China To Evacuate 80,000 People, Blast Dam

Lake Formed When Landslide Blocked River; Soldiers Preparing To Drain It With Dynamite

(CBS/AP)  Chinese officials rushed Tuesday to evacuate another 80,000 people in the path of potential floodwaters building up behind a quake-spawned dam as soldiers carved a channel to try to drain away the threat.

The official Xinhua News Agency reported emergency workers would try to complete the evacuation by midnight Tuesday, taking the number of people moved out of the threatened valley to almost 160,000, from more than 30 townships.

The Tangjiashan lake in northern Sichuan province, formed when a massive landslide blocked a river, is one of dozens of fragile dams created during the earthquake that pose a new destructive threat in the disaster zone.

Soldiers hauled explosives through the mountains to reach the area, and the official Chinese Daily said Tuesday on its Web site they were "preparing to dynamite the barrier." State television showed live footage of heavy earth-moving equipment being used to carve out a 200-yard channel to drain the water.

"We are prepared to get rid of the trees by chopping and explosion. After that, the second batch of equipment will be moved in," Liu Ning, chief engineer at the Ministry of Water Resources, was quoted as saying on CCTV.

The lake is swelling behind a landslide near Beichuan, one of the towns hit hardest by the May 12 tremor that devastated Sichuan.

The number of deaths from the quake climbed further toward an expected toll of 80,000 or more. The Cabinet said Tuesday that 67,183 people were confirmed killed, with 20,790 still missing.

China said Monday it would relax its one-child policy for victims of the earthquake, giving some solace to grieving parents whose offspring were killed or maimed.

Aftershocks continued to rattle the region. Two temblors in Qingchuan county on Tuesday afternoon caused more than 420,000 houses to collapse, Xinhua reported. The U.S. Geological Survey measured one aftershock at magnitude 5.7.

Elsewhere in the disaster zone, explosives were used to demolish some damaged buildings in the town of Yingxiu. Teams have been pulling down creaky buildings across Sichuan recently, using mostly excavators, bulldozers and other heavy machinery.

Also Tuesday, health officials said higher-than-normal rates of stomach pains and fever had been reported among the millions of quake survivors, but that no major disease outbreaks had occurred.

Some 5 million people were left homeless by the quake, and many of them are living in tents or makeshift communities that are clustered throughout the disaster zone.

Qi Xiaoqiu, the director of disease prevention at the health ministry, said the quake had knocked out much of the region's health infrastructure but that 12 field hospitals had been erected and tens of thousands of health professionals were working in the zone.

"With the destruction by the quake, the living and sanitary conditions have worsened for the local population," Qi told reporters in Beijing. "Their physical conditions are weakened, (they are) more vulnerable to disease."

Diseases such as tuberculosis, hepatitis and diarrhea remained a threat, but so far no outbreaks had been reported, he said.

About 1,800 soldiers clambered up mountain paths to reach Tangjiashan with plans to dig and blast their way through the debris and drain the water, Xinhua reported.

The Tangjiashan lake is one of dozens created when the magnitude 7.9 quake sent millions of tons of earth and rock tumbling into some of the region's narrow valleys. Some rising floodwaters have already swallowed villages.

Tangjiashan now holds 34 billion gallons (130 million cubic meters) of water and was rising by more than 3 feet (1 meter) every 24 hours, Liu said.

Xinhua said troops were working around the clock to remove at least 1.8 million cubic feet of debris to build the channel, which would not be completed before June 5.

Pressure is building behind the dams as rivers and streams feed into the newly formed lakes. Officials fear the loose soil and debris walls of the dams could crumble easily, especially once the water level reaches the top and begins cascading over.

Adding to the threat, thunderstorms were forecast for parts of Sichuan this week — a foretaste of the coming summer rainy season that accounts for more than 70 percent of the 2 feet (60 centimeters) of rain that falls on the area each year.

In northern Sichuan, 1,300 people were evacuated from Guanzhuang town because of landslide worries, local official Li Guoping said.

An aftershock measured by the U.S. Geological Survey at magnitude 5.7 rumbled across the region Tuesday, and Xinhua reported it had injured five people, without giving details.

It was the latest of dozens of aftershocks that have further frayed survivors' nerves.

One quake expert said Tuesday that aftershocks in the area could continue for several months, though they would grow weaker as time passes.

"Judging from previous earthquakes of a similar magnitude, this time the aftershocks may last for two or three months," He Yongnian, a former deputy director of China Seismological Bureau, was quoted as saying by Xinhua.

