|
Post by bodger on Mar 2, 2020 19:48:31 GMT
If you have grandchildren I hope you are ready to apologise to them for standing aside while watching the planet they live on, and which represents their future, being transformed into a relative wasteland of extreme climates and growing extinctions of wildlife. you still don't get it do you ...... an extraordinary wet month is not proof of anything except an extraordinary wet month
as regards your other ridiculous insertions into my post ...... read what is written and not what your fevered imagination thinks it says. You obviously believe in "group think" and are unable to comprehend that other people may hold views that do not accord with your ideas. I do hope you are not religious because your attitude is exactly that of a religious fanatic
typical of your inane comments is the one "perhaps because removing the cause is more efficaceous (sic) than playing around with possible mitigation methods" you think banning ic engines will reverse the temperature increase, whatever caused it ? If you accept the idea that greenhouse gasses cause warming then when you consider there is the equivalent of 700 gigatons of C02 that will be released by permafrost melting ........ maybe mitigation might be sensible ?
A
so you fail to answer a single one of the queries raised about your denier-rant.
when did I ever suggest that banning ic engines will reverse the temperature increase?
you have really lost the plot, the hook, the line, the sinker and it would appear your sense of judgement. no loss. go bury your head in the sand, as is your wont.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 2, 2020 19:51:19 GMT
Heresy alert, not for the elderly and staid of thinking. The solution is NOT DREDGING, but SLOWING THE RIVER DOWN, clog it up with trees and branches. It's about the only thing that will slow down the water before it gets down the hill. We need to SEE MORE BEAVER IN HEBDEN BRIDGE. A few more trees on the hills wouldn't go amiss, though they will self regenerate once the burping farting sheeps are replaced with lentil burger bushes.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 2, 2020 19:58:00 GMT
you still don't get it do you ...... an extraordinary wet month is not proof of anything except an extraordinary wet month
as regards your other ridiculous insertions into my post ...... read what is written and not what your fevered imagination thinks it says. You obviously believe in "group think" and are unable to comprehend that other people may hold views that do not accord with your ideas. I do hope you are not religious because your attitude is exactly that of a religious fanatic
typical of your inane comments is the one "perhaps because removing the cause is more efficaceous (sic) than playing around with possible mitigation methods" you think banning ic engines will reverse the temperature increase, whatever caused it ? If you accept the idea that greenhouse gasses cause warming then when you consider there is the equivalent of 700 gigatons of C02 that will be released by permafrost melting ........ maybe mitigation might be sensible ?
A
so you fail to answer a single one of the queries raised about your denier-rant. You didn't ask any questions
when did I ever suggest that banning ic engines will reverse the temperature increase? when and where did I say you had
you have really lost the plot, the hook, the line, the sinker and it would appear your sense of judgement. no loss. go bury your head in the sand, as is your wont.
twat 28695752548_a2f7982af0_o by mudlarker, on Flickr
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 19:59:02 GMT
we need to SEE MORE BEAVER Worth tagging Mr Stabby and Andyberg here just in case they may wish to comment.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Mar 2, 2020 20:04:08 GMT
we need to SEE MORE BEAVER Worth tagging Mr Stabby and Andyberg here just in case they may wish to comment.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 2, 2020 20:05:02 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 20:41:37 GMT
A great many of England's rivers have, at some time in their past, been subject to extensive improvements in order to make them navigable for increasingly larger and deeper draughted vessels, . . the Thames, the Severn, the Mersey, the Weaver, the Trent, the (Yorkshire) Ouse, the Don, the Nene, and the Great Ouse, to name but a few of them. Prior to the improvements, when they were still exactly as 'nature' had made them, navigation was all but impossible for anything but shallow flat bottomed boats of very limited carrying capacity. A beneficial side-effect of these rivers being improved for navigation, was the improvement in their ability to contribute hugely to draining the land through which they ran. How would you classify and describe the extensive dredging which was essential to all these past improvements, and the works carried out on modifying the river channel's cross-sectional areas as and where necessary, . . working with 'nature', or 'fighting' it ? Bodger just might lend a little credibility to his borrowed arguments were he to answer the above question - posted yesterday on page 17 - instead of trying to divert attention from the nominated subject of this thread and onto climate change instead ! The question