You write “diversion of TVA interest to climate change research, as opposed to its mandate of flood control.”
A common feature of most “green” initiatives is a product of their simplicity, since often the authors have low educational levels – someone mentioned “thick as two short planks”. This leads to the green “remedy” for climate change “crises” being disproportionate in the balance.
For example, we have “threatened species” stopping or delaying large industrial developments that are part of the last few decades of the unequivocal advance of human social comfort, health and longevity.
The Australian Federal department of Climate Change, Energy, The Environment & Water (yes, it is real, DCCEE&W) has propaganda-like material like this on Web sites: “No one will ever again see a Paradise Parrot flash its rainbow colours across the sky or see the Tasmanian tiger slink through the wet Tasmanian forest. They are extinct. They are two of the over 50 types, or species, of Australian animals and over 60 species of Australian plants that are extinct. It is very sad, but it is too late. Extinction is forever.” “Humans have great power to change and destroy habitats and so reduce the chances of species surviving. Species and their habitats are affected when vegetation is cleared for uses such as agriculture, forestry, mines, suburbs and roads; when rivers are dammed to store water; or when swamps are drained for developments.”
One of their remedies to preserve species is “Use less energy. The manufacture and use of power and the use of cars and other forms of transport consumes vast amounts of energy. This energy comes from land which could be the habitat of threatened species. Air pollution caused by fuel consumption is beginning to have an effect on the climate. Cool mountains may become warmer, deserts wetter and rainforests drier. These changes are likely to change or destroy the habitats of many species.”
Generally, the remedies are not balanced, in the same way as you note that dams were not built because of local objections that the rivers were attractive. The balance between attraction and flooding seems to favour dams if you are not green through low intelligence or susceptibility to propaganda.
Geoff S
The human argument seems to centre on no dams or dams with no leaks.
Nature’s argument seems to involve beavers building leaky dams.
Do leaky dams allow salmon to swim up river? Do leaky dams maintain a flowing river 12 months of the year? When extreme rainfall events occur, do leaky dams break down and cause catastrophic flooding events?
It seems to me that in arid areas like the SW, beavers creating leaky dams is undoubtedly beneficial.
Whether the same would be true for areas susceptible to tropical storms is far more open to discussion.
In the late 1960’s I designed dams for the US Flood Control Program in West Virginia. NEPA was designed to put the Program out of business and it did. Thousands of dams were never built.
They said we were drowning rivers. Better for rivers to drown people? One of my dams was a NEPA test case, and never built. This is why I have been tracking the green movement’s rise to power for 54 years. I took an early hit. Now you know how I felt.
In the ’40s and ’50s, the Army Corp of Engineers planned on building many dams on the tributaries of the CT River. They only managed to build a few before the enviros stopped them. There had been some big floods in the region in the ’30s. One of the successful projects is near me in north central MA. The lake is now a very popular kayaking spot- one of the best in the region. We haven’t had any big floods in the region in recent decades but it will happen and when it does, I hope people remember how the Corp could have prevented it and created many wonderful lakes. The lake near me was mostly swamp before it was cleared and turned into a lake. There’s plenty of swamps in New England. Converting some to lakes is a great idea- but of course the enviro won’t let it happen. But do they go into the swamps for pleasure? Of course not. Nobody does.
We took the RV from Saskatchewan to Florida and back. There were many flood control dams along the way with excellent lakeside RV campsites. I remarked at the time that we were in luck. That they would never have been permitted to build those dams today.
I will suggest the issue is “environmentalism” in general, which opposes engineering solutions to weather events.
I comprehend your point but must point out that wind and solar and batteries are engineering solutions that are touted as being able to solve weather events.
Environmentalism (not to be confused with conservationism) is culpable to some (if not all) degree.
Uh, no.
Helene was a weather event, and the TVA dams were built to mitigate risk against such a known event (known in that it had occurred in 1916).
Solar panels and windmills are engineering proposals to mitigate a supposed global climate, not weather, issue.
Actually, TVA was built for three reasons. First, to improve inland navigation (the TennTom is an example that I personally navigated when bringing my big powerboat from Fort Lauderdale to Chicago) thru lots of locks, nestled aside tug/barge strings). Second, to produce hydro electricity. Third was flood control.