[cfin5]

I''m 100% ready and willing to see Wind Turbines, Solar Power Panels place around,...whatever it takes to get us away from the Mideast mess to be a self sufficient energy consumer or even exporter. But I won''t stand for some globalist environmental pyramid scheme to penalize my country financially and let others slide especially when the their facts are in such disrepute. All it amounts to is ONE MORE TAX we have to give the government. Haven''t they already proved to us that whatever they get from us, they can spend it twice as fast (conservative guess) on something totally unrelated to the said tax in the first place? Need I mention Social Security? Carbon Dioxide a pollutant? Get real people.

[roger_inkart]

If the US has the fortitude to put the plan into action, I see no reason that the US couldn''t be one of the least polluting countries in the world

Posted by Questionnews at 07:19 PM : May 27, 2008

And....what? No one is arguing that it''s _possible_ the US could reduce it''s greenhouse gases. Anything is possible, you see. Is it wise to sit around thinking of how you''ll spend your first million, or should you first address the problem of earning it?

There are powerful, rich people who are very interested in making sure the US burns as much fossil fuel as possible. They have legions of mindless underlings at their bidding (you see them here on the form, repeating talking points, telling 1/2 truths and carrying water for their betters. Poor dopes.)

So we are not just climbing a mountain here. We are climbing one canvased with pitfalls, traps and villans - all given one task: to make us fail and keep our addiction to oil intact..

Also, when you ask hypotheticals and are rude you should hardly be surprised when people respond in kind.

[questionnews]

And if I misspelled a couple words be nice.

[questionnews]

But to pose the question is highly moronic in the first place - who know what will happen in the next 40 years, let alone assume the US will drastically reduce it''''s greenhouse gas output. The reality is that there is only so much the US can do to control what other nations do. One thing we can do is get our own house in order before worrying about such nonsense as you have proposed.

Posted by roger_inkart at 07:03 PM : May 27, 2008

This months Scientific American cover article states that a $420 billion investment in solar energy alone could supply 70% of the US energy requirements by 2025. Comprssed air storage will supply energy at night. Along with wind, geothermal & tidal power plants we could have 100%of our energy needs met. It would take up vast areas of the SW deserts, but I have been to the SW, it''s no biggie If it''s a govt. run program you should double that estimate. If the US has the fortitude to put the plan into action, I see no reason that the US couldn''t be one of the least polluting countries in the world since we are one of the few countries that can handle the costs. Pick up the mag & read "The Grade Solar Plan" article. Very educational!

[cfin5]

So what came first? The solar cycle induced ice age which stalled the vegetations growth causing less CO2 consumption? Or the carbon dioxide increase causing the Sun to snuff out some? According to Egore, rising CO2 must be causing other planets to cool at the same time. The fact I''m pushing is why Al Gore will not submit himself to debate. That is not a very scientific way to find the truth guys........Forgive me for pullin'' your chain here. It''s a good way to make you think before believing someone else''s theory.

[roger_inkart]

That''s all you have?

Posted by Questionnews at 05:57 PM : May 27, 2008

What are you looking for, exactly? That I might believe the US should launch military attacks against nations that won''t cut their greenhouse gases? No, I don''t think we should. Happy?

But to pose the question is highly moronic in the first place - who know what will happen in the next 40 years, let alone assume the US will drastically reduce it''s greenhouse gas output. The reality is that there is only so much the US can do to control what other nations do. One thing we can do is get our own house in order before worrying about such nonsense as you have proposed.

[questionnews]

Uh-oh I misspelled aviod. Here come another spelling lesson. Avoid, there is that better?

[questionnews]

I would make sure my own house was in order before harrassing my neighbors.

And for someone who has so many spelling errors and poorly constructed sentences, you''''ve got a lot of gall saying you have to dumb it down, you clueless jacka.ss.

Posted by roger_inkart at 05:45 PM : May 27, 2008


That''s all you have?? This is the internet not your classroom Mr. Rogers. I misspell neighbor & you instantly pass judgment. That being said, I notice that you have gone to great efforts to aviod addressing the question. If can''t deal with it, don''t address it. (Maybe misspelling neighbor in Mr. Rogers neighborhood set you off.)

[roger_inkart]

OK I''''ll dumb it down a bit so you can follow along. It''''s 1850
Your nieghbor is dumping chemicals that leach into your well water & making your family & your livestock sick and worse. The authorities do nothing. Do you just sit back & let it happen or do you take matters into your own hands?

Posted by Questionnews at 05:34 PM : May 27, 2008

I would make sure my own house was in order before harrassing my neighbors.

And for someone who has so many spelling errors and poorly constructed sentences, you''ve got a lot of gall saying you have to dumb it down, you clueless jacka.ss.

