Mosul Dam collapse 'will be worse than a nuclear bomb'

Warnings by scientists and environmentalists about an imminent collapse are dismissed by Iraqi officials as far-fetched.

After six months of frantic security and logistical preparations, an Italian company has kicked off the repair works to beef up the dam, under the protection of five hundred Italian soldiers and Kurdish Peshmerga forces.

The Italian company,TREVI, will have about 18 months to prevent the foundations of the dam from plunging deeper underground, averting an impending catastrophe. Experts warn that if the dam collapses, up to 11.11 billion cubic-metres of water known as Lake Dahuk, will submerge Mosul and create an inundation that will affect the lives of millions of people living along the banks of the Tigris river.

...An in-depth study by the European Commission's Science Centre, released last April, puts the number of Iraqis that could be affected by the dam's floodwater after its collapse at seven million. The 58-page report by the Joint Research Centre simulates different scenarios that may result from the dam's breakdown.

If just 26 percent of the dam collapses, the study predicts a flood of catastrophic proportions.

"This simulation … results in a very high wave of water, [up to 25 metres high] ... arriving at Mosul after [100 minutes]. The capital Baghdad is reached after 3.5 days with a maximum water height of 8 metres and a mean of around 2 metres."

Floodwater will destroy the infrastructure of all the cities along the Tigris banks, including Tikrit, until the water eventually stops 700km south of the dam.

More at link:
www.aljazeera.com...

Woah. That is serious. This article points out the controversy- The Iraqis don't want to spend the money with a raging war against ISIS going on, and suspect the reconstruction company is just looking for a way to make a buck. A LOT of bucks. But the lives of up to 7 million people and several cities hang in the balance. Jesus. Or rather, Allah? Somebody... This sounds like a total cluster waiting to happen. And it IS going to happen, according to scientists, even with the band-aid patching. Yikes.

I hope they are protecting that dam from an attack by ISIS.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

There was talk some years back about it being rigged with explosives.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

interesting. And I recently updated my Mosul thread with an incident at the Mosul Dam.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry

the Mosul Dam was held captive by ISIS 3 or 4 years ago.

ISIS takes control of Mosul Dam

a reply to: Alchemst7

So the situation is even more urgent, because ISIS held it for a while, preventing the repairs from being done. Now they are scrambling, trying to patch it up before it fails.

Well, are there any major floods in Revelations.

It is smack in the middle of all of the biblical prophecies.

The article is very informative and it truly does suggest it could go any time from yesterday.

P

The instability and vulnerability of Mosul damn has been known for many years. My nephew (in-law) was in the Marine Corps. in 2003 and the first place they went during Operation Iraqi Freedom was to secure the Mosul dam, even before the main invasion force reached Baghdad. At the time his mission was considered top secret because the coalition didn't want anyone to know how truly vulnerable the damn was. There had been reports of the Iraqi's rigging the damn with explosives, but these reports were ultimately found to be largely unfounded.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

. . . these reports were ultimately found to be largely unfounded.

Let's hope it is so. It is possible to conceal explosives within concrete.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

I call bull# on your title. I also contend dams are horrible! The damage done to ecosystems by dams is the travesty. Blow that dam thing up!!!

a reply to: KEACHI

Yeah, who cares about the people at all?

a reply to: Kester

Actually, a large concussion weapon in the water would probably work better.

a reply to: KEACHI

Yeah, shoulda' never dammed up that damn Colorado River either, huh? Bet all those tree-huggers in CA would change their tune then, considering better than 55% of the Hoover Dam's output goes to CA (and significantly more when it was first commissioned).

Shoulda' never dammed up all those rivers and tributaries in Panama either, huh? Nah, CA didn't need no stinking Panama Canal! The entire west coast of CA (LA, SFO, SD, OAK, etc) would be in the stone age right now compared to the rest of America if it wasn't for the Panama Canal. Damn Dams! They could have hauled all that steel over the Rockies with donkey's and mules!

Where do you think all those materials and resources came from? The sky?

Yeah...let's just "BLOW 'EM UP!"

Matter of fact, that kinda' sounds like a dandy idea, now that you mention it!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Your no more knowledgeable about the benefits of dams than anyone else. I think the benefits do not justify it. The permanent damage done to our aquifers by rerouting, dams and reservoirs has created a new problem much worse than the inconveniences they were meant to solve. I think they should not be dammed.

a reply to: ketsuko

The people can move. They were not there before the dam. And I think they would be better off with a vibrant river ecosystem than they are with the # shute they have now.