Technically your verbiage matches the mainstream narrative. However, the definition of climate change is long term changes in weather patterns. Climate is the long term average of weather. I refuse to use the alarmist rhetoric as that adds credibility to their otherwise unjustifiable claims.
engineering solutions???
mebbe somebody that claims to be a risk management expert should take a very quick cursory look at cost/benefit, with respect to installed flood control vs. failed flood control facilities.
are any of those risk management experts out there?
As you know, there is a difference between a flood control structure that is well designed and one that is not. Extreme weather events happen. Even properly designed system are not designed for 1 in a thousand year events (and we don’t have enough data to actually establish that level). We lived through Harvey. The flooding was a bit like Helene in that the storm moved quite slowly.
He who fails to learn, ignores, or denies the lessons of history is doomed to repeat the mistakes.
I just wrote a historian about another loss of history which while not new seems to be especially high now. We survived pulling a not very large trailer across some 40 or so US states which required considerable research about slopes. There was a necessary R/V – Trucker west and another east guide to those, the east I recall as somewhat worse. Such was I 68 going west in the Maryland peninsula with interesting names around like Savage River. There was a notable R/V park in West Virginia next to a substantial river which ran everybody off and secured their electric hook-ups when there was a flood warning. We have friend who lost his trailer in a west Texas park flood and there was a more recent exceptional flood on the Blanco River that did exceptional damage including taking out a bridge. Such is widespread but natives and geologists surely know a lot about Appalachian floods. Similar expensive coastal problems exist about susceptible properties. It’s nice to live next to the water.
A long way from the ocean they are taking out dams on the Klamath River to “save the salmon.”
And those dams are removed after generations of salmon establish new breeding grounds.
Very well done, Charles. I was intending to write this story up, but you’ve done a far better job than I could have.
Best regards,
w.
It’s entirely understandable if North Carolinans do not want dams built on their beautiful natural rivers. There’s plenty of formerly natural rivers that were destroyed by dam building – a free flowing river is a natural good, both recreation wise and environmentally speaking.
The moral of the story is not that they shoulda built the dams. The moral of the story is that if you don’t build the flood control dams, then don’t bitch when you get flooded. It’s a trade off. But of course, nobody remembers the trade off, especially when the warmunists and their handmaidens in the media would much rather blame the flooding on “climate change” instead of unprotected rivers.
“There’s plenty of formerly natural rivers that were destroyed by dam building – a free flowing river is a natural good, both recreation wise and environmentally speaking.”
Destroyed? Altered is more like it. Many people like the recreation on a man made lake behind the dam.
Also many like to be on the beach in summer. If we calm down the rivers building dams, sediments will no longer reach the ocean and beaches and deltas will disappear.
Beaches and dunes are also a natural protection against storm surges. So yes it’s a trade off. Less flooding is less beaches.
I should think engineers could deal with the sediment build up, if they focus on it. They should be able to install pumps behind the dam and pump the sediment downstream periodically. Doesn’t sound like a mission to Mars or even the moon.
Dam builders long ago leaned how to do this. That doesn’t mean the episodic silt release will be allowed to take place – after all, “What about the fishes?” they will scream. As if rivers never transport silt.
In the absence of flood controls, There will be floods. Duh.
As for NC communities, you caved to the pleadings of a vocal minority and reaped the consequences of inaction. I’m really sorry, but that is what reality looks like. If flood control measures and blocked and people are allowed to build in the flood plain, it will happen again and again. I will be sorry then, too. You can lead the greens to water but you cannot make them control it. They want control of you. You have take charge to do it to protect them, in spite of themselves.
An analogous situation persists in California with respect to the water supply to people living there. The master plan was laid out in the ’50’s when engineers were respected. None of the necessary additional dams have been built in the last 60 years. What is the inevitable consequence? No drinking water. Blaming climate change won’t help one whit. Bad math climate mongering does not compensate for bad decisions about community protection.
