
California Dam Crisis Could Have Been Averted - nahomag
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/california-dam-crisis-could-have-been-averted/#sa_body
======
spikels
Climate change has little to do with this issue. CA has a history of
infrastructure mismanagement (see HSR, Bay Bridge, etc). The CA Dept of Water
Resources has a history of incompetence. Oroville Reservoir a history of
problems.

This was a straightforward civil engineering failure. The flow of water that
needed to be handled was known. It had been much higher in the past. The flow
in the main spillway could be controlled by gates. There was an emergency
overflow spillway.

They had plenty of time and resources to solve this problem but they didn't.
We don't yet know exactly why but the design, construction, maintenance and/or
operation was flawed. This is the responsibility of the operator of the dam
which is ultimately the state.

I think tying everything to climate change can be counterproductive. Yes it
can attract attention to an issue but it probably also distracts from less
salient but perhaps more important issues in this case like keeping brush
clear from the spillway or inspecting concrete structures.

We badly need better infrastructure management. And this will allow us to
better respond to climate change.

/rant

~~~
stuckagain
Your rant is just a rant. Mentioning HSR is some kind of dogwhistle. In what
way is HSR mismanaged and how is that related to this dam?

The events at Oroville have been exceptional and it's strains belief that you,
Random Internet Guy, saw it all coming. The amount of water that has fallen in
the Feather watershed this year is without precedent in recorded history. The
spillway worked fine until a gaping hole appeared in it. Nobody foresaw that a
massive sinkhole would destroy the main spillway.

~~~
troisx
Actually plenty of people foresaw a problem with this dam and multiple other
dams in CA. I have a friend who worked on dams in CA 20 years ago who told me
that they weren't getting the maintenance and upgrades they needed and it was
only a matter of time before there was a failure. And he never even worked in
this particular dam.

------
stuckagain
The interesting thing here is the disconnect between local and national
politics. Butte and Plumas counties went to court because the dam's operations
did not properly account for climate change. But the two counties are
represented in Congress by Doug LaMalfa, a stereotypical climate change
denier. LaMalfa has vociferously complained about all climate change policies
at the state and federal level and constantly publishes press releases
questioning the facts of climate science. He has a lifetime 0% score from the
League of Conservation Voters. He is, in short, the kind of dangerous know-
nothing who is bringing about the end of civilization as we know it.

One does begin to wonder if his constituents perceive the disconnect. One
major problem is that Butte and Plumas counties taken together do not
constitute a majority of the district (Butte is about a quarter million people
and Plumas is ten times smaller). Relatively well-educated and affluent Chico
is completely buried under a huge, rural, and very poor 1st district, most of
whom are not threatened by these particular waterways.

~~~
problems
> the kind of dangerous know-nothing who is bringing about the end of
> civilization as we know it

I'm totally on board with you with regards to climate change, but do you
really need to simplify and insult opponents like this?

~~~
WalterSear
Which part of the phrase isn't accurate?

~~~
kbenson
> bringing about the end of civilization as we know it

That's at _best_ hyperbolic. It's inflammatory and unhelpful in a rational
discussion.

And to be clear, it's also inaccurate. Climate change will not cause the end
of civilization as we know it, unless as we know it means "exactly as it
exists right now", in which case twenty or thirty years from now would be the
end of civilization _as we know it_ even with absolutely no climate change,
just due to how technology and culture progresses.

~~~
stuckagain
If we just lean into climate change face-first, as Republicans demand, there
will be widespread famine and displacement. Nobody alive today has seen famine
on a large scale. Relatively food-rich countries are going to be mowing down
hungry hordes at their borders with machine guns. When I say "end of
civilization as we know it" I'm not kidding.

~~~
kbutler
"The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions
of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon
now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world
death rate." \- Paul Ehrlich, 1968

"perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic
about the future" \- Paul Ehrlich, 2009

"I do not think my language was too apocalyptic in The Population Bomb. My
language would be even more apocalyptic today." \- Paul Ehrlich, 2015

The message remains constant, in spite of contrary evidence, but the mechanism
of apocalypse changes over time.

When you're faced with contrary evidence, do you change your mind or double
down?

Yes, climate change can cause significant problems. Yes, human civilization
affects climate. However, adaptation with our ever-increasing scientific and
technological capability appears most likely to maximize well-being.

------
M_Grey
<Insertname Infrastructure Crisis> Could Have Been Averted

Get really _really_ used to that headline in the US, because the way we're
headed, everything from bridges to dams are going to be subject to that
headline. We've neglected basic infrastructure in this country for so long,
that people have grown up without realizing there's a problem in the first
place.

~~~
artursapek
I'm 24, and have grown up here. First time I really heard about it was Trump
at his rallies.

~~~
nscalf
For all of the hate that Trump gets (I personally think most of it is earned),
he has touched on some really important issues that have been ignored for a
long time. Infrastructure is one of those.

~~~
M_Grey
Then problem is not that he's 100% wrong, the problem is that when he's right
it seems to be of the "Broken Clock" variety. When there is little rhyme or
reason to the views he takes, he's bound to end up in a few positive places
(such as today, condemning anti-Semitism).

The problem with Trump is that they're only positive in these highly isolated,
episodic ways.

~~~
artursapek
That sounds like a lazy way to dismiss a guy who maybe deserves more credit
than he gets.

~~~
mikeash
Trump is the only person I've ever seen make three contradictions in a single
sentence.

The only thing consistent about the man is his inconsistency (and his love of
Russia, apparently). He's the political version of how you can prove anything
if you assume a logical contradiction.

