Page 1 of 1
Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 00:03
by andywoolloo
don't we need a vote or something before one country can affect the rotation of the earth FFS?
http://www.theenergylibrary.com/node/11435
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 00:08
by MatsP
No. Every time there is a earthquake of any significance (Richter scale of 6 or more), the earth "moves in time" a bit. But hardly measurable amounts.
It is much worse for the future of earth's creatures that the dam has made extinct many species of fish and other aquatic life-forms around the dam - both up- and down-stream of the dam [no don't ask me which ones, I'm just confident that this is the case without checking it].
--
mats
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 00:10
by andywoolloo
yes, that too! re the fish and animals.
but we cannot control when we have an earthquake. But we don't have to make those dams, rt?
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 00:22
by MatsP
Oh, sure. But there are only 3-4 rivers that potentially has this effect on the planet, and that makes 3-4 x 0.06 microseconds (or 60 nanoseconds).
Speed of light is 186000 miles per second. In 60 nanoseconds, light will travel about 18 meters/55 ft. Bear in mind that light travels to the moon in about 1.3 seconds. It's not a lot of time. And this is one of the largest dams ever built.
Or put another way: If we shift 60 nanoseconds every day [not just the once when filling up the dam the first time], it would take 45000 years to shift earths rotation by a second. Even if we fill the dam EVERY SECOND [which is almost impossible], it would take over half a year to shift the earth's rotation by one second.
It is an insignificant change to the planet - the impact on life is MUCH worse.
--
Mats
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 00:25
by MatsP
I would like to add that if this makes people protest against dams - fine. But it's not the important factor of dams.
--
Mats
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 07:17
by Mike_Noren
MatsP wrote: [no don't ask me which ones, I'm just confident that this is the case without checking it].
Yes; a double-digit number of species were lost as a result of the dam. Casualties included one of the world's freshwater dolphins, the world's largest sturgeon, and the world's largest freshwater turtle (although I think there's still one or two of those in captivity somewhere).
As a tragic aside the two last sturgeons were a mature pair which died in captivity after having been fed only bread.
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 22:23
by andywoolloo
so I am on ur side Mats, dams bad...bad for everything... right? I do not like them sam I am.
and it's a big impact on the world just like the rio xingu dam crap. there needs to be more discussion among countries when all will be affected.
Re: Shouldn't we maybe have voted on this..as a planet?
Posted: 09 Jun 2010, 10:13
by catmar
There was mention of the dam in the April National Geographic mag, which was devoted to the subject of freshwater. The Earth's axis has been tilted by nearly a inch by the dam and the water behind it-I still can't get my head around facts like that. I agree with andywoolloo, projects of this magnitude need to be discussed globally-but would China listen?