of climate change is something of an irrelevance*, . . the human race can't do anything which will have an immediate and noticeable effect on it. Dredging out shoaling areas of rivers, on the other hand, is something over which we have total and immediate control, and it's beneficial effects can be enjoyed shortly after the next Atlantic storm front arrives over our shores. *piffle Actually a good point...in the second paragraph anyway. Yes, the central question is 'Dredging - is it a good way to reduce flooding'. But you can't just dismiss the possible effects of climate change and increased rainfall as a significant factor just because it suits your contention (unless you don't mind in turn being dismissed as a crank). Happily there is a lot of scientific research into this very aspect of the mass debate. Here's one (other sources are available): www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2020/2020-winter-february-statsSo increased rainfall over the last decade has significantly increased the potential for catastrophic flooding (and I'm not discussing why this is the case, just accepting it as fact - wobbly planet, cows farting, whatever). Its bad news for climate change deniers. On the other hand, perhaps one decade of data isn't enough for a more satisfying conclusion, as John asserts - and your conclusion is as much an assertion as anything else. Sorry John. You've commented often enough on the unprecedented situation at your own mooring. However the pro-dredging entrenchment* is veering as completely into the 'oh yes it is' school of logic as the 'oh no it isn't' camp. Some say dredging is obvious and common sense. Well, so is the fact that it has pissed it down more of late than it used to. I can't argue with the final assertion that dredging could help alleviate the situation, because what data there is (the Somerset thing again) supports the case for dredging...unless Bodger can come up with some other evidence to the contrary (and I hope you have some ammunition here instead of opinion). Perhaps the nascent pressure group would be best-suited to pressuring for a localised experiment...hmmm, where would be best for such a thing? *pun intended
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 20:51:18 GMT
I see it from a boating point of view.
Last winter I was doing my weekends on the Thames, as one does, in my little Colvic 20. The weather seemed to be permanently pleasant so I darted up and down the river with gay abandon.
I spoke with a lock keeper who said the Environment Agency were looking at doing something about the statutory minimum river levels because it was awkward to maintain the level with not enough water.
Great boating weather.
This winter I have been doing weekends on the lovely Thames with a bigger boat but have been able to do about 1/20 of the hours due to the water situation. Too much of it.
It seems to be a case of extreme swings.
A very dry winter season followed by a very wet one..
To be fair from some light research it seems it could be a pattern.
I do sometimes wonder if internet makes normal things seem more extreme.
|
|
|
Post by bodger on Mar 2, 2020 20:54:11 GMT
....... We need to SEE MORE BEAVER ................ that reminds me of a pub game we used to play in those glorious days of dollybirds and miniskirts in the 60's.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 2, 2020 21:07:59 GMT
nemesis I would certainly agree with your conclusion that we have had a hell of a lot of rain and it has shown that either the estimates of once in a hundred year allowance is either out (although it is worth remembering that a once in a hundred year event can happen two years on the trot ...... that's just the way uncertainties balance out) or the flood control measures presently in place are inadequate (whatever the reason for the increase.) Another pretty incontrovertible point is that dredging has been sporadic at best over the last 50/60 years and very much reduced for the last 20 years. I personally would accept the view that dredging is not the answer in all catchments Jim Riley comments about bring back beavers actually does make sense for upland areas as their damns dams provide effective flood plain management. Not really a practical solution where the flood plains have been built on or walled off. behind flood defences. However in certain areas it would seem that if you cannot allow the water to spread out over a flood plain you need to provide a route for the water to flow away as fast as possible. To my mind the only way is to provide a deep wide river channel with only sufficient weed banks to limit erosion (again sometimes an unavoidable result of increased flow rates) I fail to see how simply increasing the height of flood defences is the complete answer. I fail to see how this is more effective at improving drainage than deepening and widening the channel. edited because of rude language
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 21:11:23 GMT
Worth looking at heavy lift helicopters with large bladder tanks as well.
|
|
|
Post by bodger on Mar 3, 2020 7:57:35 GMT
Worth looking at heavy lift helicopters with large bladder tanks as well. you could always assemble your fleet into a chain of water carriers and fill them at Lechlade and discharge them at Teddington.