Oroville reservoir was completed 56 years ago. In order to achieve flood control during the rainy season they have a plan to reduce the level of water when a storm is approaching. A few days warning of a storm that will result in 15″+ of rain in three days wouldn’t help much.
Right. Poor prior planning promotes piss poor performance.
Your speculation is in error.
They build houses and towns in the Mississippi fool plains. When they are flooded, everyone gets government (aka our tax dollars) to rebuild on the very same site. Next flood, rinse, spin, repeat.
Somewhere along the way, someone should get an idea that building there will result is serious water damage, not if but when.
Rinse, literally.
There has been more than one example where the US government bought out the town and relocated it to higher ground nearby. However after decades, the town wants to grow on that ‘prime’ recreational riverfront land and pressures the Corp of Engineers to grant the land to the city and allow development. After that step, it’s just a few more years until the city promotes prime housing development in the same region that was condemned decades earlier as a flood zone.
Great article! Many, if not all, of the dams in the area were at or near “full pond.” There was as much as 20” of rainfall in a short amount of time in certain places. Some towns were washed away, like Chimney Rock. The government’s response has been pitiful. If it weren’t for neighbors and citizens getting to work clearing roads, flying personal helicopter rescue missions and the like, the loss of life could be much greater.
Government would rather give US money to Ukraine or the Middle East or illegals.
They aren’t really giving $$$ to Ukraine- it’s mostly old weapons, which allows the military industrial complex to produce newer weapons. And, if the Soviet Union is born again- we’ll be spending trillions resisting them, as was done for half a century, mostly forgotten by many people. But I agree about the Middle East and illegals.
But back then, the US was a superpower and produced everything it needed. Today, the same country is in deep debt and imports most of the stuff it needs. Even most of its medicines are made in China.
Only because it prints dollars like there is no tomorrow (inflation) it stays afloat.
It’s still a super power. Trump would like to reduce the imports. It can print dollars because the dollar is international currency. No other nation can do it- only the world’s greatest super power. For decades, it’s been claimed that this privilege won’t last- but it continues. Some of the inflation is due to excessive pay for certain powerful labor unions (the port workers just got a 60% pay raise over 5 years) – and excessive pay for some professional classes, like some medical doctors, corporate executives, university honchos, etc. Probably the biggest cause of inflation now is increasing energy costs thanks to the climate whack jobs.
You omitted minimum wage increases.
Minimum wage increases can’t possibly have much effect on the macro-economy. Compared to the huge salaries of “burros” and many professionals and tradesmen with excessively powerful labor unions. Here in Wokeachusetts, I know many essentially worthless people on the state payroll making a 6 figure income.
For flood control to have any effect the hypothetical dams would have to be significantly below full pond. However most of the dams in the region were at full pond so in this storm they would have had no effect. FEMA had resources in the area 2 days before the storm and as the governors have said the president has been providing all the resources they wanted, do not repeat Trump’s misinformation!
Waited a full week before deploying 1000 troops to assist. Waited more days before deploying 500 more. It was neither as effective nor efficient as you make it seem.
Why didn’t they lower the water level during hurricane season?
I am of two minds about this. It is OK not to have flood control dams in order to preserve wild scenic mountain waterways. But then it is NOT ok to build on their banks when they are known to be prone to flooding.
At Patricia’s mountain cabin in northwest Georgia, we are quite near the wild and scenic Toccoa River—excellent kayaking, tubing, trout fishing. Feeds Lake Blue Ridge, a TVA power dam reservoir downstream. It is prone to some flooding when thunderstorms hit the watershed. The solution is that NOBODY is allowed to build right along the river. Everybody along the river is set back and up the mountainside by about 15 feet. So is ASKA road, the only access to that entire area. In 20 plus years, never been a problem.
But forbidding property owners from building where there is even temporarily land fit to build on and where there is already propery ownership, would be a taking. Eminent domain confiscation requires compensation. Without the will of the electorate, voting for the code and its enforcement, and coughing up for tax money to pay for it, no government would have been able to do this.
Taking the property would have been probably too raw for even FDR, and certainly too expensive.
