Thursday, 22 October 2020
Tuesday, 20 October 2020
Bangkok examines flood prevention plans Dec 2011
Bangkok examines flood prevention plans Dec 2011
Shani Wallis, TunnelTalk
Devastating floods across wide areas of the Bangkok metropolitan area have prompted engineers and officials in Thailand to address urgently needed programmes and projects that would mitigate the annual threat and ensure that the city is prepared to prevent any repeat of this typhoon season's economically and socially crippling disaster. TunnelTalk Editor, Shani Wallis, attended a press conference last week in Bangkok at which the tunneling society of Thailand presented its undergroud proposal for long term flood mitigation and control.
Bangkok inundated
Flood water metres deep in the streets and homes of Bangkok during September, October and November took a heavy toll on the citizens and the fabric of the city. Incredibly, more than two months after the first inflows, flood water still lies across low-lying areas of the city's suburbs with fears of waterborne diseases and families struggling to salvage what they can of their possessions still the focus of local news reports.
Struggling now with the aftermath of the worst floods in the city's recent history, engineers in Thailand have mobilised to present new infrastructure projects that will prepare the city for predictable flood events in the future.
Like so many cities that have implemented comprehensive flood control systems, one of the leading plans that is gaining political support for Bangkok is based on extensive underground excavation with multi-purpose functionality possibilities. A plan to excavate a double deck cut-and-cover facility beneath the existing six to eight-lane Eastern Outer Ring Road that stretches 100km from the northern suburbs and runs parallel with the river would deliver floodwater to the Gulf of Thailand.
At times of heavy flooding the entire 24m wide x 10m high cut-and-cover facility would provide a channel for floodwater. During normal times, the lower deck would remain reserved as a drainage channel while the upper deck would accommodate another six lanes of highway traffic to the already heavily congested highway above.
The waters that flooded into vast areas of the northern suburbs of Bangkok were created by a perfect storm of circumstances, according to members of TUTG, the Thailand Underground and Tunnelling Group that will host the World Tunnel Congress (WTC) and 38th General Assembly of the International Tunnelling and Underground Space Association (ITA) in May next year (2012).
Underground option gaining traction as the possible solution for Bangkok
"First, the heavy rains of two typhoons at the start of the season in August hit the upper reaches and catchment of the Chao Phraya River," explained Zaw Zaw Aye, Tunnelling Director of the Thai construction company Seafco and Secretary General of the WTC organising committee. "After months of no rain, these were held in the reservoirs which filled very quickly.
At that point, another three typhoons hit the area in quick succession and vast amounts of water had to be released from the dams. The water had to come down the Chao Phraya River to the Gulf of Thailand. The problem in the city is that rapid urbanisation during recent years has seen new housing estates develope on land that once accommodated traditional rice paddy fields on which the annual flood waters were welcomed.
In addition, urban flood defences have not kept pace with developments that have blocked many of Bangkok's klongs, or canals, creating development barriers to Chao Phraya River flood waters."
When water released from the dams came down the river it was evident that parts of the city would flood. As well as the klongs, Bangkok has flood control defences, including a set of new drainage tunnels. The first, in the city centre (5km long x 5m diameter and with a 60m3/sec capacity) is complete; another is under construction (6km x 5m diameter); and two more are in the planning stages (the 13.5km x 5m diameter Don Muang tunnel and the 9.5km x 5m diameter Suan Luang Ro 9 tunnel which will drain an area of 85km2). But these were not able to help Bangkok to full measure on this occasion.
Extent of the floods around Bangkok's protected city centre
"The current systems can manage between 6-10 million m3/day," explained Zaw, "but more than 11 billion m3/day of water was coming down the river. The city could only drain a third of it."
City authorities used all existing systems, including floodgates and the diversion weirs on the klongs, to protect the city centre, with the surge spreading out in three directions to inundate the northern, eastern, and western areas. Even Bangkok's new international airport, opened two years ago on the east side of the city, was not spared. Many had warned against building the airport on the eastern flood plain.
