• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

Lebanon's Dam Projects Destructive or Constructive ?

Do you believe the dam projects in Lebanon are?

  • But/And is succeeding already, with no proved related corruptions!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    15

President-Elect Apo

Your will, my hands.
Orange Room Supporter
Away from political bickering and trolling... has anyone even looked into the scientific and feasibility study of this dam project? on what basis did you base your position? What are the cost/benefits of that project? Are said studies published?

Sorry but if u haven't looked into that, your positions (whether pro-BesriDam or anti-BesriDam) are just out of sheep mentality

Edit: Dams are not just either totally good or totally bad... there are many factors to take into consideration
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
Away from political bickering and trolling... has anyone even looked into the scientific and feasibility study of this dam project? on what basis did you base your position? What are the cost/benefits of that project? Are said studies published?

Sorry but if u haven't looked into that, your positions (whether pro-BesriDam or anti-BesriDam) are just out of sheep mentality

Edit: Dams are not just either totally good or totally bad... there are many factors to take into consideration
the complete studies are available on the wordbank's web page corresponding to the bisri dam project.


it is also available in arabic.

the debate is far from scientific, the made up concerns are brought up simply as justifications for rejecting the project, despite all of them being addressed in the studies that are found on the worldbank's website.
 

LForever

Well-Known Member
LForever you seem like a reasonable guy. Does that article sound scientific to you?...

Every reliable international organization approved it. They all said groundwater isn’t enough or isn’t suitable.

There’s diverging views of course like in every project. But the scientists that keep getting quoted are worse than the economists that NBN invites.


Anyway canceling this project is better for gebran I think. Can you imagine the propaganda when junblats monkey start attacking the tractors and workers in the dam? Alla ma ken sakkaton aa 5 snin. We would have paid more from our taxes w mich tale3elna shi menno.

Shame for the people living in Beirut.

But anyway it will probably be relaunched when a mafia approved contractor gets it

مش عم احكي من منطلق سياسي او نكاية بجبران.

يا خيي اذا عندك هدر يقدر ٤٠-٥٠ ٪؜ عنبع جعيتا وعشبكة توزيع المي. شو الافضل: تحل مشكلة الهدر وهيك يمكن ما تعوز تعمل سد بهالكلفة وتدمر وادي بهالحجم او تعمل سد بكلف مليار و٢٠٠ مليون دولار بوقت الدولة مفلسة ؟
شو صار بسد بلعا والمسيلحة وبرصا وغيرون.
سد القرعون صار بحيرة مجارير.
مش اهم نحل مشكلة تلوث المياه السطحية والجوفية ؟

بفرنسا مياه الشرب باغلبيتها مصدرها مياه جوفية.

والله القصة بالنسبة لي مش شخصية ونكاية بجبران.

سلامات
 

mikeys71

Well-Known Member
Dams are usually used to generate power, flood control and agriculture use. Rarely dams are built for drinking water.
 

LForever

Well-Known Member
كل مشروع بيعملو التيار بتعملو عليه حملة تتفشلو
وغير أحزاب بتسرق مدون أي مشروع وساكتين عنهن.
فينا نعرف كيف بدنا نبني بلد معكن؟

الجواب حسب كيف بتتعامل مع القوات.
يا بتعتبرهن فيهن يوقفو مشروع بهالحجم بغض النظر عن اذا المشروع كان صح او غلط وهيك بتعامل مهعن عا قد حجمن
يا بعتبرهن ما عندن تأثير ساعتها جوابك ما له معنا بما انو مش هني يلي رح يبنو البلد.

بالنسبة لموقف القوات من باقي الاحزاب انا اؤيدك مية بالمية . بس ما فهمت عليك يمكن منيح ، شو قصدك بغير احزاب بتسرق من دون ايا مشروع ، قصدك انوا التيار بيسرق بس بقدم مشاريع ؟
 

Aegon

Active Member
Hw much have the Corrupt Lords Saad Hariri and Gebran Bassil lose on this on this canceled project?
 

JB81

Legendary Member
الجواب حسب كيف بتتعامل مع القوات.
يا بتعتبرهن فيهن يوقفو مشروع بهالحجم بغض النظر عن اذا المشروع كان صح او غلط وهيك بتعامل مهعن عا قد حجمن
يا بعتبرهن ما عندن تأثير ساعتها جوابك ما له معنا بما انو مش هني يلي رح يبنو البلد.

