Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Ok, if you say so i will tone down the retorts but ignoramus is the same as moron/idiot that other members call our community.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South–North_Water_Transfer_Project
reportthat other members call our community.
Not the waters of the Brahmaputra as that is impossible in plain words, the North bank tributaries to the river that hold enormous significance for Bangladesh.
That's the thing, i rarely report posts. Will do so from now on as other members seem to harbour a vengeful agenda towards my posts. Thanks for the heads up, sir/ma'am.report
I found this tread through reports ...
This is just 1152 km canal running mostly through North China plain. I do not know about details, but there are some geographic suitability in those region to undertake such project, because such north-south canal exist in China since ancient ages. The famed Grand Canal of China was dug two thousands years ago linking northern and central part of China was the main water borne transportation corridor since ages. This water carrier follow that famed Grand canal of China. This Chinese project is noway similar to river interlinking involving Brahmaputra through Siliguri corridor.
1152 km is just? For comparison, its the length of the Brahmaputra from Namcha Barwa to Meghna estuary. If envisioned, the interlinked channels will also run through the flood plains of the duars and the Brahmaputra valley. Other areas like central India will have problems of transporting water against gradient, not Assam, Bengal or Bihar.
1152 km is not short, but compared to the project you are talking about it is certainly short. Given the curved route, 1152 km will barely leave West Bengal in it's journey towards South India.
There will not be a single canal from the Brahmaputra to the rivers down south, you are misinterpreting the point. Objective is to link the western most north bank tributaries of the Brahmaputra like the Teesta, Sankosh, Manas and Jogighopa flowing from Bhutan to the Ganges which will be much lesser than 1152 km. From there the link will be created to connect Ganga to the Chota Nagpur rivers like Damodar and Subarnarekha with the ultimate aim of connecting to the Mahanadi.
That's the whole idea of the Brahmaputra project, create dams and reservoirs to generate electricity up in the hills and divert the waters towards the Ganga as they reach the flood plains of the duars. It will be very easy as the Northern Indian plains have a general slope towards the Ganga.
Diverting rivers is a plan that backfires after a while. Rivers have natural drainage characteristics, to defy them is to invite expensive man-made disaster. Look at the flooding that is happening upstream in Bihar because of water not draining properly through Farakka and Hooghly. On top of this, Indians are too cheap and disorganized to dredge their rivers on regular basis, so it is a double-whammy. Like I say - payback is a B*TCH!
On top of this, Chaiwala and his Sanghi cohorts will never pull off these wet-dream interlinking canal projects. Indians are not Chinese!
Enough said.
Agreed 100% on that last point.
These backwoods Ahom morons have no clue what type of technology was used to make a bridge like the Jamuna bridge. And they have the gall to compare it with one of their 'Bharti Teknalaji' cement contraptions.
Some idiots are comparing Padma Bridge with the cheap garbage piece-of-crap Bogibeel contraption.
Too funny.
For Jamuna Bridge they studied the river's hydraulics for the last recorded 200 years to ensure river training occurs properly, even in the peak monsoon season. It was a massive undertaking that will stand there for the next one hundred years and pilings were driven deep deep underground under riverbed to ensure stability. you can't use the likes of cheap-@$$ low-rent ahom throwaway projects because at Jamuna Bridge site the river is far deeper and wider, especially during monsoon.
These idiots jump up and down about their two-lane garbage bridges built on shallow pilings where rivers are not anywhere as deep or wide as what we have. Idiots.
So it will not divert water from main Brahmaputra river, just from it's some tributaries. Still I would like to see how they channel all those water through a narrow passage between Bangladesh and Nepal border to connect with Ganges.
That's what i have been saying from the beginning, as we both know that diversion of an unstable river is next to impossible. But those are very important rivers for your North Western part of the country.
It will benefit you too, there is an alternate route proposed if you come on board, one that will connect the Jogighopa, Teesta and Manas to the Farraka easing your concerns. Secondly, we might address your concerns re the Teesta water sharing as the river would have adequate water then in all seasons. Finally, you will get a share of power from the hydel plants upstream. I don't see any reason for you to get unnecessarily worked up because of our interlinking plans. The ball's in your court!
Still it would be bad for the environment. The intricate balance formed by those rivers with land and it's flora and fauna in the region will be negatively affected. Disrupting the natural course of river is never good in a long run.
Nice share, rail connectivity to Arunachal, Nagaland interior (Dimapur already was a railway hub) and Manipur was promised by the Central Government and they have been true to their word. With the commissioning of India's longest rail-cum road bridge in Bogibeel, Naharlagun in Arunachal has already been connected, now it's the turn of other two states.
Studies have found that building reservoirs in the upper reaches of the tributaries of the Brahmaputra is the best way to tackle floods in Assam not half-baked and wasteful measures like dredging which your compatriot Bilal had suggested in an earlier post.