[roger_inkart]

We could not breath if CO2 doubled,......ain''t gonna happen!

Posted by cfin5 at 05:22 PM : May 27, 2008

Be that as it may - the snippet you posted (or rather plagarized) was written by an Advisory Board Member for the ''Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change'' which has been heavily funded by ExxonMobil.

So, with that in mind, why should we consider what he says as viable?

There is no sound reason we should listen to anyone who is being bought by Big Oil. They know they''re future depends on the world continuing to burn fossil fuels. And with the trillions they''re making, it''s little wonder they''re happy to buy off of couple folks to muddy the waters in the global warming ''debate.''

[questionnews]

What are we answering, exactly? Do we think this is plausible? Should we, as a nation, do nothing about greenhouse gases because, in some scenarios, it could lead to war?

And I strongly suspect the only ''''green freak friend'''' have have is in your imagination.

Posted by roger_inkart at 05:22 PM : May 27, 2008

OK I''ll dumb it down a bit so you can follow along. It''s 1850
Your nieghbor is dumping chemicals that leach into your well water & making your family & your livestock sick and worse. The authorities do nothing. Do you just sit back & let it happen or do you take matters into your own hands?

[cfin5]

When plant growth increases do to higher levels of carbon dioxide,....so does our planets oxygen content. The check and balance wheel goes round and round.

[rheola-2009]

Posted by Questionnews at 05:15 PM : May 27, 2008


Most certainly.

however the problem at present in China surely has nothing to do with climate change.

[cfin5]

''''The benefits to plants that would result from a doubling of the carbon dioxide concentration do not necessarily mean that such a doubling is good for the planet. We do not know what the optimal level of atmospheric carbon dioxide should be. So many variables could be affected by a major increase in CO2 including temperature and a redistribution of water resources, that the honest observer has to conclude he does not really know what will happen.''''

Posted by roger_inkart at 04:52 PM : May 27, 2008------We could not breath if CO2 doubled,......ain''t gonna happen!

[roger_inkart]

There are a 100 what if''s to consider, but try to answer directly.

Posted by Questionnews at 05:15 PM : May 27, 2008

What are we answering, exactly? Do we think this is plausible? Should we, as a nation, do nothing about greenhouse gases because, in some scenarios, it could lead to war?

And I strongly suspect the only ''green freak friend'' have have is in your imagination.

[questionnews]

Since this topic went from a dam break to global warming (which happens alot here) a green freak friend of mine & I were chatting & have this speculative question to address:

Year 2040
The US bit the bullet & paided dearly but now the US is one of the lowest producers of C02 in the world. A switch to solar, tidal & wind did the trick.
The earths C02 levels & temps continue to rise because China, India & several other countries continue to use fossil fuels & have stated that they will continue to use oil & coal indefinitely.
2050
Planet C02 levels & temps continue to rise and are now responsible for crop failures and a rising mortality rate. China & India have increased thier CO2 output by 50% over the levels in 2040 and they refuse to curb it.
As so on. At this piont is an armed conflict justified to stop these other countries from releasing ever increasing levels of C02?????

There are a 100 what if''s to consider, but try to answer directly. (BTW--my green freak friend say yes)

[roger_inkart]

It should also be noted Sylvan H. Wittwer is a Advisory Board Member for the ''Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change'' - which has received $100,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

[enlightenu]

Posted by cfin5 at 04:12 PM

Only up to a certain point, but then the extra CO2 has other effects....

ScienceDaily (Mar. 14, 2008) %u2014 A recent study at the University of Illinois created a bit of a mystery for soil scientist Michelle Wander -- increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was expected to increase plant growth, increase plant biomass and ultimately beef up the organic matter in the soil -- but it didn''t. What researchers found instead was that organic matter decay increased along with residue inputs when carbon dioxide levels were increased and they think the accelerated decay was due to increased moisture in the soil.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080311123413.htm

[roger_inkart]

You read that correctly. Flowers, trees, and food crops love carbon dioxide, and the more they get of it, the more they love it.

Posted by cfin5 at 04:12 PM : May 27, 2008

Plagarized from a 1992 article by Sylvan H. Wittwer.

Of course, you left out this critical part:

''The benefits to plants that would result from a doubling of the carbon dioxide concentration do not necessarily mean that such a doubling is good for the planet. We do not know what the optimal level of atmospheric carbon dioxide should be. So many variables could be affected by a major increase in CO2 including temperature and a redistribution of water resources, that the honest observer has to conclude he does not really know what will happen.''

[cfin5]

What is the latest "cutting edge" technology in Greenhouses to make plants grow faster? Hmmmmmm?