Through all, Bangkok's metro system, with some 21km of the 50-60km network underground and the rest elevated, never shut down. "Some underground station entrances were closed," explained Zaw, who worked on the construction of underground sections of the system, "but the network is designed for a 100-year flood and all, or most, underground stations have elevated entrances as well as flood doors. I personally went to see how the flood doors performed in the emergency as I was involved in the design and installation of several."
As it happened, the metro was the only reliable method of transport through the wider city, including into the flooded areas on the elevated sections. "Buses could not operate and most private cars were out of action or parked on the elevated highways out of harm’s way, which completely chocked off the highways."
For other underground utility services, the potable water system was affected initially but was returned quickly to full service as much of the floodwater was not contaminated. The sewerage systems backed up and overflowed, a situation that brought with it the threat of waterborne disease and the liberal use of chlorine as a quick-fix response.
As well as damage to homes, shops and businesses, a visit to Bangkok last week by TunnelTalk revealed that even now there are stacks of sandbags on standby in the city centre. Small walls with stiles over them have been built in front of some smaller shops as a more permanent protection measure. There is also still an acute shortage of food, bottled water and drinks in the shops. There was no flood water to be seen but reports were of many low-lying areas, some including luxury residential estates, still remaining under water.
The aftermath of the disaster has included heavy criticism of Thailand's new Government and its failure to address the looming crisis, as well as inadequate management of the upstream reservoirs where officials were caught out completely by the deluge.
The reaction by the Government and City authorities has been to begin afresh the development of plans to prepare the city for what engineers know will happen again. The rapid urbanisation of the city and building on the natural floodways make a repeat of the disaster a certainty without urgent action. The new network of 5m diameter drainage tunnels is designed more for stormwater management, not for a massive surge of water down the river from upstream. Something much more substantial and of much greater capacity is needed, and tunnelling engineers in Bangkok have illustrated how underground flood mitigation methods are the only feasible option.
|
Chicago TARP
|
Tokyo G-CANS
|
Hong Kong Drainage
|
Kuala Lumpur SMART
|
At a press conference last week TunnelTalk joined the audience to hear of how systems such as Chicago's TARP, Tokyo's tremendous G-CANS underground flood channels and retention caverns, Hong Kong's major new flood control tunnelling networks and Kuala Lumpur's innovative dual purpose Stormwater Management And Road Tunnel (SMART) project, have inspired Thai engineers to develop their own Multi-Service Underground Tunnel System, or MUSTS.
Proposed multi-purpose flood relief project runs beneath the Outer Ring Road, first on the east side and eventually also on the west side
"The underground addresses several major issues," said Engineer Professor Dr Suchatchawi Vince Suwannasawat, Dean of Civil Engineering at King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang who is also President of Thailand's TUTG tunnelling society and Congress Chairman of WTC 2012.
"First it avoids expensive procurement of private property for new surface flood canal options; secondly it limits the impact of what will be a massive construction operation to the corridor of an existing public highway."
The underground solution also better allows for gravity-feed of the flood facility towards the sea, a major concern for surface options that often require large pumping systems or deep cuts. In operation, the lower deck of the underground facility would have a capacity of 130 million m3/day. This would increase to 260 million m3/day with both decks of the facility turned to flood control mode.
In addition, the multi-service system includes the possibility of generating power. Directing water down deep shafts would create the necessary hydrostatic head needed to operate a turbine installed in the bottom. Depending on the selected size of the project, between 200-600MW of electricity could be produced by extending the project's multi-service system application.
At the press conference in Bangkok on Wednesday last week, Dr Suwannasawat explained that Phase 1 of the project, for the 100km facility under the East Ring Road, would demand a Government investment of some 200 billion Thai Baht (US$6.3 billion). He went on to explain that, set against the estimated 1.4 trillion Baht cost of the current disaster, the project represents a proposal that should be advanced as soon as possible.
The multi-service functionality of the project also presents the possibility of imposing tolls on the roadway to raise funding towards its construction and maintenance. There is also potential for generating electricity to support its own operating costs.
