Jump to content
relapse98

Spillgate failure on Lake Dunlap

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Was there any damage downstream from the unexpected 6 foot wall of water?

Maybe? Right below the dam is The Bandit golf course and neighborhood. Their boat house looked pretty low in the water but I haven't heard of any problems. I have a friend that owns a house on McQueeney (the next lake down) right across the lake from the the Lake Breeze Ski club, she didn't report anything and her house would be one of the first to take on water. There's been some lake bulkheads falling into the water in Dunlap, I bet as the soil subsides and dries out, there will be more. I saw some boats that landed on the hard, but it was probably a gradual thud, so they landed in mud and should be fine, if they can get them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, we saw pictures that had 3 pumps pulling out of the channel in front of the dam but weren't entirely sure what they were for. San Marcos purchases raw water from Dunlap and their inlets are in the hydropower canal on the north side. So the pumps are to make sure there is water there for them.  75% of their water is from Dunlap, 25% aquifer. Kyle also gets some portion of its water from Dunlap but I don't know if it's from the canal or the water treatment plant, which is on the south side. Kyle has asked people to cut back water usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And watching what happens here....pay attention to the hydraulics.  There are lots of complaints in Texas about dams contributing to flooding because they "purposefully opened their floodgates" during massive flood events.  The alternative to that is to just let the dam overtop (which dams with actual gates really aren't designed for), and overtopping of dams can result in things like....this.  Imagine that with a dam holding back 50X that amount of water.  

It was a hell of a "King of the Hill" episode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

the crazy thing is some meth heads have probably already pulled that shit from the river and scrapped it out

this is a pretty "out there" plan and would probably cost a shit tonne to implement, but I think they need to work in a pump back setup into some of these chains of lakes and they definitely need to do so on the highland lakes chain

perhaps LCRA can come in with their big swinging dick and money bags and buy up all of this river authority and then do the pump back system and do one on the highland lakes as well

it has been several years, but a Tech professor wrote a paper detailing how west Texas wind farms were actually paying people to take their power at night because the wind blows mostly at night when demand is low and with the subsidy for "green energy" they could pay users to take their power and still make some money as well

with a pump back they could get paid to take the power at night (or get the power for free) and pump the water back up hill and then in the day when you let the water go at the high demand point you get top dollar and that is again "green energy" and you double dip on the subsidy

plus hydro power is one of if not the fastest source of power that can come online and go offline

here is the article

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/texas-wind-farms-paying-people-to-take-power-5347

the transmission lines that article talks about possibly being built have for the most part been built now, but a lot more wind farms have been built since then too

if they can move that power at night across the grid down to central Texas and stage is as stored water behind hydroelectric dams that helps the transmission issue in the high demand periods as well

this is a pretty big plan that would take a lot of cash, but I think it could work long term

i'll go further.  we should build a series of canals to move excess water from east to west using nightwind power to raise the water to higher elevations, including to all the way up on the estacado.  I've studied the US topos for the entire state and there are 5 or 6 ideal locations that would allow us to create new lakes that would store trillions of gallons for less than a billion dollars of new dams.  All but 1 of these piesky proposals are mostly empty farmland.  1 would wipe out a small town, but for the good of the state, fair eminent domain buyouts should be arranged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RamjetFDO said:

Better video of the failure...

 

It's like watching Texas Football from 2010 to 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

i'll go further.  we should build a series of canals to move excess water from east to west using nightwind power to raise the water to higher elevations, including to all the way up on the estacado.  I've studied the US topos for the entire state and there are 5 or 6 ideal locations that would allow us to create new lakes that would store trillions of gallons for less than a billion dollars of new dams.  All but 1 of these piesky proposals are mostly empty farmland.  1 would wipe out a small town, but for the good of the state, fair eminent domain buyouts should be arranged.

not to hijack this thread more than I already have I believe in the more is better especially with water....it would be about impossible to get agreement to move east Texas water west and even more so in the coming years

