Originally Posted by GarethR (Post 5582184)

Good old Nakheel :) Their science, at least as presented in that report, is seriously flawed, but never mind.

When the Wikipedia entry for the Palm Jumeirah was modified to include the fact that the housing density on the island was greatly increased after the original round of sales (which was absolutely true) and that they'd had stagnation problems with the water before they added the breaks in the crescent (again true), someone was quick to edit the page to remove that stuff. A quick glance at the edit history revealed that the IP address for the person doing the censoring was... the Palm Jumeirah Sales Office :D

There's a wider problem here though, of the fact that the pollution and greenhouse gases created by the UAE are out of all proportion to the population size; in fact, I think I'm right in saying that the UAE is one of the most polluting nations in the world in that respect. And as well as our enthusiastic contribution to global warming, imagine all the crap that's coating our lungs when we breathe the air here. Lovely :(

Originally Posted by GarethR (Post 5582184)

Good old Nakheel :) Their science, at least as presented in that report, is seriously flawed, but never mind.

When the Wikipedia entry for the Palm Jumeirah was modified to include the fact that the housing density on the island was greatly increased after the original round of sales (which was absolutely true) and that they'd had stagnation problems with the water before they added the breaks in the crescent (again true), someone was quick to edit the page to remove that stuff. A quick glance at the edit history revealed that the IP address for the person doing the censoring was... the Palm Jumeirah Sales Office :D

(

Originally Posted by shakh your bootie (Post 5582206)

Bang on re UAE's per capita carbon footprint. (http://www.ameinfo.com/53883.html, for example).

Judging by this board's preference to mull over the property apocalypse rather than the scorched earth apocalypse, I am probably wasting my breath here but...
http://www.eeg-uae.org/billion-tree-campaign.htm

Plant a tree. Go on...

Originally Posted by captainflack (Post 5597914)

They overlooked the fact that water that did not move would stagnate. That is a pretty basic error. Now they cut extra gaps for circulation, they have more water movement. Water movement + sand equals erosion.

The palm will be washed away well before it is submerged by rising sea level. Unless they dredge continuously, which is kinda like building a new Palm every 10 years and just as costly.

The choice was stagnant water or washing away in 20 years. Simple choice really. You cannot hide the stench of stagnant water, but you can easily lie about the likely erosion until you've milked as much money from gullible investors as you can....

Originally Posted by shakh your bootie (Post 5597992)

Erm. I think you'll find that the sand is covered by a water permeable geo-textile that prevents erosion....

You are right that they should have used CFD modelling to predict the water flow and got it right first time - they have corrected this on the Jebel Ali site.

Personally, I don't find the buildings on the Jumeirah Palm at all appealing, but one has to doff one's cap to a pretty impressive feat of civil engineering.

Originally Posted by shakh your bootie (Post 5597992)

Erm. I think you'll find that the sand is covered by a water permeable geo-textile that prevents erosion....

You are right that they should have used CFD modelling to predict the water flow and got it right first time - they have corrected this on the Jebel Ali site.

Personally, I don't find the buildings on the Jumeirah Palm at all appealing, but one has to doff one's cap to a pretty impressive feat of civil engineering.

Originally Posted by Robbies (Post 5600457)

The shorelines looked finished at the front a month or 2 ago, but they are doing preventative maintenance as flooding was noted in the basement car parks of a couple of the buildings, so they are all ripped up again. Other than that, the shoreline area is pretty much done.
.

Originally Posted by Robbies (Post 5600457)

We've bought on the Palm, and have NO regrets. We're certainly not "gullible investors" as captainflack put it. Prices are still rising, and I see them continuing to rise for years to come until the project reaches completion.

The shorelines looked finished at the front a month or 2 ago, but they are doing preventative maintenance as flooding was noted in the basement car parks of a couple of the buildings, so they are all ripped up again. Other than that, the shoreline area is pretty much done.

The fronds however are continuing to be built (no idea for completion), as are the Golden Mile (end 2008), Marina (2009), Tiara (end 2008) and Oceana (end 2008) residences. Hotels will be ongoing, prob for another 5 years I would imagine.

As for being doomed, I have no idea - I'm no scientist. But I haven't seen any waves that would cause any severe erosion - the water moves, but not much.

Originally Posted by captainflack (Post 5601019)

Similar prices to the Greens actually, which is surprising considering the Palm is supposed to be a premium development

Originally Posted by Robbies (Post 5600718)

a fault was found on 1 or 2 of the 20 buildings. So they are applying the fix to all 20.

I'm more than happy to see this done rather than fix the buildings that were affected and leave the rest hoping it won't happen to those.