I don’t know much about ASKA road, but quick search seems to limit its boundaries to semi-wilderness trail systems on Federal National Forest land, located in Georgia — perhaps this is incorrect? This land is purchased by the Federal government, is it not?
In the North Carolina Pisgah National forest, there are much similar limitations to those you outline for ASKA, yet I am right now in communication (via starlink, on their end) with people who are totally isolated and running on gasoline generated power, and a complete washout of NC 276 in both directions out. How would the proposed building code have prevented this?
“Predictions are hard, especially about the future.” YB
The general area is the southern part of Chatahoochee national forest. It was created by TR as a patchwork. Whole region was logged. Those who wanted to sell to NPS were invited to do so. There are still a lot of private inholdings.
There was no taking. Each riverside private parcel extends a bit up the mountainsides. So the cabin owners own the riverfront. But cannot build there. They have gazebos and fire pits along the shore.
In Georgia? Thought we were talking about North Carolina!
Again, I can witness that the land and building codes in and near the Pisgah is much as you describe for Georgia. I don’t think the code could have been applied to Asheville, and I’m quite sure that the existing code did not help around Brevard or Lure lake.
It is very unlikely that anyone could have won an election, passed an initiative, or funded a state or federal project based on forcing such a code through in North Carolina.
dk,
Defn of taking varies.
A taking wrt to endangered species act is any direct or indirect impact.
A taking wrt private property is loss of all use of property, for use purpose. (If you can build on the property elsewhere, it aint been taken.
Zoning ordinances, enacted, do not require compensation for partial loss.
(Per Dolan, there simply needs a reasonable nexus between the taking impact and the proportional ‘benefit’).
Let the insurance companies weigh in. Rates are higher on the river bank than 15 feet upslope from the river. That would be encouragement without treading on landowner rights.
Over 200 acres of my Great Aunt’s land was taken by the state of North Carolina to expand a state park by claiming a need to preserve a pristine natural forest. The family had owned the land for more than 100 years. Since her husband had died and their children moved out of state, Great Aunt Susie couldn’t afford an attorney and didn’t want to cause trouble with the state over property rights, the state ‘settled’ by letting her live in her own house until she passed away. There was no monetary compensation. The government has no problem with forcing people out when they want to. Arlington Texas let Jerry Jones force the sale of houses for a little as $5k so he could get the new football stadium built. Sure, they houses were in poor condition, but the people that lived there their whole life aren’t going to be able to find a new place to live for $5k.
Teach me something I don’t understand. The article talks about Asheville and other parts of the TVA.
If I recall correctly, the State line between NC and Tennessee and the Continental Divide is the summit of the Appalachians. The tributaries of the Tennessee River do not flow from NC. Asheville has noting to do with the Tennessee Valley. Dams in the Tennessee Valley do not make the flooding better or worse on the NC side. One might call them similar but different.
In this case the flooding on the NC side was much worse because the counterclockwise circulation caused the tropical moisture to climb the mountains and precipitate on the NC side. It had nothing to do with TVA river control dams.
I usually find myself agreeing with McIntyre but this time he’s all wet.
The French Broad River does indeed make into Tennessee by way of what is known in those parts as a gap. The Swannanoa River, another that’s in the news, is a tributary.
The article says:”… flood control in the valley of the Tennessee River and its tributaries.”
The French Broad River appears to be a tributary of the Tennessee River.
From the Brittanica:”https://www.britannica.com/place/French-Broad-River
The link appears not to have copied correctly. Here is a quote from the article.
”French Broad River, river rising in the Blue Ridge, Transylvania county, western North Carolina, U.S., and flowing 210 miles (340 km) northeast past Brevard, then northwest past Asheville, N.C., and through the Great Smoky Mountains into Tennessee, where it turns west to join the Holston River near Knoxville, forming the Tennessee River. Douglas Dam and Reservoir, part of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), is on the French Broad east of Knoxville.”
You are correct. I just checked. The border is drawn in straight line segments from mountaintop to mountaintop. So the TVA is completely on the Tennessee western slopes, never in North Carolina eastern slopes.
The map in the article clearly shows that the TVA was involved with the French Broad River.
