Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > The Oroville Dam

Breitbart: California Has Not Paid $1.2 Billion in Oroville Dam Damage Claims

Dec 16, 2017 at 8:55 AM | Unregistered CommenterRobert Christopher

Dec 16, 2017 at 8:55 AM | Robert Christopher

If the Oroville Dam overflow has now been rebuilt, the issue of liability for emergency works can now start.
Somebody has paid the bills so far. Trump?
Meanwhile California can find the money to spend on "Global Warming" measures, however useless they are, even with massive debts.

No lives were lost, but Lawyers could still make a killing.

Dec 16, 2017 at 11:39 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

"The near-disaster at Oroville Dam last February brought damage claims flooding into the state by the hundreds – shops and restaurants that lost business, farms that got overwhelmed by surges in water, cities and counties buried in evacuation expenses.

Most claims argue that the state is responsible for the emergency because it ignored warning signs about the condition of the dam’s spillway.

So far the state hasn’t paid a single claim."

Read more here:

Dec 16, 2017 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

The California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) cost estimates for the Oroville Dam crisis and repair have spiked to $870 million, after an independent forensic report blamed the state for misleading the public about its knowledge of dangerous conditions.
Breitbart: Oroville Dam Repair Cost Spikes to $870 Million

Jan 29, 2018 at 4:11 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

Robert Christopher, under UK Law, Insurance etc, my understanding would be that the "costs" would initially fall into two separate categories. The cost of returning the dam (and associated engineering) to a safe and fit for purpose condition, and the consequential costs incurred as a result of the failure and subsequent works.

"With the independent forensic report serving as a basis to blame the State of California for failing to fund maintenance infrastructure at Oroville Dam adequately, and allegedly concealing known risks to public safety, the Trump administration would potentially have justification for cutting off its funding of what could easily amount to $5 billion in costs to the State of California."

Hopefully, the Engineering issues are now resolved. The cost has been met by US Taxpayers, this would not prevent Taxpayers being able to recover the costs from those deemed negligent, in this case, the State of California.

Trump did not agree to pay for any of the consequential costs, business interruptions etc, and now California is effectively denying liability

This will generate legal action by Californians against the State of California, along with the potential for legal/financial dispute between the US Government and the State of California.

Irrespective of Governor Brown wanting an argument with Trump, Californians may want to argue with Governor Brown.

IF the State of California has no insurance policy to cover the repairs or consequential losses, Governor Brown will want to delay any legal judgement until after he has left Office

Jan 31, 2018 at 11:34 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Trouble On the Way for the Oroville Dam ???

I guess it depends on whether action is taken to prepare for the worst, in addition to hoping for the best! :)

Mar 7, 2018 at 8:24 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

Robert Christopher, the structure of the dam was not raised as an issue in the aftermath, or during the reconstruction of the spillways.

The entire structure was originally designed to take Spring snowmelt, and have the ability to overflow "safely". The overflow spillways had not been required for 10+(?) years.

There is no reason to suppose that the dam or spillways are more vulnerable than they were, to operating at overflow rate, and the dam did survive the previous event.

The intrigue should be about the cost, and liability for the damage, and whether concern about the structure of the dam and spillways was the reason the water level was never allowed to get too high, leading to water "rationing" for residents of California (who were told it was due to Global Warming)

Mar 7, 2018 at 11:18 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

golf Charlie on Mar 7, 2018 at 11:18 PM

I read it as that they ought to let some water out sooner rather than later, just to reduce the risk of having to take action in an emergency.

I remember, in (SE) Australia, the Engineers wanted to let some water out of the reservoirs as the Wet Season approached, but were stopped by the politicians, supported by the public, because they had had several years without rain and the chance of flodfing was NEARLY ZERO.

Well, the rains came and there was flooding because the reservoirs were full at the start of the wet season.

There is no argument about the rains coming: the water is already on the hills around Oroville, as snow.

Mar 8, 2018 at 12:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobert Christopher

Robert Christopher,
the desired operating procedure would be to end the spring melt with the reservoir full to capacity, having "used" as much water as possible for hydro and supplies. With the best will in the world, this would be difficult to achieve.

This could be the first time that the Managers have felt confident in allowing the structure to reach maximum capacity, without pressing the panic button, as they were correct to do.

This would also confirm that the owners/operators knew the "structure" was not safe, despite the previous patch repairs, the failure of the spillway was NOT unforeseen, and the damage caused downstream resulted from negligence.

Mar 8, 2018 at 1:35 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Insignificant or not?

I don't think we've heard the last of Oroville.

Sep 3, 2018 at 1:41 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe