While many parts of the country is suffering from the lack of water for irrigation(and also for drinking and other purposes), a vast amount of water is running to the ocean without use. The country believes that almost all the hydro power sources are already tapped for electricity generation.

However, I have found a method to take irrigation water to dry zones without any operational cost and a way to generate more hydro electricity with a small shift of technology. I submitted my methodology to several people who have know how in the field, and all accepted it is theoretically correct. I presented them to the Minister Champika Ranawaka and he also accepted that it is “technologically feasible”. I e-mailed this to the Presidential Secretariat on request a couple of months back, however after that I didn’t get a response.

Kalu Ganga (Kalu River) alone takes over 300 cubic meters of water to the ocean every second. This water(and water of many other rivers) can be diverted to dry zones with a minimal capital cost and a vast amount of hydro power also can be generated. This almost no cost water and clean energy. However, I think no sufficient interest was generated. I cannot rule out all the possibilities of short comings of the method, however, I believe, it also cannot be ruled out as useless without any serious scientific and technological assessment of the methodology. However, unfortunately second alternative seems to the reality. No serious consideration was drawn to my proposal.

If somebody who is interested and capable of assessing and recommend it to the government high ranks if it is feasible I would like to give all the details.

Assessment of the proposal won’t cost anything, even if it is a failure, however, if the method id feasible(I believe it is feasible)the gains will not be of small scale.

I think, this would be some contribution towards Ranil Senanayaka’s mission.

Thanks!

Chris Dharmakirti,

Great suggestions. Perhaps you and Dr. Ranil Senanayake should consider partnering with Veerabhadran Ramanathan’s Surya Project in India.

I also like project Surya’s promotion of solar and fuel efficient stoves. I do not know if it could be replicated in Sri Lanka because it may be susceptible to the Jevons Paradox, which can be mitigated by a fuel tax. The political implications of a fuel tax, as demonstrated by recent protests, are such that the government may not have the will to implement it.

They have proved to be a useless and hopeless legal clan.

Though there was a problem of colonialsm arising out of grabbing Tamil Eelam(TE) as a colony by SL in 1972, the legislature wrongly called it an “ethnic problem” for the past 40 years.

They were chasing after a mirage and therefore a solution could not be found.

The politicos did not have the wisdom to solve this problem without war, murder, genocide and waste of financial resources.

Together, foolishly, the lawmakers of SL, bristly spent massive amounts to carry out a war against the people of TE.

Consequently, the Sri Lankan Ruppee has reached its all time low now.

This is perhaps the begining of the end of SL and the begining of TE.

The people of TE, inside and in exile, now have a strong intellectual and ideological grounding by the grace of God. And this is making them a tough customer for those who support the colonisation and empire building of the coloniser SL in TE.

http://groundviews.org/2011/12/17/climate-change/

My criticism is leveled at ALL concerned with maintaining this fiasco not any one person or group but the entire process. I quote:
‘The global effort on addressing the problems of climate change is also hampered by the fact that the IPCC is consisted only of people who are nominated by their Governments. Commenting on this feature Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute says, “Its Governments who nominate people, you will find in many chapters that there are people who are not scientists at all”.

From
http://groundviews.org/2011/12/02/restoring-shelter/

Having been a spectator at this circus, I see that the only thing most international ‘scientific’ bureaucrats are concerned about is ‘ensuring their positions by ‘not rocking the boat’. Jobs on these platforms are not secured by minding the truth or the well being of society. Sadly, I see no one in the IPCC (as yet) willing to address the issues that I have raised, but it does not mean that we, the public should stop asking ‘why’?

Here’s a link to an article by Paul Krugman that was written way back in 1997.

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/1997/04/earth_in_the_balance_sheet.html

It outlines the position of economists on climate change. I hope that Krugman’s write-up will act to diminish the negative stereotyping of economists.

I also like your passing reference to the scientists who run the IPCC. Can I presume that also includes the Sri Lankan MIND at the IPCC? I hope you don’t MIND answering that question. LOL!