The project has won early political backing with Deputy Governor Teerachon Manomaiphilbul of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration speaking in support of the proposal and urging the central Government to implement the project stating: "It is a huge investment and one that I agree with."
Global theme for international congress
In welcoming the 64-member nations of the ITA to Bangkok in May next year and the
anticipated 1,500-2,000 delegates, the TUTG Organising Committee has selected
'Tunnelling and Underground Space for a Global Society' as its congress theme.
The fact that the host city has suffered the kind of natural disaster that
looms large for many of the world's other major mega-cities will certainly draw
extra interest. Delegates will be interested to hear first hand reports of how
the disaster happened, how the city coped and more importantly how the
Government, authorities and engineers plan to prepare the Bangkok to avoid
similar disasters in future.
MUSTS includes the potential for generating electricity
The experience will profile significantly also in the Congress Open Session, organised by ITACUS, the ITA Committee on Underground Space that is examining the development of resilient cities over the course of the next three years.
Launched this year at the WTC2010 in Helsinki in May, the theme of Delivering Better and Resilient Cities discussed in Finland, continues in Bangkok in May 2012 where the forum will centre on Planning Better and Resilient Cities, before moving to Geneva in 2013 where delegates will close the series with a discussion on Deciding Better and Resilient Cities. A special one-day registration is offered for delegates who would like to join the Open Session as a stand alone event rather than the full tunnelling congress programme. There is much to consider and develop on this wide ranging and vital topic and Bangkok's recent flood experience makes it a most appropriate venue for hosting the discussion in May 2012. A welcome and invitation to attend is extended to all from the TUTG Organising Committee.
References
Helsinki WTC2011 Congress video report - TunnelCast, May 2011
Brisbane averts underground works inundation - TunnelTalk, Jan 2011
Concerns and consequences of seismic devastation - TunnelTalk, March 2011