بالنسبة لموقف القوات من باقي الاحزاب انا اؤيدك مية بالمية . بس ما فهمت عليك يمكن منيح ، شو قصدك بغير احزاب بتسرق من دون ايا مشروع ، قصدك انوا التيار بيسرق بس بقدم مشاريع ؟

لن سلم جدل إنو التيار سرق، عل أقل جبلك مي.
غير سرقك ومقعدك عل الحصيرة.

بالنسبة للقوات، ليسو إلا أدوات للتحرتق عل التيار متحالفين مع المافيات الحاكمة لإفشال أي مشروع
 

oldschool

Active Member
Ya khaye, lamma tsa33ar el project, the world bank supervised the bids and the pricing. So the price is right for this project. Btejo bet arrero men rasskon ano akid fi ser2a, w huwe aslan ma sar.

La bet farjo wen el ser2a, la betjibo hada yaamlo arkhass, hottkon 3a aret hake. cha3eb khwerif.
 

oldschool

Active Member
مش عم احكي من منطلق سياسي او نكاية بجبران.

يا خيي اذا عندك هدر يقدر ٤٠-٥٠ ٪؜ عنبع جعيتا وعشبكة توزيع المي. شو الافضل: تحل مشكلة الهدر وهيك يمكن ما تعوز تعمل سد بهالكلفة وتدمر وادي بهالحجم او تعمل سد بكلف مليار و٢٠٠ مليون دولار بوقت الدولة مفلسة ؟
شو صار بسد بلعا والمسيلحة وبرصا وغيرون.
سد القرعون صار بحيرة مجارير.
مش اهم نحل مشكلة تلوث المياه السطحية والجوفية ؟

بفرنسا مياه الشرب باغلبيتها مصدرها مياه جوفية.

والله القصة بالنسبة لي مش شخصية ونكاية بجبران.

سلامات


But the UNDP and World bank and etc... studies said that groundwater sources are insufficient and or salinated and inadequate for use now. So whats the point of fixing the 40% loss if it exists and can be fixed with reasonable cost if its not going to be sufficient, while you can build a dam that will provide 100% of what you need, which you wont get when you just fix the 40% loss.

As for the other dams, nbahh sawton el wizara w y2oulo ano the dam is now at a testing stage for 2 years, where it will be filled/emptied to test where the leaks are.

The Brisa dam btw was started before FPM and it failed and guess who was a consultant for it... Paul Abi rached.
 

TayyarBeino

Legendary Member
جوزف زخور

@zakhour_joe​

·
6h

سد شبروح انقذ كسروان من العطش، رفغ اسعار الاراضي، وزاد السكن والعمران فيها، سد القيسماني انعش القرى العطشى في المتن . و اعاد اليها الخضار. و اسعار اراضيها الى ارتفاع. المناطق الاخرى لديها سيترنات (صهاريج) تأتيها بالمياه الى باب المستريح
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
But the UNDP and World bank and etc... studies said that groundwater sources are insufficient and or salinated and inadequate for use now. So whats the point of fixing the 40% loss if it exists and can be fixed with reasonable cost if its not going to be sufficient, while you can build a dam that will provide 100% of what you need, which you wont get when you just fix the 40% loss.

As for the other dams, nbahh sawton el wizara w y2oulo ano the dam is now at a testing stage for 2 years, where it will be filled/emptied to test where the leaks are.

The Brisa dam btw was started before FPM and it failed and guess who was a consultant for it... Paul Abi rached.
you really think that the UNDP and the experts are more knowledgeable than zouzou ebba w @LForever about dams and their details?

don't waste your time, they have the whole truth laid out in front of them. when they run out of scientific excuses they turn to commissions. a cheap tribal mentality that miserably fails to rise to the level of citizenship.
 

TayyarBeino

Legendary Member
بالفيديو .. غدي فرنسيس لوليد جنبلاط: قبضت 20 مليون دولار استملاكات في سد بسري.. اذا بتردن بيفيدونا كتير بهالأزمة


نشر بتاريخ Sep 6 2020 | 20:49 PM
 

TayyarBeino

Legendary Member
too late...why SH didn't talk to Jumbi
أشار عضو كتلة "المستقبل" النائب محمد الحجار، في حديث تلفزيوني، إلى أن مشروع سد بسري كان يؤمن المياه لـ40% من سكان لبنان، معتبراً أنه كان المطلوب القيام بدراسات إضافية وحوار مع المعترضين، قائلاً: "أضعنا فرصة كبيرة".



