Comments by "Fredrik Dunge" (@DaDunge) on "Dutch proposal to dam the North Sea" video.

  1. 10:25 The baltic sea is an increadibly delicate system, the Öresund bridge almost didn't bet built because the fear that it may restrict the flow of fresh oxygenated water in from the north sea and thus kill the entire sea, willfullly shutting it of would accomplish that and you'd reduce the baltic sea to a lifeless husk of rotting freshwater, like I said the same thing would likely happen with your doggerland basin but the baltic sea there's no argument, the baltic sea would die.
    50
  2. Probably a better idea really, because the enclosure would become a slowly evaporating pool of Brine otherwise.
    31
  3. @Physes This won't be fresh water this will de oxygenated brine. Also this concern doesn't come from me but fro many leading environmental groups and scholars.
    19
  4. @Physes Ocean currents help move around oxygenated water, your pups won't result in ocean currents. Yes the surface water would be oxygenated by the wind and the waves but the oxygen would not get particularly far down into the lake, it doesn't in ant lakes.
    9
  5.  @failedtoloadpleasetryagain1862  The last part is something you'd get with the dammed "lake" too. All the fish in the lake would die, and the locks in the dams would no where near be able to handle the amount of traffic needed to keep the coastal ports alive.
    7
  6. You could say the same thing for the damms in the Netherlands, or some of the major ones in the US. the reason no one does it is because they're to huge, it'd take enormous amounts of explosives to put a dent in them.
    4
  7. 9:45 Again you underestimate the scope of it, it would turn the region into a freshwater swamp, a rotting hole of dead water.
    4
  8. 10:18 So there would be more of these festering holes of rotting water? Yeah that's a great idea...
    4
  9. 6:08 That's one of the richest regions in Europe, they'll work it out.
    4
  10. 8:40 If you really did this dam the best bet is to throw the enviroment to hell and just lower the surface inside the dam enough to lift doggerland from the ocean floor and then build a hyperloop along the edges of the damm. But seeing as the EU can't muster funding even for a hyperloop alone I very much doubt it.
    3
  11. Really? Could I see you data then because I am an engineer too and this some like a complete and utter mess which glosses over a thousand issues.
    3
  12. Atleast some of them would be like that which is why this is impossible, Britain could at any time do one of it's mood swings and lock down the entire project, hence any engineered solution would have to not use England. At that point you're much better of hugging the European coast. Norway doesn't need this anyway.
    3
  13. 10:00 False dichotomy is I ever heard one.
    3
  14. It's not, it's a pipedream. This can't have been meant seriously.
    2
  15. 7:50 The climate itself would be impacted, the Batlic sea would die without an influx of fresh water from the north sea.
    2
  16. I agree with everything except the Atlantropa thing. That was still worse because they talked about draining a sea intentionally, whilst this would do the same thing unintentionally. They're both completely whack though. There are way better solutions than this.
    2
  17. That would probably be better idea, because otherwise all of this would become a rotting festering pool of slowly evaporating brine.
    2
  18.  @panzerofthelake506  What are you talking about?
    2
  19.  @2canines  Well no I've got it from Cosmos a space time odyssey so I am far from certain but the sea is 5 kilometers deep.
    2
  20.  @definitelydaniel69420  Would still need England consensus to have them inside this. Also We'd be leaving Ireland outside which is not acceptable.
    2
  21. That's nice but no atleast no plan which includes England. The British are on their own, and also can't be trusted. And if the british isles are to be protected then leaving Ireland outside is not an option, England can sink into the sea for all I care but Ireland is part of the EU. But a far more feasible option is biulding a dam from Denmark to the tip of the netherland and another one from there down to somewhere in france. Like I said, the English cannot be trusted so they should be completely discluded from from this. And including norway is also pointless they're also not part of the EU pls they don't need it. Norway's coast is mountainous. Denmark The low countries and normandy are the place that really need to be protected. Oh and England but that's not the EUs problem.
    1
  22. Not in the middle of the ocean, in the coast. Dams combined with canal, you don't stop the flooding you control it.
    1
  23.  @mylordandsaviour4786  The north sea under this plan would be as bad as the Baltic is no, it would be no help whatsoever.
    1
  24. Heck even that is a better solutions. Just seal of the groundfloor of your houses, the netherlands is now new Venice.
    1
  25. You'd kill a hufe number of coastal communities to bring back a piece of rock and mud from the seafloor?
    1
  26. 7:30 Your combined nations, is first of all combined STATES, nation is a people not a country, unless you mean nation state and Belgium is on your list and it is not a nation state. Secondly it included Russia and the UK neither which can be relied upon as partners in ANYTHING.
    1
  27. @MeLikeLulz There will be no need to do that, this is one of the richest regions of Europe they'll handle it, the rise will be so slow the moment wealthy people's basements starts taking water they'll figure out a much more cost effective solution than this.
    1
  28. movies aren't reality
    1
  29. Congratulations the Baltic sea is an incredibly fragile ecosystem and you just killed it. When they built the bridge over öresund they were concerned that it would be enough to block flow of water from the north sea to the baltic and end up killing the baltic.
    1
  30.  @stevshaboba7476  So what's the catch?
    1
  31.  @mylordandsaviour4786  Eh no because there is no outflow what you end up with is something like the dead sea where particles from the rivers that flow into it don't get out of it, they will sink long before they get to the pumping stations at the damm so they won't get removed by those, so you'll start seeing salt and sediment buildup. Almost all real life lakes have a outflow of some sort. And this region as it currently is these sediments are grabbed by ocean currents are carried far away.
    1
  32. Yeah and he even thought Russia would help pay for it...
    1
  33.  @panzerofthelake506  Actually no the channel owner sets the parameters for the comments section, and usually when something is "removed" it's actually only held up in a keyword filter for the channel owner to look if it is an acceptable comment or not.
    1
  34. Yeah they did and that was stupid too, because the bottom of the Mediterranean is really salty and would not make good soil for agriculture. What you'd really be doing is allow the Sahara to get all the way up to Europe. Also the bottom of the Mediterranean is so deep down a human would die from standing on the bottom of a drained Mediterranean.
    1
  35. @Some Entity Yeah maybe that was what they meant.
    1
  36.  @mylordandsaviour4786  sluices but they could never handle all that traffic.
    1
  37.  @MultiDEVILMAYCRY123  Yes that is it, you've found out our dastardly plot...
    1
  38. Except in this case he's talking out of the loony bin, I'm an engineer and this plan has got more holes than a swiss cheese.
    1