Santiago Metro survives massive earthquake - TunnelTalk, March 2010
Saturday, 10 October 2020
Friday, 9 October 2020
Saturday, 26 September 2020
玛丽安莫达.政府不注重学校英语教育
2020-09-25 07:20:00
2348143逆思流
任何想要破坏一个国家的人，都不必诉诸大规模毁灭性武器。他们要做的，就是修改这个国家的儿童教育，然后坐下来等待灾难性的后果。
这就是大马发生的事情。一个自我陶醉的社会，允许极端领袖控制我们生活几乎每个领域，包括教育，而今天，我们收获了成果。
我们谴责巫统／囯阵政府，因为他们的政权政治化教育和语言，让它们成了非常敏感的课题。
马哈迪在1974年出任教育部长并随后成了首相，他在教育制度上实施了固打政策，没有绩效制，以及他在英语教数理政策方面的反反复复，至少让两代大马人深受其害。
我们培养了成千上万的毕业生，但他们缺乏自信。那些没有掌握基本英语的人，在受到批评时会感到尴尬。其他人缺乏基本的沟通技巧，而有相当一部分的毕业生则抱着一种理所当然的心态。他们认为学位意味着他们可以要求更多津贴和福利，而不是向雇主展示他们的价值。
今天，许多大马父母对国民学校越来越不满。他们很常抱怨教师和教学素质低落、缺乏纪律、部分教师抱有种族主义、体育活动也有种族固打，以及存在因虐待问题而调职过来的老师，包括性虐待。
许多不满的父母把孩子送到多源流学校，那里的纪律和教学水平更高。那些有能力负担的人，会把孩子送进国际学校或海外寄宿学校。其他人则选择在家学习。马来民族主义者要求关闭多源流学校，但他们有去要求关闭国际学校吗？为什么？
最近，人们开始重新关注我们学童的英语水平很差的问题。
砂拉越首席部长阿邦佐哈里日前为砂州政府在古晋设立的第一所国际学校主持动土仪式；他在致词中表示，州政府的决定是因为有必要培养有竞争力且可以掌握国际英语的学生。他认为，许多毕业生由于英语水平太差而失业。
9月20日，大马雇主联合会（MEF）执行董事三苏丁也发表了关于英语掌握能力的类似言论。他说，良好的英语书写和会话能力，有助于公司内外沟通，同时，他也不同意雇主歧视土著毕业生的看法。
三苏丁说在私人界，有90%的大马雇主使用英语，他将土著毕业生无法在私人界找到工作的原因，归咎于他们英语水平太差。
在70年代，民政党创办人之一的陈志勤，预测民族主义者将对使用英语产生威胁。陈志勤的预言成真，因为马来极端者如今声称说英语是不爱国的表现。
如今，马来孩童不愿意说英语，因为他们被洗脑说除了马来语以外，说任何其他语言都是不爱国的表现。讽刺的是，这些马来人后来还哭着说被歧视，并抱怨说很难在私人界或跨国企业找到工作。
在独立时期，我们的学校和大学在亚洲名列前茅，但马哈迪却以固打制拉低了我们的排名。
他摧毁了英国政府一个世纪的努力，并铲除了投身教育的先贤们两个世纪的工作。消除绩效制已经至少让两代大马人失去竞争力。讽刺的是，我们拒绝的优秀生，却成了新加坡的收获。
马哈迪最近一次承认他的政策失败，是在2013年9月12日，即大马日本贸易与工业协会（JACTIM）30周年午餐宴会上。他说，掌握英语，尤其是在科学和数学领域，将有助于提高大马公立大学在世界舞台上的声誉。
当被问及对“2013年至2025年大马教育蓝图”的看法时，他说他不满没有落实英语教数理。他忘了他在摧毁我们的教育制度中所扮演的角色。
有一次，他声称在申请资讯工艺职位的333名毕业生中，只有7人合格。没有成功录取的毕业生不会说英语，因此在面试时要求以马来语进行。
当慕尤丁担任教育部长时，他甚至声称我们的教育是世界上最好的教育之一。讽刺的是，尽管向东马的学校设施注入了数亿令吉的拨款，但砂拉越的学校实际上却摇摇欲坠。那么，那些拨款是如何分配的呢？
我们需要英语来打开我们的世界，并在科学、工艺、外交、旅游、金融、国际贸易、航空和商业等领域脱颖而出。我们缺乏政治意愿来让学校更加注重英语教育，这在短期内可能会让极端政客受惠，但从长远来看，对国家却不会有所帮助。
Mariam Mokhtar: The great Putrajaya denial of English in Malaysian schools
作者 ： 玛丽安莫达
文章来源 ：
星洲日报 2020-09-25
Friday, 25 September 2020
傅文耀.糖果或救命绳
傅文耀.糖果或救命绳
2020-09-25 07:20:00
首相慕尤丁周三宣布斥资70亿令吉，向国内B40和M40群体派发300令吉至1000令吉不等的援助金，预计将会有约1070万人受惠。有钱派当然是一件值得高兴的事情，只是首相答应给的钱究竟会从哪里来？
早前国会通过了调高举债上限的议案，大马举债上限从占国内生产总值（GDP）的55%调高至60%，慕尤丁一转身就大手笔派钱，如此作法确实值得商榷。我不禁在想，直接派钱真的可以解决国民面对的问题吗？
1000令吉对于一个上有老下有小的家庭来说，很可能只是一个月的奶粉钱和伙食费。我相信陷入困境的大马人，所需要的是一份长期工作，更甚于一笔只能支持他们一个月的生活费。
这笔直接派发给大马人的70亿令吉，如果用于推动基金工程或设立教育基金，将发挥更大效益。别忘记沙巴人还面对着烂泥路和在树上上网的困境；吉兰丹的原住民村落甚至连清洁的水源都没有，政府却慷纳税人之慨，选择直接派发现金，迎合民粹。
