English Floods

[Phil D. Rolls]

Are the scenes in Somerset proof that centralised government is not working? You have to wonder what could have been achieved by a more localised response. Those poor people have been abandoned.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Thats what happens when 400000 Jambos shed tears of pride re their young heroes.

[RyeSloan]

Are the scenes in Somerset proof that centralised government is not working? You have to wonder what could have been achieved by a more localised response. Those poor people have been abandoned.

Not sure what you mean by a more localised response?

While there has obviously been a lack of planning I would suggest that seems to go down to a local level as well....easy to cast blame in these circumstances but what exactly did the local councils do to prevent this?

There is also the thought that there is not much you can do in the face of such extreme circumstances....it reminds me of the furore a few years ago about the lack of planning for the huge snowfalls we had, yet this year I've not seen one snowflake in Edinburgh.

As for the dredging argument...a closer look would suggest that is being used without a full understanding of what it actually means or what it would have prevented. Some analysis I have seem has suggested it would have done bugger all and just resulted in other areas flooding quicker...the water does have to go somewhere at some point.

Finally if you live in areas under sea level then do you not have a personal or community responsibility to protect your property....blaming central government is always the easiest route to take.

And in any case are we at all surprised that central planning is inefficient and lacks the ability to understand issues at a local level?

[Phil D. Rolls]

Not sure what you mean by a more localised response?

While there has obviously been a lack of planning I would suggest that seems to go down to a local level as well....easy to cast blame in these circumstances but what exactly did the local councils do to prevent this?

There is also the thought that there is not much you can do in the face of such extreme circumstances....it reminds me of the furore a few years ago about the lack of planning for the huge snowfalls we had, yet this year I've not seen one snowflake in Edinburgh.

As for the dredging argument...a closer look would suggest that is being used without a full understanding of what it actually means or what it would have prevented. Some analysis I have seem has suggested it would have done bugger all and just resulted in other areas flooding quicker...the water does have to go somewhere at some point.

Finally if you live in areas under sea level then do you not have a personal or community responsibility to protect your property....blaming central government is always the easiest route to take.

And in any case are we at all surprised that central planning is inefficient and lacks the ability to understand issues at a local level?

The story being put forward is that they have been getting no response to pleas for help. I have heard different arguments about the effectiveness of dredging. What they have been saying is that the Environment Agency have forbidden them from trying this.

It's your point about communities below sea level that I was really thinking about. It's a local problem, but they are bound by a national strategy. If responsibility was devolved to them, it's possible their preparation and response might have been more effective.

[One Day Soon]

The story being put forward is that they have been getting no response to pleas for help. I have heard different arguments about the effectiveness of dredging. What they have been saying is that the Environment Agency have forbidden them from trying this.

It's your point about communities below sea level that I was really thinking about. It's a local problem, but they are bound by a national strategy. If responsibility was devolved to them, it's possible their preparation and response might have been more effective.


Also possible that the reduced economies of scale would mean that they would then have insufficient resources. I think the structure is right but the information sharing and shared decision making hasn't been operated effectively.

[Jonnyboy]

It's all the Environment Agency's fault. FACT (according to a Government spokesman holding the line on passing the buck)

[Sylar]

It's all the Environment Agency's fault. FACT (according to a Government spokesman holding the line on passing the buck)

Nonsense - everybody knows the gays are to blame :greengrin

[marinello59]

This whole blame game thing leaves me cold. It rained a lot. Lots of houses were knowingly built on the flood plains. In order to defend against every single flooding scenario would cost more than taxpayers could sensibly afford. And it would probably still occur. **** happens sometimes and we just have to make the best job we can of dealing with it.

[hibsbollah]

This whole blame game thing leaves me cold. It rained a lot. Lots of houses were knowingly built on the flood plains. In order to defend against every single flooding scenario would cost more than taxpayers could sensibly afford. And it would probably still occur. **** happens sometimes and we just have to make the best job we can of dealing with it.

The 'blame game' is fascinating because it opens a window into the first signs of the coalition government losing control. Ministers blaming each other yesterday and the Cameroon's Govt's bizarre dual announcements of 'money being no object' and 'there are no blank cheques' have been really farcical. The political story of this could be far more damaging than the environmental one. (Fingers crossed for the people involved)

[Hibercelona]

It's god sending us a sign that we should be separate from this lot. :agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

It's god sending us a sign that we should be separate from this lot. :agree:

:agree:

All the English are gay.