ولفت النائب الحجار إلى أن مصير المشروع يتوقف على الأيام المقبلة وعلى الطريقة التي ستتعاطى بها معه من جانب الحكومة العتيدة.

 

HalaMadrid

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
But also Ghajar didn’t do what was required of him and gave them that’s excuse. Unless he did and they said it wasn’t enough. We need more details and there’s a responsibility on the ministry involved.
I'm just positing a theory. I really don't know if it checks out. You may be right that the government gave them an excuse, but if it did, it was basically because the WB was fishing for the excuse. These are the 3 things the government was supposed to do according to the WB's cancellation notice:

The WB indicated that the suspended portion of the Loan would be cancelled unless it receives satisfactory evidence that:

(a) GOL has finalized the Ecological Compensation Plan (ECP) following due process and in consultation with key stakeholders by no later than September 4, 2020;

(b) GOL has finalized the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) arrangements by no later than August 24, 2020; and

(c) the contractor is mobilized at the worksite by no later than September 4, 2020.

The GOL submitted a draft ECP on August 12, 2020, and the WB provided its comments on August 25, 2020. To date, these comments have not been addressed to the satisfaction of the WB and stakeholder consultations have not taken place. The GOL submitted a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the O&M arrangements on August 24, 2020. The MoU departs from the requirements of the Loan Agreement and the WB requested further details on the institutional and financial mechanisms put in place between the Ministry of Energy and Water and the Beirut Mount Lebanon Water Establishment. Without this information, the WB is not in a position to determine that the covenant in the Loan Agreement addressing the O&M arrangements has been complied with. Finally, the contractor has not been mobilized at the worksite.

As of the agreed deadline of September 4, 2020, the WB has not received satisfactory evidence that the three required actions have been achieved. The cancelation of the Bisri Dam project came into effect on September 5, 2020.

The first two sound like they're largely completed and the explanation is just WB/international donor speak for we're just fishing for a reason. You'll see later in the Q&A that stakeholder consultations did take place, and for the WB those are largely performative anyway. Doesn't actually sound to me like there's a basis under those first two to cancel the contract. The third is the only one that actually matters and is the one the US has the most control over. But I really don't know there could be other factors or maybe the government really just thought it wasn't worth the fight over, which I sort of agree with. But the WB doesn't usually do years of assessments, contractual negotiations, etc, just to pull a contract because they are insufficiently satisfied that civil society was consulted.

True. Schenker met with those whom oppose the dam, only in spite of FPM
It's not directed at FPM or even the president, if my theory is right, it would be to basically tell all of the state actors "either get in line or we'll starve you." And I'm sure you know what "get in line" means to this US administration.
 

SAVO

Active Member
there is sort of Character assassination against G.Bassil .
the issue is not about the utility of the dam or not ..(and here i think it a good project since lot of lebanese water is wasted in the sea )..
the issue is about the next presidential election..

and the taef mafia want to reduce the power of Bassil and Fpm with an american green light .
 

oldschool

Active Member
I'm just positing a theory. I really don't know if it checks out. You may be right that the government gave them an excuse, but if it did, it was basically because the WB was fishing for the excuse. These are the 3 things the government was supposed to do according to the WB's cancellation notice:



The first two sound like they're largely completed and the explanation is just WB/international donor speak for we're just fishing for a reason. You'll see later in the Q&A that stakeholder consultations did take place, and for the WB those are largely performative anyway. Doesn't actually sound to me like there's a basis under those first two to cancel the contract. The third is the only one that actually matters and is the one the US has the most control over. But I really don't know there could be other factors or maybe the government really just thought it wasn't worth the fight over, which I sort of agree with. But the WB doesn't usually do years of assessments, contractual negotiations, etc, just to pull a contract because they are insufficiently satisfied that civil society was consulted.


It's not directed at FPM or even the president, if my theory is right, it would be to basically tell all of the state actors "either get in line or we'll starve you." And I'm sure you know what "get in line" means to this US administration.

I wonder if bassil just dropped the project on purpose since he knew if works started it was gonna be the start of a huge media campaign against him every day, and ultimately with very little benefit from the project for his base
 
Top