Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

All These Floods....


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#21 longboard

longboard
  • Coach
  • 2,293 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:09 PM

A thing I came across the other day was a defence of insurance companies who no longer insure for flooding. In short, say the insurers, they would offer insurance if flood defences were maintained at acceptable levels however they no longer are.


Where is that information from Jon?

#22 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:17 PM

2. I think that the base flood risk data comes from the Environment Agency. See here: http://www.environme...sure/37837.aspx Key in your post code top right to see if you are doomed!


Doesn't cover where I live (obviously) so I've searched where I used to be: Heywood, Rochdale, Milnrow. It is remarkably accurate in terms of Heywood: I remember the floods of my childhood that covered exactly the shaded areas - including Heywood Cricket Club ground!

But predictive maps like this do not tell the whole story. Methven has one water course running through it - Methven Burn - and I'm sure that the equivalent Scottish map would show that we would have to suffer a deluge of biblical proportions for the village to be inundated. Yet, on quite a few occasions in recent years, the main road through the village has been flooded, involving the many shops and houses on it. The village lies in the fold between two hills, and heavy rainfall comes raging in from the fields on both sides. One route is off the extensive field system just to the north-west of the settlement; heavy rainwater empties on to the northern entrance road, a considerable slope, and rages straight through... the front door of the post office at the bottom! Along the way the water also finds its way into properties that should be safe from flooding - houses high up and quite removed from any water course.
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#23 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,842 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:21 PM

Cutting funding for flood defences and carrying on building on flood plains can't be a good combination!

#24 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:34 PM

Where is that information from Jon?


I think there was an agreement between ABI (Association of British Insurers) and the British government to the effect that the insurance industry would continue to insure homes in high-risk flood areas if the government continued to invest in flood defences. That agreement is just about up and that is why ABI want a new arrangement. Their members will continue to insure everyone as long as they get some sort of protection from excessive claims from the most at risk. They want to build up a fund that the insurance companies would be able to dip into for the most extensive flooding incidents. The problem is that an abnormal flood could occur in the early days of the fund, which would both wipe out the fund and also, potentially, destroy the insurance industry, So they want the UK government to underwrite the fund until it is established - the problem being that the government has other calls on its resources.
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#25 Saint Billinge

Saint Billinge
  • Coach
  • 2,652 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:43 PM

I said on a previous thread that building more and more houses in certain areas and concreting/block paving drives/gardens does have an impact on flooding but was told not so!

Edited by Saint Billinge, 01 December 2012 - 09:44 PM.


#26 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 08:36 AM

Well, according to the society that deals with weather (I can't spell it but it begins with an M!), since 2000 the global temperature remained static for 10 years and has actually dropped over the last two years, so that kind of flies in the face of the messages we were bombarded with concerning global warming.

When the report came out from the society that deals with weather about the global temperature, they also mentioned the nature of the rain we have been getting in the UK since 2000. I thought it was just me, getting older and so looking back through rose tinted glasses at passing showers and summer sunshine, but apparently it's not just me. As a matter of fact, the frequency of torrential rain has increased since 2000, markedly since 2007. In 2012 I have lost count of the number of torrential rainstorms we have experienced in my neck of the woods, and personally for that I blame whoever it was who decided we needed a hosepipe ban back in March when claims were being made that most of England was in drought. I remember quite clearly weather people and others saying that we need lots of rain because the water table was too low. Ha! They clearly tempted the weather gods because now our water table is so full that even non-torrential rain could bring about floods - anywhere in the country. I hope those people are now flagilating.

I don't think matters are helped by the amount of concrete and other impervious surfaces we have covered the country with. That was ok when we had showers with the occasional dousing of real rain but now that things have changed there should be a serious policy of digging up and returning to grass so that we have a greater opportunity in more places to survive these torrential rainstorms we are getting with greater frequency without the consequences being so catastrophic.

The other problem is that I think almost universally local councils have cut back on drain clearage. I know that is the case in my home town. We have to contact the council now if a drain looks blocked and they will come and clear it. The problem with that is that (a) we might not notice it is blocked until a torrential storm floods us out of house and home, and/or ( b ) how blocked does a drain need to be to cause mayhem on the surface?

Ultimately, though, if this climate change that clearly we have been experiencing is going to be with us for good then we need to make significant changes to the way we approach, well, everything really. While I understand the need for the government to control spending, or get the national debt down or whatever it is they are supposed to be doing, the regular destruction of homes (sometimes on multiple occasions over a period of a couple of years - or one year in the case of 2012) and businesses is not going to help the economy to grow. Flood defences have to be a priority because we can do nothing about the weather and if this weather is here to stay we have to be prepared for it as best as we can be.


O Lordy, where to begin. For a start, the concern is over climate change not global warming. Climate change caused by carbon emissions will alter weather patterns and cause a change in precipitation levels, temperature, pressure etc.
Fides invicta triumphat

#27 guess who

guess who
  • Coach
  • 3,953 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:48 AM

Why are politicians so keen to lay the blame for the recent upsurge in flooding on climate change? Have they not thought it might be down to poor management and lack of maintenance since privatisation of the water companies?

Its like they dont want to consider it as an option.


Its a good excuse to tax us more.

#28 westhuller

westhuller
  • Coach
  • 3,029 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 12:17 PM

I know since the last floods in Hull some of the natural flood plain areas that were used for farming have been reclaimed and have been allowed to flood.

#29 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,511 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 12:41 PM

2. I think that the base flood risk data comes from the Environment Agency. See here: http://www.environme...sure/37837.aspx Key in your post code top right to see if you are doomed!


