Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Observer II

Water Management ?

Recommended Posts

Water, water everywhere and not a drop to spare.   Think we did this as a topic last year and we're still here; with politicians circling the Don Valley trying to pick up votes from disgruntled victims of flooding.  But ALL politicians have known for decades that there is a problem and it needs sorting, but have they addressed it - apparently not; probably too busy monitoring social media for political incorrectness.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If all the world were paper
If all the seas were ink
If all the trees
Were bread and cheese
What would we do to drink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would think the ever burgeoning cost of HS2 would be better spent on countrywide flood defences. The cost of HS2 is rising faster than inflation, perhaps this is the type of inflation pension rises should be calculated on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.

 

From: The Rime of the Ancient Mariner 

Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall years ago a report warning that paving off gardens and building near rivers would lead to floods in future.

If you plug a leak in a river surely it will flood somewhere else. If you build flood defenses you need to have somewhere for the water to go, so you need to create floodplains, water storage and/or increase the rate the water can flow at.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been known about for decades, that increased paved areas provide faster run off, which our rivers etc can't cope with.  The flood plain is the natural soak away to hold excess water and slow flow down.  Alas, despite knowing this,  Authorities have continued to build on and within flood plains to date.   Yes, a good deal of preventative work has been done EG; the barriers in Warrington along Kingsway;   but at the end of the day, nature will keep the pressure on, EG coastal erosion, where swathes of our coastline have now been written off.  The other aspect to this. is the enormous amount of energy that flood waters can provide if captured and re-directed, thus providing green energy.   Alas all this requires a long term, co-ordinated plan,  political will and the money to invest in such fundementals, rather wasting cash on such things as HS2.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs,

Spending large amounts on getting energy from flood water that is on the move for a few days every few days makes HS2 look like a real bargain. The flood water is  a long problem when it has overtopped and has nowhere to go, it does not flow anywhere forcefully! Despite your protestation you should look where the local floods are and consider when those houses were built and by whom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they are static floods that need to be high up in valleys. The floods that are causing problems are low down in flood plains as you pointed out. We don't get to choose where it rains. You can't get energy from the flood waters in the area around Fishlake. I will put it down to you posting too late at night

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

😑   Water can be "stored" at lower elevations - they're called lakes  and wet lands.   Water can be transported around the country in canals and pipelines, to avoid local droughts.   Water can be re-used for energy generation by pumping to a height in times of low demand, and released for generation during high demand.   IT's called "management",  the ancients were doing it thousands of years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are just argumentative. The arrangements you suggest are still not efficient for occasional floods no matter what stupid argument you come up with next! Must you always have the last word? If you must then so be it I can't be bothered with you on this subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs being argumentative? Whatever next? 🤣🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Water is a wonderful resource,free at source ,necessary for all life on earth ,one of the staffs of life ,but in the present day UK is only cared about as a source of revenue for water companies.The inconveniences of floods & destruction when Mother Nature gives us too much water is still the buck that is still passed from one agency to another till it stops at the unfortunate flood victims doors. Britain has been a country blessed with rain since pre history & booming populations with necessary housing developments over the years should have been allowed for in making sure adequate flood defences were always in place. The population is expanding , needing evermore housing, the rain won't stop neither will the floods so all that is left is to construct adequate flood defences & water run off/storage systems. 

QED

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All well and good to state the obvious Davy, but these things don't come without cost. If you want the government to do it then it has to come from taxation (i.e. the government only has the money it takes from the taxpayer). If you want the water companies to pay for it then it has to come from water charges. As you say water comes free from the sky, but the control of it as a resource isn't free. We are blessed in this country with clean, safe water piped to our homes with the waste water taken away and treated. This is something that large areas of the world don't have and yet all people in this country can do is moan about it. If you can come up with better solutions at a cheaper price then I'm sure there's someone out there will pay you handsomely for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that flooding has occurred for centuries but it hasn't affected people like in the present because there are many more people living in the UK now who all need housing. Flooding is still relatively sporadic but when it happens it affects more people than it used to because populations everywhere are growing. It is for government agencies & local authorities to set aside land that could be designated as flood reservoirs to hold excess groundwater which could be saved towards water shortages or allowed to run back into the rivers when flood emergencies are over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or stop building houses on flood plains.

What a country eh, we complain when there is too much water and complain again when there is a hosepipe ban because there is not enough water..🤭

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to harp back to the old theme, but a lot of the cause can be traced back to EU regulations that have to be followed by the EA such as not cleaning ditches, not dredging watercourses and (as happened in the Somerset levels) allowing flood plains to flood for the sake of the wild-life. The spoils from ditch clearing and dredging have, under EU regulations, to be treated as "waste" and disposed of (at a cost) in the prescribed manner, not left to the side of the ditch or on the banks of the rivers as had been the practice before the EU took over. The consequence of this is that the water can no longer drain away as before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today on one of the news programs it was said that 20,000 new houses are to be built on what is currently floodplains in the area that has been flooded recently!

On 11/12/2019 at 7:53 PM, Observer II said:

Water, water everywhere and not a drop to spare.   Think we did this as a topic last year and we're still here; with politicians circling the Don Valley trying to pick up votes from disgruntled victims of flooding.  But ALL politicians have known for decades that there is a problem and it needs sorting, but have they addressed it - apparently not; probably too busy monitoring social media for political incorrectness.

 

The UK spends billions on flood defenses, the water still needs to go somewhere and so wouldn't the money be better spent on moving the water rather then trying to stop it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I,m ok according to the worse case scenario on the interactive doomsday flooding map for the world.

http://coastal.climatecentral.org/

you may have ti fiddle with the map a bit to find the uk but you can set up different parameters for time etc.

Even at worst case i will still be able to walk to the hospital and get to tesco as they will not be under water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2019 at 9:28 AM, asperity said:

Sorry to harp back to the old theme, but a lot of the cause can be traced back to EU regulations that have to be followed by the EA such as not cleaning ditches, not dredging watercourses and (as happened in the Somerset levels) allowing flood plains to flood for the sake of the wild-life. The spoils from ditch clearing and dredging have, under EU regulations, to be treated as "waste" and disposed of (at a cost) in the prescribed manner, not left to the side of the ditch or on the banks of the rivers as had been the practice before the EU took over. The consequence of this is that the water can no longer drain away as before.

On a similar theme .i can't remember the last time i saw a gully sucker cleaning grids , & i think it would be nigh on impossible these days with parked cars everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw one a couple of weeks ago Davy, but it was only doing the one. I presume they only do it as an emergency measure these days, not as preventative maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Evil Sid said:

I,m ok according to the worse case scenario on the interactive doomsday flooding map for the world.

http://coastal.climatecentral.org/

you may have ti fiddle with the map a bit to find the uk but you can set up different parameters for time etc.

Even at worst case i will still be able to walk to the hospital and get to tesco as they will not be under water.

I presume that they are ignoring real-world data (i.e. sea level rise currently around 3mm/year) and instead using the much scarier doomsday scenario figure of "here's a number that I plucked out of the air yesterday". 3mm x 30 years = 9cm (less than 4 inches for those of us who think rationally). According to the map in 2050 my road will be underwater but, as it's a hill and my house is at the bottom of the hill, the water level would have to rise several feet for that to become true. So I call bovine excrement on this study.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...