Phony feasibility study

Below is a recent comment by a participant in the Heart of the River coalition which captures the concern we’ve had all along, but have not directly expressed.

“… As science or research goes, the feasibility study is ass backwards:  the FIRST questions should have been “Does Central Indiana need more water?”  If yes, the next question should have been, “How can we best provide it?”  Based on decades (centuries?) of data, the answer to that would not be “Build a dam”.  But even if it was decided another reservoir was needed, the next question would be “Where’s the best place to build a dam?”  The answer would not have been the most damaging possible alternative site (i.e. the Mounds Lake site).  

So the ‘feasibility’ question was “Can we build a dam here?”  And any school child could tell you it’s feasible to dam a river. The science/research protocol is so bad, DLZ should be sued for malpractice.”

Maybe fraud would be a better charge. Some engineering companies have acquired a reputation for gaming the system at the expense of the public. The floodway fill on White River at 96th Street for a retail center is one example.  Depositions in the permit-appeal litigation revealed that the DNR computer modeling staff had manipulated the inputs to achieve a result which met the state standard. DLZ’s project manager on the planned dam is familiar with that issue.  Indeed, he was part of that problem, although he worked for a different company at the time.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s