Live data from Hacker News

What if California's dams fail?

nytimes.com

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#61
Fun fact: In some statistics on the safety of different forms of electricity generation, the largest dam failure [1] is left out, which brings hydropower down to same level of safety as nuclear, wind and solar. Our World in Data is an honest source, and reports both values [2].

If you see hydro reported as safe as nuclear, solar and wind (for example in [3]), then they excluded the largest accident. If hydro is 2 orders of magnitude more deadly than nuclear, wind and solar, then they included everything.

    solar 0.02 deaths/TWh
    nuclear 0.03
    wind 0.04
    
    hydro 0.02 without, 1.5 with
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

[3] https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/power/weekly-data-fossi...

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#62
I live in Sacramento, there is some context the author may not have been aware of.

First off, hydrology and specifically excess water management in the valley is often geared toward irrigation and replenishing ground water. We have areas that are suppose to become flooded to keep the pressure off of the earthen levees along the river and delta (created by the confluence of the Sacramento to and San Joaquin rivers) as the water drains into the San Francisco Bay. This gives us a way to slow the discharge of water give it time to soak in join the water table. There are improvements here like widening the river channels we’ve carved out to expose more surface area for it to soak into, but there are no plans for this afaik.

Second, we have a network of creeks, canals, and drainage ditches that move excess water to less harmful places, Dry Creek (which is dry most of the year) was carrying water as it should in march. These provide essential, perennial habitats that were once naturally occurring, and are filled and let dry by design.

Like most new media coverage, with this article being no exception, there is a tendency to focus on the main dams, but in the case of the American River, there are 5 dams in all managing water flow, with a dozen or so more impounding various tributaries. Combined this is known as the Upper American River Project, which acts a extra power capacity that SMUD (Sacramento’s community-owned power company) can turn on quickly. This network holds back nearly 430,000 acre/ft of water. A cascading failure in these dams can cause a significant portion of this (with the total capacity being released as almost 1/2 of Folsom’s capacity) could cause a spillway event and a wall of water careening downstream and potentially rupturing levees that were not rated for this volume. Because of the nature of the river’s bend and the narrowing of distance between the banks, the most obvious spot a break would occur is near Sacramento State University and would fill up the River Park neighborhood instantly given that exists between two levees when a new one was built to restrict the flow of the river so they can build more homes. The floodwaters would make it to downtown, destroying the affluent area of East Sacramento, Midtown, and running south through land park, elmhurst, and oak park. This is just one disaster scenarios that could lead to post-Katrina New Orleans type of flooding, with only hours of warning to execute a poorly planned evacuation.

The upper American River project series of damns is fairly well maintained, but for every Sierra Nevada snowmelt River that drain into then Sacramento or San Joaquin, there is a similar network of dams at varying levels of repair, waiting for a large cascading failure event to give the poor unsuspecting towns in the valley an unfortunate surprise.

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#63
post #45

Funny thing no one talks about. Maybe theory. Probably not. The Sacramento river, if flooded by say the dam failure of Oroville, could reach Stockton. If that happens the city would be a foot or two underwater. Little does anyone know there are contingency plans to literally blow the levees along the river and flood the nearby (mostly) farming land.

Such contingency plans are quite common, are they not? The water has to go somewhere , so better redirect it to the place where it causes the least amount of damage.

There are designated floodplains such as the Yolo bypass that water is able to be diverted to all along the rivers.

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is probably the most prepared state in the US, by far, for the climate issues coming. The problem is it’s also the most currently affected. Mostly due to historic forestry mismanagement (which they’ve corrected but it takes time to make an impact) and the maliciously incompetent behavior of PG&E. Most of the East Coast is going to be a mess. Same with states near the Gulf. Texas can’t even function now in…

> forestry mismanagement (which they’ve corrected but it takes time to make an impact) no, this is trivializing badly. A more accurate statement is work, and there are varying opinions. The progress might be that some selection of smart, concerned and able public members now know about this topic, and discuss it at all without falling into fundemental disagreements. At this time, one estimate shows fifteen percent of…

I don’t know what you think you’re saying but you don’t appear to be responding to anything I said & it reads like a bad copy & paste of a ChatGPT response.

But to your point: Millions of homes being in danger is a big problem but hardly the only one. Huge forest fires—homes in their path or not—are an ecological disaster. They are more likely with the bad forestry management I mentioned that it will likely take a decade to undo.

None of what you said is at all relevant to that.

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#68
post #61

Fun fact: In some statistics on the safety of different forms of electricity generation, the largest dam failure [1] is left out, which brings hydropower down to same level of safety as nuclear, wind and solar. Our World in Data is an honest source, and reports both values [2]. If you see hydro reported as safe as nuclear, solar and wind (for example in [3]), then they excluded the largest accident. If hydro is 2 ord…

Interesting. Is there a rationale for excluding it?

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> forestry mismanagement (which they’ve corrected but it takes time to make an impact) no, this is trivializing badly. A more accurate statement is work, and there are varying opinions. The progress might be that some selection of smart, concerned and able public members now know about this topic, and discuss it at all without falling into fundemental disagreements. At this time, one estimate shows fifteen percent of…

I don’t know what you think you’re saying but you don’t appear to be responding to anything I said & it reads like a bad copy & paste of a ChatGPT response. But to your point: Millions of homes being in danger is a big problem but hardly the only one. Huge forest fires—homes in their path or not—are an ecological disaster. They are more likely with the bad forestry management I mentioned that it will likely take a de…

"forest mismanagement has been corrected" you stand by that ?

Re: What if California's dams fail?

#70
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waiting for the big flood is kind of like waiting for the big earthquake, It’s either going to happen tomorrow or 200 years from now, and either way there’s nothing you can do about it except hope you die quickly

You could avoid living in a place likely to flood during a 100 year flood

Can’t help it if something like 5 trillion dollars of our economy is built on a fault line and they’re forcing people back to said fault line for in person work

You find a way to get them all to relocate and I’ll book the first ticket

Post reply on HN