The map comes from the “Tennessee Valley Authority, Division of Water Control Planning”. The title of the map is “French Broad River in N. C., Watershed Map Showing Plan of Development”.
The TVA is the author of the study in the link. They made the report, and did the entire watershed mapping and history for the NC area in question.
The report was very interesting in numerous areas…
This data https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring-location/03451500/ shows the french river flow gage in Asheville NC cresting at 24.66 feet on sept 27th at 6 pm minor flood stage is 9.5 feet, so it crested at 15.16 feet above minor flood stage.
According to this link the 1916 flood crested at 17 ‘ above flood stage, almost 2’ higher. We have no records of what the below 1842 to 1848 hurricanes did in Asheville NC, as it was only first a town in 1850 with a population of 500, https://www.citizen-times.com/story/weather/2024/09/30/how-does-helene-compare-to-the-ashevilles-great-flood-of-1916/75450985007/
Per the below link, the Swannoa at Biltmore crested at 26′ in 1791 (Numerous reports in the TVA report suggest the 1791 flood was considerably worse then the 1916 flood.)
During Helena the Swannanoa at Biltmore crested at 26′ according to Fox news, https://www.foxweather.com/extreme-weather/helene-flooding-extremen-asheville The TVA link in the post shows a 21 feet crest in 1916 Download on pg 23. Also rainfall amounts over 23 inches were reported in 1916 as well. (See the excellent rain map in the TVA report) One thing is clear from the document. Flooding of these levels should have been expected as 70 to 100 year events or less Also, rainfall amounts vary greatly over short distances within singular events, so again, comparisons are difficult. For instance, per the link below, Asheville itself only received 2.85 inches of rain in the 1916 event, yet surrounding areas received almost 23 inches of rain. The included map with the rainfall amounts is far better information then todays reporters gather.
Regarding historic hurricanes, well Helena is not a record setter. Look at this 6 year period…
October 4, 1842 – A 955 mbar major hurricane which makes landfall on northwestern Florida produces a 20-foot (6 m) storm surge at Cedar Key. Strong winds result in severe damage in Tallahhasse. (note, almost double the storm surge of Helena)October 11, 1846 – The Great Havana Hurricane of 1846 passes near Key West with an estimated pressure of 902 mbar (hPa) and winds of possibly Category 5 status,[39] damaging or destroying all but 6 of the houses in the city. 50 are killed,[40] and damage amounts to $200,000 (1846 USD, $4.8 million 2008 USD). It is estimated it struck mainland Florida near Cedar Key, producing severe flooding and strong winds.[6]September 25, 1848 – The Great Gale of 1848 strikes near Tampa as a major hurricane with an estimated pressure of 948 mbar. Considered one of the most significant hurricanes in the Tampa area, the 15 foot (4.6 m) storm surge from the hurricane destroyed much of Tampa and nearby Fort Brooke.[42]October 11, 1848 – A major hurricane hits northwestern Florida, causing additional damage to the severe hurricane a few weeks before.So nobody’s SUV or cows had anything to do with this. We also have no idea what modern dropsconde and satellite Doppler 24 7 reading would have catagorized these, and many other historic storms, other then they would have been recorded as considerably stronger.
I am not certain Helena was truly a Cat 4 on landfall?
What you wrote seems reasonable but
Is it untrue that flood control dams on the North Carolina side were rejected?
Is it untrue, as a few replies state, that some rivers do flow into NC from Tennessee?
Regardless, either control of the rivers, or keeping out of the flood zone is required for any rational consideration. People who make the wrong choice, no doubt often through ignorance, have to be responsible for their own fate.
Asheville does appear to have an active flood control policy, including increasing the height of the North Fork reservoir and requiring new buildings in Biltmore village to be 2feet above base elevation. Whether the additional dams mentioned in the OP would have done any good given that they would have already been full and would have had to have been reduced to accomodate the rain from Helene with only a few days notice.
https://www.ashevillenc.gov/news/100-years-after-the-flood-of-1916-the-city-of-asheville-is-ready-for-the-next-one/
Asheville is at the very eastern end of the Tennessee Valley watershed, right near the divide. The areas shown in the provided map are all in that watershed, even though not in the state of Tennessee. The state border is not the divide. Any areas east of what is detailed in that map flow east towards the Atlantic.