I think a better idea is 4 or 5 same design large desal facilities in the coast powered by wind and south Texas natural gas (and also producing energy with the water) and then a pipeline to San Angelo to meet the CRMWD pipelines and then tie the CRMWD pipeline to the CRMWA pipeline by connecting between Snyder, Texas and Lake Alan Henry (25 miles downhill)  and also connecting between Lake JB Thomas and Lamesa, Texas (45 miles up hill)

with that you would connect 600 miles of existing pipelines (CRMWD) to 400 miles of existing pipelines (CRMWD and Lubbock Alan Henry) and 4 massive lakes (Meredith, Jb Thomas, EV Spense, OH Ivie.....along with smaller Alan Henry, Twin Buttes, OC Fisher, Nasworthy

there are several other lakes and a few 100 mile existing pipeline systems in the same area that could be connected to and with a major refit of the existing pipelines and some new storage lakes along the Estacato I believe the electricity you could produce every day pumping that water up and down hill would make the water basically very low cost or almost free excluding the massive new recreation opportunities by filling those existing lakes to a more consistent level and running water in some of the river systems consistently

the cost is in the low billions to do a major project, but you would be able to basically get water to pretty much every person in Texas either with pipelines or existing river systems....there would be loss of course sending the water in rivers and storing it in lakes, but you would also be connecting massive aquifer systems that are already drilled and that are capable of having water pumped into them for storage

sadly besides that GD Lockness Monster potentially fucking things up if you don't give him tree fiddy there are the GD zebra mussels that would have to be monitored and controlled for

the technology is already there and basically off the shelf along with more than half the needed pipelines and pretty much all the needed lakes

it is a matter of getting the will to look to the future and make more water vs fighting over existing water which is what seems more popular now yet almost impossible to agree on

also making sure to include a robust and significant electrical component that would be a major part of ERCOT reliability and peaking power and a major part of making green energy reliable all the time

the cost seems high until one looks at all aspects and how many people and river systems and aquifers could be touched and the combined existing infrastructure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's another market too... replenishment of the ogallala aquifer.  this desal thing might have legs - hadn't thought about the existing pipes.  and the upper colorado (ivie, spence, others) can store a bajillion gallons.

hell, you could even run the pecos year round, and cede elephant butte to santa fe.

your jib, the cut of it, is meritorious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

there's another market too... replenishment of the ogallala aquifer.  this desal thing might have legs - hadn't thought about the existing pipes.  and the upper colorado (ivie, spence, others) can store a bajillion gallons.

hell, you could even run the pecos year round, and cede elephant butte to santa fe.

your jib, the cut of it, is meritorious.

 

you could definitely replenish the Ogallala the well fields are already there and they are already studying them for storage possibly with water that is desalinated from the deeper brackish aquifers.....you could also run it out towards Pecos where there are well fields and replenish that aquifer and get that one giant spring flowing again (another way to sell the whole project aquifer replenishment and spring flows)

I would run the main pipe west of San Antonio to San Angelo and use Lake Medina (that has a large canal and pipeline system south of it because it is an agricultural storage lake) and you can sell to Austin and San Antonio and store water even in the Edwards which is perfect for storage...I would also dump water in the Frio (for recreation and overall "wildlife nature") and into the Guadalupe for power and recreation because you can split the headwaters of those rivers just north of Lake Medina on the way to San Angelo

I have a crazier plan that uses a lot of abandoned rail right of way and and runs pipelines all the way to tie into the "big" Colorado in New Mexico and then into some abandoned pipelines in Arizona that used to carry a coal slurry to the now torn down Mohave Coal Power Plant in Laughlin, Nevada

the idea use New Mexico desert wind power and solar to get the water to the existing massive lakes/power stations on the "big" Colorado and then sell the water and power to California and Las Vegas especially now that they are tearing down all their coal plants faster than they are replacing them with anything

in that plan you could dump water into the head waters of the Rio Grande and Pecos in New Mexico and help fill Elephant Butte  by dumping in the Rio Grande.....you would also provide more consistent recreation on the Pecos, Rio Grande and way upper "big" Colorado because of the daily releases

it sounds pretty ridiculous until you read that Las Vegas is looking at a 3 billion dollar plan to go into the Nevada/Utah desert and trying to tap desert aquifers for water...I am like fuck that Texas needs to deliver that water and take that $3 billion and move that water and generate energy along the way all the way down the "big" Colorado

this tells about the pipeline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mesa_Peabody_Coal_controversy

3 million gallons a day was out of the aquifer and it went 273 miles right to Laughin (right on the river)......tie into that all the way from Texas desal and charge those fuckers accordingly AND take a cut of the electricity

Edited by ButtFumble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

Maybe switch to a Colgate?

with MFP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

 

you could definitely replenish the Ogallala the well fields are already there and they are already studying them for storage possibly with water that is desalinated from the deeper brackish aquifers.....you could also run it out towards Pecos where there are well fields and replenish that aquifer and get that one giant spring flowing again (another way to sell the whole project aquifer replenishment and spring flows)