[Sylar]

The 'blame game' is fascinating because it opens a window into the first signs of the coalition government losing control. Ministers blaming each other yesterday and the Cameroon's Govt's bizarre dual announcements of 'money being no object' and 'there are no blank cheques' have been really farcical. The political story of this could be far more damaging than the environmental one. (Fingers crossed for the people involved)

I don't know - all I'm seeing whenever these new storms pass through is 'data, data, data!' :greengrin

The environmental story has been absolutely thrilling but this emergence of blame has been exciting - I lost the will to read anymore yesterday though, when I read an article that blamed EU policy on sustainable flood management for the occurrence of flooding (after the obvious input of rainfall) in the first place.

Marinello is bang on the money - unprecedented rainfall and poor archaic planning practices that didn't take floodplains or flood design engineering (i.e., return periods of large magnitude storms) into account.

Dredging wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference and would only have displaced the problem to other areas of the catchment, whilst causing a whole raft of new problems at considerable expense.

The thing that's really getting on my wick is that everybody and their dug is suddenly an expert in hydrology!

[Sylar]

An excellent article in today's Guardian by one of my colleagues, Professor Paul Bates (based at Bristol).

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/12/flood-crisis-dredging-climate-change

[hibsbollah]

An excellent article in today's Guardian by one of my colleagues, Professor Paul Bates (based at Bristol).

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/12/flood-crisis-dredging-climate-change

Thats a very interesting article for technical know-nothings like me. From a policy perspective It could have also mentioned a sixth element, the reduction in environment agency funding, the cuts to financial incentives for green energy, cuts to flood defence programmes, and other implications of the relentless 'austerity' that we're all living with.
Caroline Lucas of the greens was the lone voice in the commons ready to mention the c word. And as soon as you mention climate change you get drowned out by the government benches, as if you are peddling some kind of myth.

[RyeSloan]

Thats a very interesting article for technical know-nothings like me. From a policy perspective It could have also mentioned a sixth element, the reduction in environment agency funding, the cuts to financial incentives for green energy, cuts to flood defence programmes, and other implications of the relentless 'austerity' that we're all living with. Caroline Lucas of the greens was the lone voice in the commons ready to mention the c word. And as soon as you mention climate change you get drowned out by the government benches, as if you are peddling some kind of myth.

It's a myth in terms of its impossible to know if the weather experienced is the result of change caused by humans or if it is simply the natural ups and downs of nature.

Only a year or two ago the talk was of droughts and below average rainfall over a sustained period being the culprit.

[Sylar]

It's a myth in terms of its impossible to know if the weather experienced is the result of change caused by humans or if it is simply the natural ups and downs of nature.

Only a year or two ago the talk was of droughts and below average rainfall over a sustained period being the culprit.

That's your first mistake right there. Climate and weather are two completely different things.

[hibsbollah]

It's a myth in terms of its impossible to know if the weather experienced is the result of change caused by humans or if it is simply the natural ups and downs of nature.

Only a year or two ago the talk was of droughts and below average rainfall over a sustained period being the culprit.

'Know' in that sense is the same way as evolution deniers say you can't 'prove' Darwins theory of natural selection. From my, never-past-gcse science point of view, the evidence for climate change is absolutely 100% incontrovertable, (based on what theyre finding at glaciers and so on) and the evidence that points to it being a result of mans activity post industrial revolution, also about as watertight as you can get.

I understand the principle that you can't pin a single weather event to climate change. But its also true that the implications of global warming for the UK will be wetter milder summers and more extreme weather events, which we are as usual not well prepared for.

[HiBremian]

An excellent article in today's Guardian by one of my colleagues, Professor Paul Bates (based at Bristol).

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/12/flood-crisis-dredging-climate-change

Interesting article there. The floods issue is always big here in Germany due to the number of recent river flooding incidents.