But the dams proposed in that map would definitely affect the Tennessee River flow. The French Broad River that goes through Asheville flows northwest and joins the Tennessee River at Knoxville.
The Eastern Continental Divide is a few miles South East of Asheville. The water flowing through Asheville goes to the Gulf of Mexico via the Tennessee River basin. I’ve driven over the divide countless times on I-26.
The Tennessee Valley Authority was not exclusive to the State of Tennessee.
It was focused on the Tennessee River and tributaries, even those that spanned State borders.
The headwaters of the French Broad River are south of Asheville, NC and it flows into the Tennessee River at Knoxville. It is considered to be the oldest river in North America and possibly one of the three oldest rivers in the world which can be proven to exist at a certain geologic age. It existed before the start of the Alleghenian orogeny and cut through the spine of the Appalachians as they grew (320-340my ago). West Virginia’s New River and the Susquehanna also cut through the Appalachians during the Alleghenian, but their proven ages are slightly younger than the French Broad. The other two oldest rivers are the Meuse and Finke. The proven age of the Meuse in Europe is similar to the French Broad. The Finke in Australia and some smaller rivers predate the Alice Springs Orogeny 350-400my ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_by_age
The Laurentians in Canada are much older than the Appalachians, but the rivers around the Laurentians cannot be dated because they did not dissect those mountains as they rose.
Take a look at the Green River in Google Earth to see how it cut canyons as the surrounding land was uplifted. The meanders it had before the uplift are incised into the uplifted land.
TVA was also getting set up to be an exemplar for nuclear power, planning to build 17 nuclear reactors. Seven were completed and continue to operate, but the remaining 10 units were eventually cancelled.
How do we reconcile repeated failure due to “local opposition” with the claim:
Might we not say that the voters at the time(s) the decision(s) were made, found more important candidates or issues in opposion? Flooding in the Alps might be laid at the feet of Socialist central planners. Repeated floodng over the past 30 years, along the Texas and Arkansas Red river might be blamed on mismanagement by the Corps of Engineers (even from the same people who deliberately destroyed flood control dikes on their property). I think this is much less true in North Carolina.
Granted, people don’t evaluate risk well, and they were undoubtedly misinformed about, or completely unaware of the chance of flooding. However, to put much or any of this on misuse of funds for climate change idealogy is a little much to ask.
The city seems to be very progressive: “In June 2021, Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer was one of 11 U.S. mayors to form Mayors Organized for Reparations and Equity (MORE), a coalition of municipal leaders dedicated to starting pilot reparations programs in their cities” [Wikipedia]
The timing was not coincidental. Opposition first, then later chasing grasshoppers.
Google Search on “us decommissioned dams” comes up with the following text:
As of 2023, 2,119 dams have been removed in the United States since 1912. The number of dams removed each year varies, but here are some recent examples:
2022: 65 dams were removed, reconnecting more than 430 river miles across 20 states. The top states for dam removals in 2022 were Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.
2021: 57 dams were removed.
2020: 69 dams were removed.
The largest dam removal project in US history was the removal of four dams on the Klamath River in Oregon and California: Iron Gate Dam, Copco Dams 1 and 2, and JC Boyle Dam.
No turning back: The largest dam removal in US history …
The removal of these dams allowed salmon to swim freely in the Klamath River and its tributaries for the first time in over a century. The project was a collaboration between the Klamath River Renewal Corporation, tribal nations, conservationists, and government officials.
Dams are sometimes decommissioned because they:
Slow the natural flow of water
Warm the water, which can promote the spread of algae and parasites
Have caused the extinction of many species of mussels, fish, and even a dolphin
Dam Removals Continue Across The U.S. in 2022 – – American Rivers
Feb 14, 2023 — 65 dams were removed across the country in 2022, reconnecting more than 430 upstream river miles across 20 states. …Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
____________________________________________________________________________
Follow that LINK and a [Ctrl-f] search on “flood” comes up 0/0
Dunno ’bout you but as far as I’m concerned, that is pretty much all you need to know.