I would run the main pipe west of San Antonio to San Angelo and use Lake Medina (that has a large canal and pipeline system south of it because it is an agricultural storage lake) and you can sell to Austin and San Antonio and store water even in the Edwards which is perfect for storage...I would also dump water in the Frio (for recreation and overall "wildlife nature") and into the Guadalupe for power and recreation because you can split the headwaters of those rivers just north of Lake Medina on the way to San Angelo

I have a crazier plan that uses a lot of abandoned rail right of way and and runs pipelines all the way to tie into the "big" Colorado in New Mexico and then into some abandoned pipelines in Arizona that used to carry a coal slurry to the now torn down Mohave Coal Power Plant in Laughlin, Nevada

the idea use New Mexico desert wind power and solar to get the water to the existing massive lakes/power stations on the "big" Colorado and then sell the water and power to California and Las Vegas especially now that they are tearing down all their coal plants faster than they are replacing them with anything

in that plan you could dump water into the head waters of the Rio Grande and Pecos in New Mexico and help fill Elephant Butte  by dumping in the Rio Grande.....you would also provide more consistent recreation on the Pecos, Rio Grande and way upper "big" Colorado because of the daily releases

it sounds pretty ridiculous until you read that Las Vegas is looking at a 3 billion dollar plan to go into the Nevada/Utah desert and trying to tap desert aquifers for water...I am like fuck that Texas needs to deliver that water and take that $3 billion and move that water and generate energy along the way all the way down the "big" Colorado

this tells about the pipeline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mesa_Peabody_Coal_controversy

3 million gallons a day was out of the aquifer and it went 273 miles right to Laughin (right on the river)......tie into that all the way from Texas desal and charge those fuckers accordingly AND take a cut of the electricity

It’s Medina Lake. Get it right or pay the price. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good drone footage, weird misinformation.

GBRA has never said they were going to remove the broken gate. They may have said the lake was going to drain, but that was either a mispeak or misreported. It's about the same as it's been 8 hours after the mishap. The bank is just now the old river channel, it still has 2000CFS going through it. GBRA has said they can't really look at the gate to see what can be done until the Corps stops releasing from Canyon, and it's still got a couple feet to go so it has a few days to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shit ton of exposed snags that were just under the surface.  I wouldn't want to ski in that.  Good for fishing, though.

Wow. I wouldn’t ski there after seeing that. A lot of those stumps had to barely be under the surface. Maybe they’ll clean that up before the dam is fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CooterBrown said:

Wow. I wouldn’t ski there after seeing that. A lot of those stumps had to barely be under the surface. Maybe they’ll clean that up before the dam is fixed.

I think there is a lot of wake boarding done in the lake I have read the bass fishermen talking about it and the big wakes thrown....McQueeny is the better ski lake, but no public access now that the one place with a ramp closed and the utility that has a ramp does not maintain it and the home owners near it will try and tell you it is privately rented

I doubt they will take out the stumps because of the fishing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good drone footage, weird misinformation.
GBRA has never said they were going to remove the broken gate. They may have said the lake was going to drain, but that was either a mispeak or misreported. It's about the same as it's been 8 hours after the mishap. The bank is just now the old river channel, it still has 2000CFS going through it. GBRA has said they can't really look at the gate to see what can be done until the Corps stops releasing from Canyon, and it's still got a couple feet to go so it has a few days to go.

It looks like the dam is still impounding the river. I don’t think it’s close to the original bank unless they do remove more of the dam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2019 at 5:43 PM, CleverNickname said:

Wild. Was the gate being lowered or adjusted, or did it just give way? Not that it matters, really. 

I believe those are Bear Trap crest gates where valves are used to control the filling or emptying of a chamber which is utilized to raise or lower the gate utilizing hydrostatic pressure.

Typically there is a pin system along the top which has to be removed to allow the gate to collapse in the down position. That isn't what happened here.

It looks like the upstream bearings gave out and the whole gate rotated and flipped. You can see the upstream gate leaf break loose and float downstream. The downstream leaf looks like it remained hinged and submerged causing the noticeable turbulence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Texas007 said:

Aging steel is being identified as the cause.

https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Aging-steel-suspected-in-dam-failure-at-Lake-13852316.php 

Note: "similar spill gate collapse occurred in 2016 at Lake Wood, 4 miles west of Gonzales, after structural steel inside that gate failed." 