that would help.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Mar 3, 2020 9:03:09 GMT
Yo see this is where we agree its a fact that CO2 is at its highest level in 600,000 years, it is a greenhouse gas and the planet is warming up, warm air holds more water than cold air so when it rains its for longer and heavier than before! The issue for me is the slightest amount of rain nowadays triggers flooding like last summer, its because no dredging on our rivers is happening at all, this is a navigable river that is rapidly silting up, and restricting commercial traffic what it was designed for But do you believe climate change is also partially being affected by humans? Or do you think that we can continue to pollute our atmosphere without any consequences to the climate? Of course we need to keep dredging, that's a no brainer. Its us we have tipped the balance burning millions if not billions of fossil fuels daily! The vegetation and sea cant sort out the CO2 as fast as we produce it! Maybe coronaviris has been sent by the earth to thin us out to manageable levels? I have tried to clean up my act as much as possible, and all my local trips are done in my electric truck, all being equal my electric car will be up and running this year, my boat is electric, but I say this honestly for the most I get told it cant and doesnt work! The fact it does escapes people, anyway rant over and onwards and upwards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2020 10:39:02 GMT
nemesis I would certainly agree with your conclusion that we have had a hell of a lot of rain and it has shown that either the estimates of once in a hundred year allowance is either out (although it is worth remembering that a once in a hundred year event can happen two years on the trot ...... that's just the way uncertainties balance out) or the flood control measures presently in place are inadequate (whatever the reason for the increase.) Another pretty incontrovertible point is that dredging has been sporadic at best over the last 50/60 years and very much reduced for the last 20 years. I personally would accept the view that dredging is not the answer in all catchments Jim Riley comments about bring back beavers actually does make sense for upland areas as their damns dams provide effective flood plain management. Not really a practical solution where the flood plains have been built on or walled off. behind flood defences. However in certain areas it would seem that if you cannot allow the water to spread out over a flood plain you need to provide a route for the water to flow away as fast as possible. To my mind the only way is to provide a deep wide river channel with only sufficient weed banks to limit erosion (again sometimes an unavoidable result of increased flow rates) I fail to see how simply increasing the height of flood defences is the complete answer. I fail to see how this is more effective at improving drainage than deepening and widening the channel. edited because of rude language I suppose the central bit of my last post was about how proven data is better than waffle and bickering. You can talk till the cows come home, it won't make any difference (except to upset some very depressed people). Also, there is more opposition to dredging than support, so gaining support for a (said it before) small-scale experiment will put that one to bed. Any scientist will tell you that an experiment that fails to prove a hypothesis is not a waste of time. But maybe all the chat about actually doing something is just that - chat.
ETA I took a brief survey of previous / historical posts using the search terms 'flooding' and 'dredging'. I found no posts concerning the heartfelt and pressing issue of dredging to improve the plight of those whose homes have been devastated, or how the failure to dredge was a remarkably short-sighted policy on the part of the EA or CaRT in connection with the current issue of flooding in any way prior to the current discussion of the subject. I did come across quite a few praising CaRT for the dredging that has in fact been carried out between 2015 and the present. How peculiar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2020 10:39:05 GMT
But do you believe climate change is also partially being affected by humans? Or do you think that we can continue to pollute our atmosphere without any consequences to the climate? Of course we need to keep dredging, that's a no brainer. Its us we have tipped the balance burning millions if not billions of fossil fuels daily! The vegetation and sea cant sort out the CO2 as fast as we produce it! Maybe coronaviris has been sent by the earth to thin us out to manageable levels? I have tried to clean up my act as much as possible, and all my local trips are done in my electric truck, all being equal my electric car will be up and running this year, my boat is electric, but I say this honestly for the most I get told it cant and doesnt work! The fact it does escapes people, anyway rant over and onwards and upwards I don't think anyone can hold their heads up and say they are doing nothing to harm the planet or affect the climate. As you know I recently added to the carbon footprint with my holiday to Iceland! Funnily enough it was that trip which made me respect nature more than ever. It's the greed driven economy we all have to fit into which is the problem along with our obsession to make machines our slaves. If a virus doesn't get us, AI will. Neither have a conscience or feel pain, they don't 'care' or love. Every day on this planet is precious, so I think so long as we try our best not to make things worse, we can hold our heads up without too much guilt. Mother nature knows best. Edited to say that I'm assuming virus's can't feel pain but I haven't seen any study to prove otherwise.
|
|