Hydrology (Sep 2022)
Eutopian and Dystopian Water Resource Systems Design and Operation—Three Irish Case Studies
Abstract
The Harvard Water Program is more than sixty years old. It was directed by an academic Steering Committee consisting of the professors of Government and Political Science, Planning, Economics, and Water Engineering. In 2022 we would add to the notional Steering Committee the professors of Ecology, Sociology and Water Law, calling it the augmented Harvard eutopian approach to the design and operation of Water Resource Systems. We use the Greek word ‘eu-topos’ to mean ‘a good place’, figuratively speaking, and ‘dys-topos’ its antonym, ‘not a good place’. By opposing eutopia and dystopia (latin forms) (Utopian literature begins with Thomas More’s (1478–1535) fictional socio-political satire “Utopia”, written in Latin and published in 1516: “Libellus vere aureus, nec minus salutaris quam festivus, de optimo rei publicae statu deque nova insula Utopia”. “A little, true book, not less beneficial than enjoyable, about how things should be in a state and about the new island Utopia” [Wikipedia translation]. He coined the word ‘utopia’ from the Greek ou-topos meaning ‘no place’ or ‘nowhere’. It was a pun-the almost identical Greek word eu-topos means ‘a good place’), we pass judgement on three Irish case studies, in whole and in part. The first case study deals with the dystopian measurement of the land phase of the hydrological cycle. The system components are distributed among many government departments that see little need to cooperate, leading to proposition 1: A call for a new Water Law. The second case study deals with a project to restore a 200 km2 polder landscape to its condition in 1957. The project came to the University with an hypothetical cause of the increased flooding and a tentative solution: dredge the Cashen estuary of its sand, speeding the flow of sluiced water to the sea, and the status quo ante would be restored. The first scientific innovation was the proof that restoration by dredging is impossible. Pumping is the only solution, but it raises disruptive questions that are not covered by Statute. The second important innovation was the discovery in the dynamic water balance, of large leakage into the polders, either around or between sluiced culverts, when the flap valves are nominally closed, impacting both their maintenance and minimization of pumping. Discussions on our findings ended in dystopian silence. Hence proposition 2: Moving towards eutopia may only be possible with a change in the Law. The third case study concerns the protection of Cork City from flooding: riverine, tidal and groundwater. The government’s “emerging solution” consists of major physical intervention in the city centre, driven hard against local opposition, as the only possible solution. Two hydro-electric reservoirs upstream were largely ignored as part of a solution because the relevant Statute did not mandate their use for flood control. The Supreme Court has recently overturned this interpretation of the governing Statute. A new theory of flood control with a cascade of reservoirs, dams and weirs is the scientific innovation here. Once more these findings have been greeted by government with dystopian silence. Hence proposition 3: Re-open the design process to find several much better solutions, approximating a eutopian water world.
Keywords