It is interesting looking at that that currently there is no housing on land prone to flooding in my area. However, a developer has put in an application for planning permission on a large area of flood plane on the outskirts. Also, we rely heavily on flood defence systems to prevent flooding including a pumping station that pumps drainage water collected in the river Alt into the sea at Hightown. This wonderful government have proposed turning it off and letting the surrounding farm land flood more heavily and for longer to save a relatively small amount of money. Money saved that would in all probability have to be paid back in compensation many times over to the farmers for their losses. :angry:
"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#30 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,303 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 01:25 PM

O Lordy, where to begin. For a start, the concern is over climate change not global warming. Climate change caused by carbon emissions will alter weather patterns and cause a change in precipitation levels, temperature, pressure etc.

Er yes, I know that. But the message has been that the climate is warming. However, the Meteorological Society, in conjunction with other such organisations worldwide, when reporting on their current findings show that this is in fact not the case. The climate remained static for 10 years from 2000 and cooled during the last two years. Scientists and/or politicians and/or media have been telling us for the last decade that carbon emissions will result in climate warming. However, my point was not about carbon emissions or whether the same impacted upon climate change. My point concerned climate change per se, with a side comment on how the temperatures recorded have not correlated with what has been told to us for the last decade.

#31 Ex-Kirkholt

Ex-Kirkholt
  • Coach
  • 1,606 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 02:33 PM

Er yes, I know that. But the message has been that the climate is warming. However, the Meteorological Society, in conjunction with other such organisations worldwide, when reporting on their current findings show that this is in fact not the case. The climate remained static for 10 years from 2000 and cooled during the last two years. Scientists and/or politicians and/or media have been telling us for the last decade that carbon emissions will result in climate warming. However, my point was not about carbon emissions or whether the same impacted upon climate change. My point concerned climate change per se, with a side comment on how the temperatures recorded have not correlated with what has been told to us for the last decade.

Climate has ALWAYS warmed and cooled - hence "snowball earth" circa 700 million years ago. 10 years is the blink of an eye in geological time and nothing can be extraploted from that. We may be able to get a fuller picture when ice-cores going back to a couple of million years have been seriously analysed.
Looks like it wer' organised by't Pennine League

#32 Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed
  • Moderator
  • 5,176 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 06:47 PM

Er yes, I know that. But the message has been that the climate is warming. However, the Meteorological Society, in conjunction with other such organisations worldwide, when reporting on their current findings show that this is in fact not the case. The climate remained static for 10 years from 2000 and cooled during the last two years. Scientists and/or politicians and/or media have been telling us for the last decade that carbon emissions will result in climate warming. However, my point was not about carbon emissions or whether the same impacted upon climate change. My point concerned climate change per se, with a side comment on how the temperatures recorded have not correlated with what has been told to us for the last decade.

It hasn't cooled in the last 2 years. It has plateaued for quite a few years now, but any suggestion that it has cooled is wrong. We are still above averages from the 70's, 80's 90's etc. This year will probably end up as the 9th warmest. Apart from 1998, the rest of the top ten are from the 2000's.

Carbon emissions do warm the climate, but they are not the only thing that warms (or cools) the climate. A warmer climate does not necessarily mean a warmer UK.
With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

#33 Hornetto

Hornetto
  • Coach
  • 3,128 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 07:50 AM

This was an issue where I used to leave - significant flooding even half way up a hill caused entirely by rain running down the hill having nowhere to drain. The council cleared the drain once every two years. So for three months until grit and leaves built up again it was fine. Then another 21 months of waiting.


We had a similar problem in my previous house where the drain was clogged and a huge lake would lap at our doorsteps. So me and the neighbour went and dug all the c_r_a_p out of the drain. Dirty job, took about 45 minutes. Sorted. Sometimes it pays not to wait for the council.

Edited by Hornetto, 04 December 2012 - 07:50 AM.

Posted Image
These Lads Can Run for 80 Minutes - the infamous Hornets fanzine is back from the dead: and just as biased as ever!
Match reports, previews and other stuff that comes into our heads at
http://theseladscanr...ns.blogspot.com


#34 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,200 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 07:42 PM

Er yes, I know that. But the message has been that the climate is warming. However, the Meteorological Society, in conjunction with other such organisations worldwide, when reporting on their current findings show that this is in fact not the case. The climate remained static for 10 years from 2000 and cooled during the last two years. Scientists and/or politicians and/or media have been telling us for the last decade that carbon emissions will result in climate warming. However, my point was not about carbon emissions or whether the same impacted upon climate change. My point concerned climate change per se, with a side comment on how the temperatures recorded have not correlated with what has been told to us for the last decade.


What do you think makes the Greenland and North Pole sea ice melt if it s not rising temperatures.?

#35 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,845 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 11:03 PM

Gritting lorries?

Even I think that climate change is reality and that whatever the cause it is too risky to assume it is not our fault.

#36 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 19,717 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:36 AM

Gritting lorries?

Even I think that climate change is reality and that whatever the cause it is too risky to assume it is not our fault.

Bit of a vague statement there. Climate changes alright, we can see that, but what was the cause of the last ice age or whatever. I'm not sure what effect man has had but if so, then even more reason for water companies and the EA to up their game.

No I don't care if you're if you're into different bands

No cause for so much hatred, I'm just a different man

Pull off that cover, I will too, and learn to understand

With music deep inside we'll make world unity our plan

 

7 Seconds -Walk Together, Rock Together





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users