个人也十分怀疑，在经济不景，商家税收减少以及油价低落的情况下，政府慷慨派钱的资金来自何处？政府的提款机国油也因为油价低迷以及必须迎合东马，缴付更多石油税的双重打击，预计无法像过去一样，支付政府高股息。除了继续发债，政府也没有其他方法；债务由谁买单？还不是留给大马人后代子孙。
没错，无差别派发现金固然能营造美好感觉，但是这个美好感觉却不持久，在你将这笔援助金花在日常消费后，你还会面对下个月没有钱缴付账单的困境，大马人需要的是一个制造更多工作机会的政府，而非只会派发现金，迎合民粹的政府。
在大萧条时期，美国罗斯福总统提倡新政，实施了一系列经济政策，其核心是三个R：救济（Relief）、复兴（Recovery）和改革（Reform），也被称为3R政策。当时罗斯福对各个政府机构进行了大改革，减少了滥权腐败以及为大众提供更好的社会安全网，西方世界一周只工作40小时的制度就是在那时建立起来。
美国之所以能从大萧条走出来，并不只是一味单靠政府救济人们，而是罗斯福在当时集思广益，聆听各个利益团体的意见，在社会各个层面社会进行了改革。
显然，大马目前只停留在救济（Relief），剩余的两个R──复兴（Recovery）和改革（Reform），碍于国盟政府只以少数席位执政，而迟迟无法落实，甚至为了拉拢议员，各式酬庸手段层出不穷，出现了几乎人人有官做的奇特现象。
政府相关公司（GLC）职位成为了拉拢支持者的酬劳，而GLC对大马的经济发展影响力极大，如此恶性循环，读者你们认为大马能在短期内落实两个R吗？
大马人口结构相对年轻，若要进入复苏期，一点都不困难，只是在收入减少，经济疲软的当儿，除了慷慨撒钱之外，政府理应改革各类机构，让国民可以在公平环境中找生计，这比派钱更重要呀！
还是一句老话，糖果可是会吃坏牙齿的，政府应该放下一条救命绳，让陷入困境的人靠自身的努力爬上来，方为上上之策。
作者 ： 傅文耀
文章来源 ： 星洲日报 2020-09-25
My comments:
政府的提款机国油也因为油价低迷以及必须迎合东马，缴付更多石油税的双重打击，…. 砂拉越的石油和天然气本来就是属于砂拉越的。今天， 我们的砂拉越政府非常无能所以才征5%销售税。其实砂拉政府应该征30%的销售税的。Petronas要吗，就继续营业下去，不要吗，请赶快离开。什么意识，【迎合东马，缴付更多石油税】
砂拉越政府无能，所以，马来亚人以为砂拉越是马来亚的领土呢。 MA63的合法性是备受质疑的。你们还能凶多久？ 我们砂人是准备独立自主一切。没有马来亚，沙砂两国会更好。 马来亚没有沙砂两国会完蛋的。记住，天底下，没有打包赢的生意。跟人家做生意本来就是30%：70%分帐的。
如果，你有听到Chagos岛回归Mauritius的事，你一定不会有那种低级【包吃】他人的心。 马来西亚本来就是马来亚的伪装。当年，马来亚连申请一个新国家的成立都不敢呢。所以，请准备沙砂两国的推出。到时，你就知道什么是沙砂两国的主权是什么？
Is Malaysia heading for 'BorneoExit'? Why some in East Malaysia are advocating for secession
Is Malaysia heading for 'BorneoExit'? Why some in East Malaysia are advocating for secession
Unity is a common theme every year on Malaysia Day, the holiday celebrated last week that marks the day Malaysia became a federation in 1963.
That year, Britain agreed to relinquish control of most of its remaining colonies in Southeast Asia — Singapore, North Borneo (now called Sabah) and Sarawak. They then joined with Malaya, which had gained independence from Britain in 1957, to form a new nation called Federation of Malaysia.
The legal instrument to form the federation is called the Malaysia Agreement (MA63).
Yet, for the people of Sabah and Sarawak, located on the island of Borneo, the agreement left many with mixed emotions. Some people in these states have long desired secession and, in recent years, the drumbeat of separation has only grown louder.
This issue is now a key political issue in the Sabah state election this weekend and upcoming the Sarawak elections, which must be held before the end of 2021.