Steel.  In moving water.  Imagine that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2019 at 3:10 PM, Trey3216 said:

Steel.  In moving water.  Imagine that!

I'm no physics professor, but I did watch Julius Sumner Miller when I was a kid.

Once the water topped the gate the stress forces changed. The water began pulling on the gate instead of pushing. I think evidence of this is in the video. At the moment of failure there's a gap between the gate and the water as it's pulled away instead of the wall of water pushing the gate over.

Also the earth is cylindrical. That's why you can see the curve of the horizon and still fall off the edge.

My question is why weren't they releasing water if it was topping the gates?

Edited by RPM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2019 at 3:19 PM, High Plains Drifter said:

When I'm dictator, Buttfumble will be my secretary of infrastructure.

But not speeches. *snooze*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they might have gotten to the legislature in time to get Dunlap (and maybe Wood) added to SB8, which I think was written to help other areas after the Harvey flooding. I Think it's now due to be voted on on the 22nd after being postponed a couple of times.

If this had happened 2 weeks later, they would have been SOL unless they could have convinced hot wheels to add it to the special session(s).

Edited by relapse98

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

My question is why weren't they releasing water if it was topping the gates?

I thought I read somewhere that the gates weren't functioning enough do that.  Could be mistaken though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe those are Bear Trap crest gates where valves are used to control the filling or emptying of a chamber which is utilized to raise or lower the gate utilizing hydrostatic pressure.
Typically there is a pin system along the top which has to be removed to allow the gate to collapse in the down position. That isn't what happened here.
It looks like the upstream bearings gave out and the whole gate rotated and flipped. You can see the upstream gate leaf break loose and float downstream. The downstream leaf looks like it remained hinged and submerged causing the noticeable turbulence.


https://streamable.com/8yzvx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Appears GBRA has put out their decision, which is to dewater all their lakes one at a time starting September 16th and thereby returning them all to natural flow. Shitty.

 

http://seguingazette.com/alert/article_e7b9582a-bf72-11e9-b73e-ff65a710dd97.html?fbclid=IwAR0KsaYhDlOiMJV9t5t2TQQSqAtmvDevgZ7kwJ1OpMSM_W44AI8IAF42RKw

Edited by Stinkpalm
Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stinkpalm said:

Appears GBRA has put out their decision, which is to dewater all their lakes one at a time starting September 16th and thereby returning them all to natural flow. Shitty.

 

http://seguingazette.com/alert/article_e7b9582a-bf72-11e9-b73e-ff65a710dd97.html?fbclid=IwAR0KsaYhDlOiMJV9t5t2TQQSqAtmvDevgZ7kwJ1OpMSM_W44AI8IAF42RKw

Damn, that’s a shame.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

NOTICE: Drawdown Begins Sept. 16

In an effort to ensure the safety of the surrounding communities, GBRA will begin a systematic drawdown of the Guadalupe Valley Lakes on September 16, 2019. Following the drawdown the Guadalupe River will continue to flow naturally.

The dewatering will begin with the southern-most lake, Lake Gonzales, and continue upstream to Meadow Lake, Lake Placid and Lake McQueeney. The drawdown is expected to take three days per lake with anticipated completion of all lakes by the end of September.

We will continue to update stakeholders throughout the process.

That includes Lake McQueeney?  HOLY SHIT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

man that sucks... Gonna be a lot of pissed off people. 

They sort of asked for it. With the proposed class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs did say:

Quote

Public Safety and the Potential for Loss of Life:
Should the "imminent" failures of the levees occur, and especially after a heavy rain event (and should one occur during a weekend or during a holiday week), the potential loss of life on the Guadalupe River could be substantial in nature. In such an event, both GBRA and its directors would be responsible for same.

I mean, they put GBRA on notice that they would be held responsible for the potential loss of life. What else was GBRA to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rusty Shackelford said:

That includes Lake McQueeney?  HOLY SHIT!

Yep. I don't really know the answer. The lakes were built to provide hydropower. Over the years, much cheaper forms of electricity have come along. Because of that, the hydro side has lost 2 million a year and GBRA has said that they cannot take money from the water supply side to pay for maintenance of those dams because then the large water supply customers would sue, and they should. Why should those water supply customers pay to maintain some unrelated dams?