Have caused the extinction of many species of mussels, fish, and even a dolphin
My, “a dolphin”. There is a story in there somewhere.
Hi Steve,
You write “diversion of TVA interest to climate change research, as opposed to its mandate of flood control.”
A common feature of most “green” initiatives is a product of their simplicity, since often the authors have low educational levels – someone mentioned “thick as two short planks”. This leads to the green “remedy” for climate change “crises” being disproportionate in the balance.
For example, we have “threatened species” stopping or delaying large industrial developments that are part of the last few decades of the unequivocal advance of human social comfort, health and longevity.
The Australian Federal department of Climate Change, Energy, The Environment & Water (yes, it is real, DCCEE&W) has propaganda-like material like this on Web sites:
“No one will ever again see a Paradise Parrot flash its rainbow colours across the sky or see the Tasmanian tiger slink through the wet Tasmanian forest. They are extinct. They are two of the over 50 types, or species, of Australian animals and over 60 species of Australian plants that are extinct. It is very sad, but it is too late. Extinction is forever.”
“Humans have great power to change and destroy habitats and so reduce the chances of species surviving. Species and their habitats are affected when vegetation is cleared for uses such as agriculture, forestry, mines, suburbs and roads; when rivers are dammed to store water; or when swamps are drained for developments.”
One of their remedies to preserve species is
“Use less energy. The manufacture and use of power and the use of cars and other forms of transport consumes vast amounts of energy. This energy comes from land which could be the habitat of threatened species. Air pollution caused by fuel consumption is beginning to have an effect on the climate. Cool mountains may become warmer, deserts wetter and rainforests drier. These changes are likely to change or destroy the habitats of many species.”
Generally, the remedies are not balanced, in the same way as you note that dams were not built because of local objections that the rivers were attractive. The balance between attraction and flooding seems to favour dams if you are not green through low intelligence or susceptibility to propaganda.
Geoff S
The human argument seems to centre on no dams or dams with no leaks.
Nature’s argument seems to involve beavers building leaky dams.
Do leaky dams allow salmon to swim up river? Do leaky dams maintain a flowing river 12 months of the year? When extreme rainfall events occur, do leaky dams break down and cause catastrophic flooding events?
It seems to me that in arid areas like the SW, beavers creating leaky dams is undoubtedly beneficial.
Whether the same would be true for areas susceptible to tropical storms is far more open to discussion.
There is one reason and one reason only for Gaia’s wrath in Tennessee. The people lost their way and failed to pay due homage to our Green Lord with Certification-
The billion-dollar solar industry’s complex rebate scheme has left hundreds of small businesses chasing debts (msn.com)
Excellent article. Thank you.
In the late 1960’s I designed dams for the US Flood Control Program in West Virginia. NEPA was designed to put the Program out of business and it did. Thousands of dams were never built.
They said we were drowning rivers. Better for rivers to drown people? One of my dams was a NEPA test case, and never built. This is why I have been tracking the green movement’s rise to power for 54 years. I took an early hit. Now you know how I felt.
Did the design of the dams take sediment transportation to the ocean to preserve the beaches into account ?
In the ’40s and ’50s, the Army Corp of Engineers planned on building many dams on the tributaries of the CT River. They only managed to build a few before the enviros stopped them. There had been some big floods in the region in the ’30s. One of the successful projects is near me in north central MA. The lake is now a very popular kayaking spot- one of the best in the region. We haven’t had any big floods in the region in recent decades but it will happen and when it does, I hope people remember how the Corp could have prevented it and created many wonderful lakes. The lake near me was mostly swamp before it was cleared and turned into a lake. There’s plenty of swamps in New England. Converting some to lakes is a great idea- but of course the enviro won’t let it happen. But do they go into the swamps for pleasure? Of course not. Nobody does.
The enviros love to talk talk about dams “destroying habitats” never considering that dams also form new habitats.
bingo!
We took the RV from Saskatchewan to Florida and back. There were many flood control dams along the way with excellent lakeside RV campsites. I remarked at the time that we were in luck. That they would never have been permitted to build those dams today.