Source of historical grievances
In a nutshell, most people in Sabah and Sarawak (also known as East Malaysia) are unhappy with federation because they think it has not delivered on two main promises made in 1962 — high levels of autonomy and economic development.
In the first area, the federal government has stripped away a lot of local powers in Sabah and Sarawak in the last 57 years. On top of that, the federal authorities have tried to impose the same toxic racial and religious politics found in Malaya (also known as West Malaysia) to the eastern states.
East Malaysia is much more ethnically and religiously diverse compared to the west. For example, the Malay population is a minority in both Sabah and Sarawak; in fact, no ethnic group constitutes more than 40% in either state. As a result, political Islam has not taken root here.
Read more: Now that Malaysia has a new government, the real work begins reforming the country
In fact, one of the defining features of East Malaysia is intermarriage among the different ethnic and religious groups. The divide between Muslims and non-Muslims is reasonably insignificant — a marked difference from the often suspicious attitude Islamic leaders have toward non-Muslims in Kuala Lumpur.
In terms of economic development, Sabah remains one of the poorest states in Malaysia. And the infrastructure in both Sabah and Sarawak is vastly underdeveloped compared to the west of Malaysia.
To add insult to injury, more than half of Malaysia’s oil and gas production comes from Sabah and Sarawak. The common joke is that all the iconic infrastructure in peninsular Malaysia, such as the Petronas Towers, Penang Bridge and Kuala Lumpur international airport, was built with money from East Malaysia.
Britain’s hand in the federation
In recent times, one of the biggest grievances in East Malaysia comes from the process of decolonisation administered by the British after the second world war.
There is clear, documented evidence that back in 1962, the colonial office in London used its powers and influence to get the local leaders in Sabah and Sarawak to agree to the formation of Malaysia.
The British wanted a clean exit from Southeast Asia and to ensure its former colonies did not turn to communism. So the British conceived the idea of a “Federation of Malaysia”, where its former territories would come under a single political entity.
Activists in East Malaysia say if the British had not supported the formation of the federation, it was highly unlikely local leaders would have agreed to it. Many would have instead preferred independence or a federation consisting of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei (which gained independence from Britain much later, in 1984).
What Sabah and Sarawak want
All these historical grievances have led to a growing movement in Sabah and Sarawak advocating for secession from the federation.
With elections upcoming in both states, all local politicians — including those serving in the federal government — are now claiming to be MA63 nationalists trying to keep “Malaya out” of Sabah and Sarawak.
Social media is one key reason the secessionist movement has taken off in East Malaysia. It is now much easier for advocates to organise and magnify their grievances.
What the Sabah and Sarawak people want, at the very least, is a constitutional amendment to recognise the special autonomy of both states. But a significant minority argues the whole federation has failed, and thus secession is the only way forward.
Currently, the secessionist groups pose no real threat to the federation. But if enough people buy the secession argument in the future, public sentiment may be too strong for the national leaders to ignore.
How should the federal government respond?
There are basically two options available to the federal government.
The first is the ostensibly easy option — the political route. This would require the federal government to recognise the historical grievances and try to resolve them.
However, this is not as simple as it seems. The government is reluctant to grant real autonomy to the two states, worried this will end up weakening federal powers in the other 11 states of the federation.
There was an attempt to reword the Constitution last year to symbolically recognise the special status of both states, but it failed.
This is the only way to keep the federation together, however. The federal leaders need to agree to recognise the special status of Sabah and Sarawak and grant them wide autonomy in the Constitution, as envisaged in the 1963 Malaysia Agreement.
The second option for the government is to play a wait-and-see game. Politically, this is dangerous, as the final outcome could very well be secession.
By way of comparison, the push for independence in Catalonia was similarly based on historical grievances that mushroomed into a mainstream political movement and eventually an independence referendum — declared illegal by Spain’s constitutional court.
At the very least, what is happening on the ground in East Malaysia suggests the decolonisation process in Southeast Asia is not yet complete. This colonial legacy is not merely history, but is clearly reflected in the present reality.