Over the same time frame, people moved onto property adjacent to the lakes. Those people came to rely and use the lakes but didn't pay a single dime for maintaining them, they just assumed they would always be there.  Now that the lakes aren't there, or some of them are soon not to be there, they are mad. But they didn't pay a single dime for those lakes, they just got the benefit of living next to them. Sucks about their home values, but I have a friend who owns *looks at comal appraisal district* a 1/4 acre lot between 2nd and 3rd crossing on the Guadalupe. Beautiful view of the hills on the other side, shitty tubing in front (wide spot in the river, it's shallow), doesn't flood afaik. Has a "house" built in 1959 but the CAD says it's "POOR" and that's being generous. It has no plumbing, the roof has holes, it's really just a shelter. The value of the place is $128k (I need to talk to my friend, his family should be able to lock in their taxes because the owner is over 65).

1/4 acre on river front, no structure to speak of, 128k.
Their values are going to go down, but those that have land adjacent to the natural channel of the Guadalupe will be fine. They won't be able to boat on GBRA's lake anymore, but there will always be people waiting to buy a riverfront lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sucks for the homeowners since they probably made an assumption that no one was going to take the lake away. I don't even entirely know how you evaluate that risk. If you had probably called the GBRA a decade ago to ask them about possible lake draining, I assume they would have said there were no plans to do so.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stinkpalm said:

Appears GBRA has put out their decision, which is to dewater all their lakes one at a time starting September 16th and thereby returning them all to natural flow. Shitty.

 

http://seguingazette.com/alert/article_e7b9582a-bf72-11e9-b73e-ff65a710dd97.html?fbclid=IwAR0KsaYhDlOiMJV9t5t2TQQSqAtmvDevgZ7kwJ1OpMSM_W44AI8IAF42RKw

so these are all just going to be little creeks now?  is that what this means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

 So how do they distribute the new land? I assume GBRA owns it and will sell it off to developers? 

No lake, but we do have an exciting new strip mall!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

 So how do they distribute the new land? I assume GBRA owns it and will sell it off to developers? 

perhaps as a second f-u to the lakefront property owners, GBRA will sell the creekfront property that will sit between the previous lakefront owners and the new creek.   and the new owners will need access roads built to their properties as wel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like they're going to try to replace the dams.

Quote

Q: Who is responsible for replacing the dams?
A: With the dams no longer representing a viable source of revenue for GBRA, it will be a community effort to cover the cost of their necessary replacement.

Q: What is the current status of the failed spillgates at Lake Dunlap and Lake Wood?
A: The compromised spillgates at Lake Dunlap and Lake Wood are included in the current discussions surrounding the replacement of the dams. The collective partnership, which includes GBRA and the lake associations, as well as the affected cities and counties are working cooperatively to determine the best course of action for identifying and funding the necessary dam replacements.

Q: Who has GBRA consulted with on this issue and what are their roles?
A: GBRA continues to work closely with two nationally recognized engineering firms – Freese and Nichols, Inc. and Black & Veatch. Freese and Nichols, Inc. was hired before the spillgate failure at Lake Wood to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the dams. While some evaluation is still underway on Lake Dunlap, Freese and Nichols, Inc. has provided a comprehensive evaluation of the dams, including recommended options for replacement. Black & Veatch was hired to design replacement options for Lake Wood and Lake Dunlap. These designs are currently in progress.

https://gvlakes.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

perhaps as a second f-u to the lakefront property owners, GBRA will sell the creekfront property that will sit between the previous lakefront owners and the new creek.   and the new owners will need access roads built to their properties as wel.

Those won't be tense neighbor relationships at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, retread said:

Sounds like they're going to try to replace the dams.

https://gvlakes.com/

*cough* With what money?
The Preserve Lake Dunlap Assocation people are trying to start a water district to raise the needed $30 million by taxing themselves, the water front owners, something like $6-$8 linear waterfront foot per year for the next 30 years. GBRA has said they will sell them the dam for $1. That $30 doesn't cover maintenance, I don't believe, and since that's everyone's big contention, they might need to figure out the funding.

What I think probably should be done is the legislature, in 2 years, grant GBRA the ability to tax adjacent property owners and use that money to repair and maintain the dams. SARA is the only river authority that currently has taxing ability. But give GBRA that 6-8/ft/yr, let them get the bonds (as an existing government entitity) and repair the dams and use the money going forward for maintenance since they are shutting down the hydropower side.

The legislators involved could have asked hot wheels to call a special session, this all happened toward the end of the regular session, but they were asleep at the wheel and so here we all are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...