Of _course_ he's touched on important issues. He has touched on all sides of
virtually all issues. He wants to spend $1 trillion on infrastructure,
increase military spending, leave Social Security and Medicare intact, cut
taxes, and balance the budget. This sort of obvious insanity does not deserve
praise.

~~~
artursapek
I agree that a lot of what he says and does makes no sense. I was just showing
disdain for the "broken clock" insult which is so easy to throw around.

~~~
mikeash
I don't get it. Sure it's an easy thing to throw around, but any brief
criticism is. Shouldn't your assessment be based on whether it's based on
something of substance, not whether it's easy?

~~~
artursapek
It's basically saying "I often disagree with this person, so when I agree with
them I refuse to admit that they have some virtue and deserve credit for it -
they are still broken and bound to be correct sometimes out of pure chance."
You don't see how that's kind of pathetic?

~~~
mikeash
No, because that's not how I interpret it at all. I already explained how I
interpret it: since he takes virtually every position possible, even
contradictory ones, without any apparent thought or reasoning, any positions
which are good are that way purely by coincidence, and therefore aren't worth
anything.

The proverbial broken clock isn't useless because you disagree with broken
clocks and refuse to acknowledge when they're correct. They're useless because
they have no actual connection to the information they purport to convey, so
even when that information is correct, it's still useless.

If I make a random number generator that prints out values between 15,000 and
25,000, I will sometimes correctly predict the closing value of the Dow Jones
Industrial Average for the day. That fact is not worth a damn, though.

------
maxerickson
I dug around a bit for materials related to the lawsuit. Found some:

[http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/progr...](http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/docs/oroville_ferc2100/comments2010jan/buttecounty_exhibits_draftcert_0210.pdf)

The county complaint is written by the lawyer quoted by SciAm. It does talk
about climate change impacting the operations of the dam, but that is about as
detailed as it gets. It reads to me like the county was after funds from the
California DWR more than it was looking forward to the spillway failing in an
especially wet season.

------
tsomctl
Every single problem in the world could have been averted. However, there is
only so much time, money, and resources, so we have to chose what to
prioritize. There are even entire fields of professionals that deal with this,
such as engineers and politicians.

~~~
ghaff
Exactly. Every time there's some high visibility issue with infrastructure,
there are lots of magazine covers and stories about underinvestment.

Maybe we do underinvest on balance. And I have no doubt that there are indeed
specific examples that, at least in retrospect, should have received more
investment. But "infrastructure investment" is probably effectively a
bottomless pit. We could probably spend 2x what we spend and events like this
would still happen and we'd still have people saying we don't invest enough.

It's not all that different from software. Maybe there would be fewer bugs and
security vulnerabilities if the industry spent twice as much effort on code
reviews and testing.

------
NikolaeVarius
CAPTAIN HINDSIGHT. The Hero of the modern age. With his trusty companions,
Should-a, Could-a, Would-a.

But seriously, postmortem everything seems obvious.

------
NDizzle
From what I can tell it appears to be difficult to get funding to address
flooding concerns during a 7 year drought.

I'm a bit to the south of the dam, in Yuba City, and was evacuated last week.
The levees aren't in great shape in this area, overall. Expect more excitement
in the next few months.

------
skynatnet
This is just all around bad planing maybe not accounting for the more rain
they are getting, but also not building for all the snow in the mountains. I'm
sorry but this is not a climate change issue as much as a bad plaining issue.
The changing weather in California is just bring it to light. yes I know the
article says that. I'm just saying that trying to control the weather and the
effect we have on it is no excuse for this kind of neglect. And it so often
is. "Well if we can just control how much rain falls out of the sky we wont
have to worry about this." Man has come far but we are not there yet. Hay
California you are men not gods start planing for the future your always
babbling on about how important it is.

------
jerf
Article: "Those images reveal a big mistake: failure to update infrastructure
to defend against climate change."

'Instead of a cooling in the tropics, there will be a uniform warming of the
ocean, which will push the Pacific jet stream farther north. As a result,
"Canada does get quite a lot more rain," Ting notes, whereas "the whole state
of California, for example, will be much drier."' \-
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/southwest-
america...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/southwest-america-
drying-climate/)

Climate Change Increases the Odds of Epic California Droughts -
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-
in...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-increases-
the-odds-of-epic-california-droughts/)

'The short answer, experts say, is that the drought built up over several
years (with help from hotter temperatures fueled in part by global warming)
and it will take many more storms and almost assuredly more than a single
winter—even one with a strong El Niño—to erase it.' \-
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/el-nino-is-
here-b...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/el-nino-is-here-but-
california-is-still-in-drought/)

'"Regardless of how much of this year's heat was man-made or natural in
origin, 2014 serves as an important reminder that heat can seriously
exacerbate drought events," wrote Williams in an email. "If temperatures
continue rising, we should expect record-breaking drought years to become
increasingly common."' \-
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/california-s-
drou...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/california-s-drought-may-
be-worst-in-a-millennium/)

I confined myself to quotes from Scientific American articles. Please by all
means post articles about how California was likely to face more droughts
_but_ it would also be hit by massive, massive rains that erase droughts in
one year that we need to prepare for. (Which you'll note one of the articles
above specifically calls out as something that will not happen.) I would
request that you find me someone predicting that specifically for California,
though, not just an article that generally says something about "more extreme
events"; we can't really accuse people of failing to plan for those unless we
can be specific about what's going to be extreme. "More droughts for
California with no particular offsetting rain" is a valid local interpretation
of "more extreme events worldwide".

It's a bit disingenuous to accuse people of ignoring the effects of climate
change when "the effects of climate change" that people have been talking
about for the past few years imply precisely that upgrading the spillway would
have been a waste of money for a reservoir doomed to depletion and drought.

