• 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
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

It is and will always be an ecological and economical disaster. Economical being we will be in huge debts that we won't be able to pay back the money in the current climate. Secondly, it does not solve the environmental costs and has a looooot of tail risks associated with it.

More with Nassim Taleb on this.



What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview by Bent Flyvbjerg :: SSRN
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
After all the conspiracy theories, apparently the plan failed because of the government negligence

the plan failed because the contractor was threatened by the mob and the militias and the army and internal security forces refused to provide a security attachment to protect the staff and the heavy equipment at the site, and consequently was not able to begin the work before the last agreed upon day on the september 4th.

why do we have to set you straight on every single point? mesh tabi3i.
 

dyyyy

Well-Known Member
the plan failed because the contractor was threatened by the mob and the militias and the army and internal security forces refused to provide a security attachment to protect the staff and the heavy equipment at the site, and consequently was not able to begin the work before the last agreed upon day on the september 4th.

why do we have to set you straight on every single point? mesh tabi3i.
This might only affect point 3. But the other 2 points are solely on the government
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
It is and will always be an ecological and economical disaster. Economical being we will be in huge debts that we won't be able to pay back the money in the current climate. Secondly, it does not solve the environmental costs and has a looooot of tail risks associated with it.

More with Nassim Taleb on this.



What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview by Bent Flyvbjerg :: SSRN
every dam has an impact on the previous ecological system, however dams help establish new ecological systems which offsets the original impact. it suffices to say that the dam will provide a considerable water supply for an agriculture environment going dry.

it is also not an economical disaster, to the contrary, it is an economic opportunity, it will help the bisri area prosper significantly, and it also suffices to say that it will save 2 million people a hefty load of money that is being wasted on alternative means to provide water.

this dam was a strategic necessity for Lebanon; there is no escaping it, it will be done sooner or later.
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
This might only affect point 3. But the other 2 points are solely on the government
point three is the only point with an actual hard deadline set, september 4th. the next day the project was cancelled. it is the only point relevant to the cancellation.
 

dyyyy

Well-Known Member
point three is the only point with an actual hard deadline set, september 4th. the next day the project was cancelled. it is the only point relevant to the cancellation.
This is the link from the world bank , and they answer specifically this question



10. If the reason to cancel the project is civil society’s opposition to it, this opposition has been there for a couple of years. So why cancel it now?

The project has been canceled due to the lack of progress in implementing the project and in completing the tasks that are preconditions to the commencement of construction of the dam, namely, adoption of the ECP, and agreement on the O&M arrangements.
 

Walidos

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
It is and will always be an ecological and economical disaster. Economical being we will be in huge debts that we won't be able to pay back the money in the current climate. Secondly, it does not solve the environmental costs and has a looooot of tail risks associated with it.

More with Nassim Taleb on this.



What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview by Bent Flyvbjerg :: SSRN
With respect to Taleb, I like his books, and actually met him in person, he is very clever but no, he is not a reference when it comes to infrastructure projects. You have to weigh the ecological impact to the need for water and boost to the economy. I disagree that it is negative on an economic level because you lose more by not having the economy moving and creating value. This project and others creates jobs, movement of money and value for the economy, it’s end result enables water for irrigation as well as domestic use.
Net, the project has been cancelled but the need for water, both irrigation and domestic use is there. I am waiting to see what the new government will propose... we cannot wait till the issue happens to react post fact...
 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
looool there’s barely any country in the world where underground water reserves are not overexploited and trying to move to other water sources like desalinization plants or dams to reduce water stress for irrigation and keep potable water reserves for human usage.
underground water tables overexploitation leads to heavy salinization which makes undrinkable/usable and turns the overland arid overtime and can lead to structural issues and sinkholes.

i thought lies and populism were limited to politicians, seems self serving and proclaimed saviors use them too.

nappes phreatiques 2al 😂😂😂😂😂
 

HalaMadrid

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
After all the conspiracy theories, apparently the plan failed because of the government negligence

The first two are absolutely pretextual reasons and Legal Agenda should have provided that context as I'm sure they have folks familiar with international donor arrangements.

Besides that, I'm not sure why they want to take this victory away from the ordinary citizens and activists who put their bodies on the line to protect the environment. It's like they now want to disclaim ownership of something they fought for...
 

cedarheart

Legendary Member
Mr. 150 vote speaking in Lebanese people name :lol:

Touché !! :lol:

not in his defense, but come on, give him some credit, he got 328 votes, that's more than Eddie Demirjian who got elected with 77 votes and now legislating in the name of Lebanese people , and more than the Moustpaha Husseini (elected with 256 votes) and a bit short of Pano (elected in same district) who got 539 votes ;)...
 

JB81

Legendary Member
Touché !! :lol:

not in his defense, but come on, give him some credit, he got 328 votes, that's more than Eddie Demirjian who got elected with 77 votes and now legislating in the name of Lebanese people , and more than the Moustpaha Husseini (elected with 256 votes) and a bit short of Pano (elected in same district) who got 539 votes ;)...

Tafdili votes is not the measure. It's how many votes did a party got.
 

dyyyy

Well-Known Member
The first two are absolutely pretextual reasons and Legal Agenda should have provided that context as I'm sure they have folks familiar with international donor arrangements.

Besides that, I'm not sure why they want to take this victory away from the ordinary citizens and activists who put their bodies on the line to protect the environment. It's like they now want to disclaim ownership of something they fought for...
Legal Agenda is not a media company they're focused on explaining laws and procedures, so basically they just translated what the world bank said.

You can say that the world bank took the decision to keep things ambiguous about the role of the protests (its in the link question 10) most probably because they don't want to look politicized...



Personally I don't know what is the real reason because the protests were more intense a month ago and still the world bank gave them an extension so no idea what was the real reason but I'm sure they're not lying about the first 2 points even if they're not the main reason
 

HalaMadrid

Well-Known Member
Orange Room Supporter
Legal Agenda is not a media company they're focused on explaining laws and procedures, so basically they just translated what the world bank said.

You can say that the world bank took the decision to keep things ambiguous about the role of the protests (its in the link question 10) most probably because they don't want to look politicized...



Personally I don't know what is the real reason because the protests were more intense a month ago and still the world bank gave them an extension so no idea what was the real reason but I'm sure they're not lying about the first 2 points even if they're not the main reason
Yah, I know, that's especially why they have the responsibility to provide context because they are legal specialists, not MTV or OTV. My point was just that a lot of civil society are now trying to disclaim connection with stopping the dam because to the average person who may have been a beneficiary, it's going to look politically bad in the future.

I didn't say the reasons the WB were a lie. I said it was pretextual, i.e., a technically true thing that is used as an excuse to cover the real reason. I don't know what the real reason is, but I strongly suspect given the WB's leadership and recent events, it's an American cudgel.
 
Top