Where I live in Bremen (500 yards from the Weser Stadion) the whole river is lined by dykes to prevent flooding, but talk is that they won't be high enough in the next 25 years as flooding events become even more extreme. As in this article, much of our problem has been due to intensive farming upstream. Previously we even had East Germany dumping their **** into rivers that flowed west. Incompetent environmental agencies have also contributed, with dykes built at different heights on the same strtch of river.

And dredging the Weser is currently a big issue due to the demands of the shipping industry, who seem to want all our major rivers forever dredged, causing more extreme tides upstream.

One big difference between here and the UK, though, is the strength of environmental groups. Here in Bremen the local Friends of the Earth took the local authority to court to (successfully) stop further dredging of the Weser. And they help manage, along with other community associations, a lot of flood plain projects that give the river a chance to breathe when floods do come. I can't be sure, but I suspect some of the houses affected in Somerset would never have been built here.

I get the OP's point about a local rsponse, though. We have devolved government here, along with devolved finances, that enables that to happen to some extent. On the other hand there are smart and dumb politicians at every level, so it's no guarantee of better and more tailored policies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

That's your first mistake right there. Climate and weather are two completely different things. Aye it's true I'm no expert but the op was referring to the fact that there was a connection being made to man made climate change and the recent weather... My point was that that connection couldn't be safely made in terms of these recent events.

Edit: thinking about this further I suppose they are different in terms of how they are described but they must be very closely related. My best guess is that the climate drives the weather....but they are still intrinsically linked no?

[RyeSloan]

'Know' in that sense is the same way as evolution deniers say you can't 'prove' Darwins theory of natural selection. From my, never-past-gcse science point of view, the evidence for climate change is absolutely 100% incontrovertable, (based on what theyre finding at glaciers and so on) and the evidence that points to it being a result of mans activity post industrial revolution, also about as watertight as you can get. I understand the principle that you can't pin a single weather event to climate change. But its also true that the implications of global warming for the UK will be wetter milder summers and more extreme weather events, which we are as usual not well prepared for.

The science is still very undeveloped in understanding the mechanics of the climate and how it changes so any implications mooted are merely projections based on incomplete models.

I agree though that on a basic level it seems impossible that man made pollutants are not impacting the worlds climate to some degree...I just don't think we are anywhere near close to being able to model that to any acceptable degree of accuracy, ergo we have no real idea what the implications will actually be or have the ability to determine what is happening now in terms of the floods is in any way connected.

That's not to say we shouldn't be looking to take action on 'climate change' I just dislike when a freak weather occurrence happens that it's rolled out as the reason.

[Sylar]

Aye it's true I'm no expert but the op was referring to the fact that there was a connection being made to man made climate change and the recent weather... My point was that that connection couldn't be safely made in terms of these recent events.

Apologies SiMar, I thought you were responding to bollah's post more generally.

Climate change drives regional weather patterns, so whilst it's patently absurd (as you point out) to say that a singular event can be attributed to climate change, the progression we're seeing of continuous storms like this is unprecedented.

Yes, there have been storms of large magnitude before (hence why we talk about them in recurrence intervals '1 in 100 year storm') but this prolonged assault of extreme weather is not something we've experienced before at this scale.

It's likely (obviously, we've not had the time to analyse the data with any real fervor yet) that climate change has contributed to these patterns but David Cameron was justifiably shot down when he professed this in the Commons with no supporting evidence.

[RyeSloan]

Apologies SiMar, I thought you were responding to bollah's post more generally. Climate change drives regional weather patterns, so whilst it's patently absurd (as you point out) to say that a singular event can be attributed to climate change, the progression we're seeing of continuous storms like this is unprecedented. Yes, there have been storms of large magnitude before (hence why we talk about them in recurrence intervals '1 in 100 year storm') but this prolonged assault of extreme weather is not something we've experienced before at this scale. It's likely (obviously, we've not had the time to analyse the data with any real fervor yet) that climate change has contributed to these patterns but David Cameron was justifiably shot down when he professed this in the Commons with no supporting evidence.

I think we agree then :-)

[heretoday]

Cameron would do well to shut his mouth on this one. Politicians don't scrub up well when they turn up after disasters acting all concerned.

The best thing he can do is speak to his friends in the insurance companies and pressure them to get the finger out when it comes to dealing with claims.

