Thursday
Jan262012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Brisbane floods redux
Jan 26, 2012 Climate: WG2 Greens Remember last year's floods in Brisbane? There were some interesting exchanges in the comments on my posts on the subject, with some differences of opinion between those who thought that the dams had been mismanaged, perhaps in response to green-initiated concerns over droughts - and those who thought otherwise (see here, here and here).
Earlier in the week, it was revealed that the dam in question was operating on a low-release strategy on the eve of the floods, rather than seeking to lower levels in the reservoir ahead of the deluge. Interestingly, evidence has also emerged that the official inquiry into the affair was not what it should have been, overlooking several key documents.
Now why does that sound familiar?
Reader Comments (42)
What could you be saying? That the Eco-loons purposely over looked anything that would highlight how utterly destructive their policies are?
No, they would never do that like how climate scientists would never deliberately break the FOI laws! I just refuse to believe that about people whose only concern is our welfare!!
Mailman
As a resident of this fine city there is in my mind, without doubt, no question that the mismanagement of the dam water levels was as a direct consequence of statements by our resident AlGorists, Flanagan and Garnaut, that the dams would never be filled again, that drought is now the new norm, etc. These two fools have a lot to answer for and in time I look forward to them being brought before a Royal Commission, together with their puppets in the CSIRO, BoM, and the infamous John Cook, to explain themselves and face the music.
Not only did we endure damaging flood but our state government and the state government of Victoria, have wasted billions of tax dollars building desalination plants that have become expensive and decaying white elephants.
In the meantime, I look forward to the Queensland State elections on 24 March at which time we will demonstrate to the incumbent socialist government that we not only reject their incompetence but we reject them personally.
Official inquiries do not require evidence under oath and can (and are) adept at hiding the truth or not looking for it or ignoring inconvenient evidence. I have heard witnesses at wind farm inquiries lying throught their teeth and getting away with it.
Pielke Jr covered this with an interesting article:
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2011/01/large-balls.html
This seesm to me the direct result of pessmistic doom laden conditioning. The irony is it seems there has been a conditioning to believe in the certainty of a less probable, long term, climate effect, that is dubiously modelled, when a regular well known ENSO effects is actually happening and screaming in your face its intentions.
It is like a dark age superstition when the patient is being given some poisonous unction and dying in front of our eyes and the Doctors are saying "Trust us, we know best".
The job of green tinged policy will be to avoid being seen to be responsible - this has happened successfully with the bio-fuels policy push, which now sees the US set in its ways diverting grain into fuel to no prctical gain but to enhance food price speculation and thereby real world starvation, and no green organisation admitting they ever suggested it in the first place. So expect much wailing and gnashing of enviro teeth and some well practiced denial.
Streetcred is there is actually a political alternative that does not swallow the CAGW koolaid?
My son worked on the Desal plant in Brisbane, built because climate change was perceived as inevitably making Queensland a desert. The socialist politicians in Queensland have behaved as a cult, not a political party.
This belief comes from the Australian 'Progressive Socialism' cult, basically the same as ours. It's a form of Marxism in middle class clothing, a subset of Common Purpose. Obama used the CP phrase in his recent speech so CP is at the heart of these flawed decisions in the left-wing English-speaking world, also the EU.
CP wants to cause the breakdown of capitalism, replacing it with Corporatism which they imagine is benign but which will lead to a Chinese Communist style government. Because it uses climate change in its programming, it is in effect like Scientology, brainwashing its members who include many senior UK politicians.
They truly imagine they can make better decisions than technical experts. It's a form of supreme arrogance typified by Prescott, an ignorant bully, but reportedly senior CP. The centre of the CP cult appears to be UEA, hence for 20 years CRU has apparently been sending activists around the World to fiddle temperature data, the classic case being New Zealand. That individual is now in the WMO.
Streetcred,
Your post brought to mind this, (which I found similarly appalling at the time):
(http://jennifermarohasy.com/2010/12/snowy-hydro-tops-up-floods-with-environmental-flow/)
It was written a little before the Brisbane floods and seems to reflect the same preconceived fallacious notions behind the actions of those who should know better and with similar catastrophic outcomes, although not so fully reported in the media.
