Talk:Philipsdam

Compartmentalization
Okay, I was able to translate the part concerned with this dam from the "Driemaandelijks bericht Deltawerken 071-080 (1975-1979)" citation. I'd say that coming at this as a layman, I'd like to clarify what I was asking earlier. What I mean by "location" was both the general location AND the "trace" or route of the dam. For someone not familiar with the decision-making around dam closures, the very first thing when you look at a map of this area is the strange route of the dam, and I think that should be explained probably more than the segmented explanation of the various different considerations, which is a bit much.

To put things more simply, it seems the main consideration was preserving as many tidal flats as possible and thus the local fishingy/aquaculture economy. And the route taken was apparently 1. where the fresh and salt waters met, 2. where a mudflat was present for easy construction of a work island and with minimal disruption/erosion to the closure area, 3. and then kind of most importantly for why you have the "weird" connection to the Grevelingendam, the option to turn the Grevelingenmeer into a freshwater lake via what would know be a freshwater Krammer-Volkerak. I think there is perhaps a way to explain this in a paragraph or two to make this more concise and not to confuse readers with what may be interesting but non-essential details. Criticalthinker (talk) 04:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What I'd also like to see explained is why the Keeten location wasn't chosen for the dam. I went and translated the Dutch version of this article, and it sort of mentions in passing that the current location was chosen over the Keeten proposal, but it does not mention why. I suspect it was for the reasons I talked about above, but I'd like to see that explicitly laid out in this article. Does any of this make sense to anyone?--Criticalthinker (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)