It's a nightmare trying to actually make contact with these leeches let alone get them to sort anything out. The flood victims have all that to look forward to after their current torment.

[Twa Cairpets]

One of the best channels on Youtube is a guy called Potholer54.
He's a journalist and he does a lot of highly listenable/watchable pieces about various things and one of the best is about the debunking of Lord Christopher Monckton, a prominent climate change denier for the right.

The series on "Monckton Bunkum" is really good, and gives a lot of excellent and entertaining insight into the debate. Really recommend it to get a good overview of the arguments from both sides, but on the basis of evidence rather than propaganda. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM&list=PL6B84B372A56FEC9A.
Hope you find it interesting.

[hibsbollah]

One of the best channels on Youtube is a guy called Potholer54.
He's a journalist and he does a lot of highly listenable/watchable pieces about various things and one of the best is about the debunking of Lord Christopher Monckton, a prominent climate change denier for the right.

The series on "Monckton Bunkum" is really good, and gives a lot of excellent and entertaining insight into the debate. Really recommend it to get a good overview of the arguments from both sides, but on the basis of evidence rather than propaganda. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM&list=PL6B84B372A56FEC9A.
Hope you find it interesting.

That was good, even though the bit about 'forcing and sensitivity' lost me a bit. I don't actually buy the line that Monckton is a clever manipulator who has hoodwinked his audience, they must WANT to believe it or have something to gain from doing so. Its obvious (to me at least) that quoting Greenland ice sheet data from 2007-2009, and not mentioning the previous 30 years, is selective to the point of incredulity. So why would no one in his audiences pick up on this and ask 'well what happened prior to this tiny three year window'? Because they have something to gain from climate denial, I guess. As ever, its all about politics.

[Jack]

In an effort to stem the floods David Cameron copies Dutch model and dispatches front bench fags telling them to find a dike and stick a finger in it.

[hibsbollah]

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/13/storms-floods-climate-change-upon-us-lord-stern

Lord Stern weighs in.

[Twa Cairpets]

That was good, even though the bit about 'forcing and sensitivity' lost me a bit. I don't actually buy the line that Monckton is a clever manipulator who has hoodwinked his audience, they must WANT to believe it or have something to gain from doing so. Its obvious (to me at least) that quoting Greenland ice sheet data from 2007-2009, and not mentioning the previous 30 years, is selective to the point of incredulity. So why would no one in his audiences pick up on this and ask 'well what happened prior to this tiny three year window'? Because they have something to gain from climate denial, I guess. As ever, its all about politics.

Glad you enjoyed it - I think potholer54 is excellent.

The forcing and sensitivity bits are to an extent the scientific bedrock of the arguments about CO2 and climate change, and the point (tricky I agree though it is to get your head around) is that throwing at best out of context or cherry picked data or at worst just plain wrong science to a lay crowd can allow you to make any point you like. The conclusions drawn about Greenland in Moncktons talks were directly at odds with the conclusions the researchers drew in the same paper!

I think Monckton is a mendacious patsy who doesn't really understand what he is talking about and is used as a seemingly credible spokesperson by the "no-climate change" lobby. Its when you dig into the actual facts, like the bit about the Himalayan Glaciers, that you see that he is either downright lying or monstrously misinformed by his researchers, and putting that rubbish out there as incontrovertible evidence.

As for why wont they question it? Well, I think that most people don't have the knowledge, or the genuine interest or inclination to look into the science behind the sound-bites. If you want to think that climate change is bollocks, and have it re-inforced by the op-ed writers in the Daily Mail or wherever, then confirmation bias kicks in when you hear someone spouting off what sounds like "real-science". How often do people ever go and check the references given? (Thats why I like potholer54, as he does). But fundamentally you're right, it comes down to politics and vested interest with resource.

The only positive of the floods really is that the impact of climate change becomes a real and immediate thing to people who in the past wouldn't have thought too much about it, which then does start to impact the political ramifications on energy policy, CO2 etc.

[(((Fergus)))]

That's your first mistake right there. Climate and weather are two completely different things.

What is the difference between them?

[Sylar]

What is the difference between them?

Scale.

Climate is a much larger circulatory system that controls regional weather patterns.