In looking up the link I found another post on the same subject that says it all:
http://jennifermarohasy.com/2010/12/cant-do-as-government-says-mdb-chief-quits/
And here we go again....
Queensland battens down again for deluge
Andrew, first and third references seem to be the same
From what little that I have read and know on this topic, it does appear that government planners (influenced heavily by eco zealots) know little about the variability of past climate in the area, and the lack of knowledge and understanding of this variability has directly led them to implement erroneous plans for dams and de-salination plants based upon incorrect assumptions as to how future climate will play out.
Further to my last post, when I talk about variability, I mean natural variability and in particular variability due to ENSO
It will be extremely interesting to see if this goes the same way as phone hacking. Inquiries at a suitable level can restrict direction of accountability away from the preferred official view until individual legal action is instigated whereby the courts demands for information has to be adhered to.
This could be a game changer for CAGW if political policy due to scientific advice can be linked into damage compensation. A really good firm of solicitors could make an international name for themselves if the buck is allowed to pass out of Oz, which following the antics of Gillard would not surprise me.
Yep, it certainly seems that the authorities are so hell bent on sticking to the CAGW narrative that they are neglecting actual observations - these excerpts from the Climategate mails caught my eye -
Email 2318
"Dear Dr Hulme,
I am very concerned by the strong correlations between UK Winter Rainfall and solar activity and the failure of the authorities to incorporate such data in their forward planning – we appear to be paying a bitter price for this here in Gloucestershire.
Your rainfall data had been previously been published to illustrate increasing UK rainfall due to Greenhouse Gas emission led Global Warming – there would appear to be a strong solar component to this also.
By failing to acknowledge this and incorporate this in our plans we are also failing to produce a cohesive argument for Sustainable Development – certainly as far as the petrol protesters are concerned! "
and email 4803
"Dear Julian,
Mike Hulme asked me to reply to your email (copied above). The possible link between solar variability and winter precipitation intensity is very interesting – one of the scientific reviewers of our paper in fact asked us to add some comments about it to our original scientific paper. We declined to do so.."
"Dear Tim [Osborn]
...I have also asked Weather Action at SBU to provide longer time series correlations between solar activity and terrestrial weather related factors. We have used WA forecasts for planning the arable farming on 2500 acres here in Glos for several years – and they have been of great benefit. They seem to achieve similar accuracy to conventional forecasts at 5 days range, yet are produced months ahead, and are usually best at showing overall trends, as well as extreme storm events. I appreciate such forecasts could be produced by purely mathematical means; but the WA people seem very sincere in their claim that these forecasts are produced by correlations with solar activity – and certainly those graphs I originally sent you would indicate (well beyond the chance of coincidence) that such links do exist.
... It has become apparent that in addition to the greenhouse gas/solar debate on climate change and weather – there are also significant terrestrial factors that have a role, not only in the amelioration of the effects of weather/climate extremes, but also probably in the moderation of the actual weather extremes. I see little in the media relating to this and I strongly believe that we are thus failing to produce a cohesive and convincing strategy to meet such changes....I have had contact also with the Environment Agency regarding these issues, ranging from their neglect of the natural water management principles ... to their equally apparent disregard of the clear drought/flood cycles detailed in the public domain information I originally sent you. Such cycles have long been noted in the water industry; but not acted on. Dr Richard Bailey (former CIWEM president) tells me he was fully aware of the solar signal apparent in Yorkshire river flows over 30 years ago."
These are a few of the emails referenced in E.M.Smith's excellent post on his 'ah ha' moment re Agenda 21, a critical link he'd previously dismissed out of hand -
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/foia-agenda-21/
A brief look at SEQ water's website reveals one major change from last year - Wivenhoe dam now has a full supply level of 75% not 100%.
Where is Tim Flannery? He was the De facto proponent of persistent drought in Eastern Australia due to AGW. This was ingrained Labor policy and no doubt was applied to the Wivenhoe dam situation BTW 14 people died because of this deluge last year. Also let us take note that current mean global satellite temperatures are already at a record low so there is not even any global warming be it natural or Mann made. We will not be hearing from Tim Flannery for some time and BTW he was named Auistralian of the Year, so we can gauge that Australian education standards have got serious problems
Warwick Hughes has been following dam water stories over the years down in Oz too.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/
Jan 26, 2012 at 11:37 AM | Unregistered CommenterMarion
Excellent and very important thread that one Marion. I have been pimping it to everyone I talk to here in Australia.