Today was great fun - spent it out taking water quality samples in Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Surrey - the sheer scale and magnitude of the flooding is very 'impressive' to see up close. Weather conditions were a bit hairy mind you.

[easty]

I had just under 4 foot of water in my living room when I lived in Roseburn and the we got flooded years ago. Where were William and Harry with the sandbags then? :greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

What is the difference between them?

Weather is what happens as a result of the climate.

Climate is macro, weather is micro.

[hibsbollah]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/16/climate-change-deniers-put-up-or-shut-up

[Twa Cairpets]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/16/climate-change-deniers-put-up-or-shut-up

Excellent article, and I agree with it pretty much 100%

[The Green Goblin]

I really feel for anyone who has had their house flooded. It must be awful. I was asking someone the other day why Holland don't suffer such terrible floods, and he told me that after they lost over 300 people in similar floods in the early 1950s, they invested in long term flood defences, which they have maintained and improved over the years and have never had a repeat since. You'd think, given the increasing occurence with which this is happening, that fairly serious steps must be taken asap to protect anywhere at risk on the uk mainland.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I really feel for anyone who has had their house flooded. It must be awful. I was asking someone the other day why Holland don't suffer such terrible floods, and he told me that after they lost over 300 people in similar floods in the early 1950s, they invested in long term flood defences, which they have maintained and improved over the years and have never had a repeat since. You'd think, given the increasing occurence with which this is happening, that fairly serious steps must be taken asap to protect anywhere at risk on the uk mainland.

That was the same storm that cost lives down the East Coast of Britain - notably in Canvey Island. Proper flood defences seem to have protected them in Essex this time.

To me, the Dutch example is one worth noting. Namely that they anticipate events like this and work together to ensure they are prevented. The British government has been trying to make out that this was an unforseeable disaster.

That seems wrong to me, and I think it will come out that successive administrations have not been paying attention to warnings. Particularly in regard to planning permission. All in all, it appears we have a political class that are unable to work towards the common good - instead trying to grab headlines on "sexy" subjects.

At the end of the day the British are excellent crisis managers, but useless at planning ahead.

[Twa Cairpets]

I really feel for anyone who has had their house flooded. It must be awful. I was asking someone the other day why Holland don't suffer such terrible floods, and he told me that after they lost over 300 people in similar floods in the early 1950s, they invested in long term flood defences, which they have maintained and improved over the years and have never had a repeat since. You'd think, given the increasing occurence with which this is happening, that fairly serious steps must be taken asap to protect anywhere at risk on the uk mainland.

Its not fun, I can testify to that.

I was flooded out of the house 15 years ago - it is a surreal experience wading through your living room, and having a neighbour canoe down the street. Although local flood prevention means a repeat is unlikely, its fair to say my insurance policy has remained very comprehensive ever since.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

That was the same storm that cost lives down the East Coast of Britain - notably in Canvey Island. Proper flood defences seem to have protected them in Essex this time.

To me, the Dutch example is one worth noting. Namely that they anticipate events like this and work together to ensure they are prevented. The British government has been trying to make out that this was an unforseeable disaster.

That seems wrong to me, and I think it will come out that successive administrations have not been paying attention to warnings. Particularly in regard to planning permission. All in all, it appears we have a political class that are unable to work towards the common good - instead trying to grab headlines on "sexy" subjects.

At the end of the day the British are excellent crisis managers, but useless at planning ahead.

We invested in flood defences as well following the storm in the 50s and these made a massive difference during the recent storm (Xaver, I forget the month) that resulted in a lot of storm surge down the east coast of the UK. We might not be as well defended as Holland, but I don't think there has been a major failing by our government relative to other countries with comparable wealth/ flood risk.

[Phil D. Rolls]

We invested in flood defences as well following the storm in the 50s and these made a massive difference during the recent storm (Xaver, I forget the month) that resulted in a lot of storm surge down the east coast of the UK. We might not be as well defended as Holland, but I don't think there has been a major failing by our government relative to other countries with comparable wealth/ flood risk.

Im thinking more of planning. Building in flood plains without dealing with the flood risk.

[Hibbyradge]

A comment on UKIP's call to halt overseas aid. (http://dailyhawk.co.uk/2014/02/14/african-union-we-cannot-ignore-the-plight-of-berkshire-any-longer/)