I showed my mate who is a pastoralist the video of the girl in Virginia and he was amazed that the state department of agriculture use the same language and the same diagrams even when they have meeting with them.
When you do a timeline of the things that have been happening to our industries in the bush since 1992 it all fits into place now.
This just in: preliminary reports indicate DEFRA has started its journey to rejoin the real world.
But, sadly, not according to dear old Damian in the Graun - who's still drifting off towards another planet.
His "edited highlights" of the DEFRA report include:-
the concrete jungles of London, set to become ovens on baking-hot days.....
........while searing heatwaves will lead to deaths.......
......those in poorer areas will be less able to buy air conditioning....
.....There may be as many as 120 days a year where the temperature rises above 26C....
Cities must be heatproofed ......
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/jan/26/flooding-climate-change-heatwave-impact-risk?commentpage=all#start-of-comments
I think all that imaginary heat might be affecting his brain.
Had a laugh at that link Maurizio. Then it dawned on me. I have been wondering how institutions like our Australian CSIRO and the BOM will get themselves out of the CAGW mess without actually imploding. Mr Shukman has worked it out. Step 1. Start reporting some positive outcomes of Climate Change. Step 2. Slowly increase the positive articles while sprinkling in few articles throwing doubt on the more ridiculous catastrophic predictions of the CAGW crowd. Step 3. Eventually you can ignore the subject altogether. If ever called to account in the future (v. unlikely) you just say; "The climate is still changing. We are certain it is anthropogenic CO2 emissions, but luckily for us we now know, and as we reported when it became known [to us?], the positive consequences outweigh, and sort of cancel out the negatives. This is old news. Lets move on."
This is a fascinating story and a wonderful metaphor.
Might it be a genuine breaking of a dam?
A class action against the Government would mean, for the first time in the world, Warmists would have to face their accusers in open court, something they have so far strenuously avoided. Lawyers, with dollar signs in their eyes, and no ideological commitment to the Greens, NGO's or any other ACGW pressure groups, would get to rip chunks out of the Govt advisors and their projections of endless drought.
The public would get a chance to see the 'evidence'.
Could be very interesting.
don't worry Foxgoose...everybody in this land where 50N is considered "South" knows perfectly well that warm weather is a Very Good Thing. Even Guardian readers. Even Monbiot (since 2009).
http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/monbiots-silence-wrong-kind-of-heat-as-orange-groves-refuse-to-attack/
What's this Bish:
Virginians Get First Peek at Secret UVA emails.
Fascinating stuff.
Here's Dear George speaking: The problem with persuading people in the UK to take climate change seriously is that, as far as we are concerned, it sounds quite attractive. The government’s new climate projections predict drier summers and a possible 5C temperature rise in the south of England by 2080. Isn’t this what we have spent our lives hoping and praying for?.
It was 18 Jun 2009 but it could have been today...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/jun/18/monbiot-climate-impacts
Harry Won A Bagel
I was particularly taken by this paragraph of David Shukman's
All the scenarios rely on computer models of the future climate and therefore inherently involve uncertainties.
That must have been hard for him to write and may well be used in evidence against him.
Sandy
David Shukman was on R4 this morning.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/b006qj9z/console
at 2h:45m
(sorry to all those who can't play this)
Excellent - Rob.
I loved this exerpt from the submission:-
The alarmist professors who in some of these emails speak about ‘the cause’ have complained that their emails have been taken out of context. Release of the full UVA email collection, all sent or received by Mann after expressly agreeing he had no ownership of or expectation of privacy about them, will provide that context.</I>
Will somebody from the area please answer this question. I recall reading at the time of the flood that the effects were made worse by development being allowed in flood plains. AGW was thought to have made floods unlikely and so development took place nearer creeks etc. is this true or is my memory faulty?
Tom
Your memory is fine! My Australian friend whose daughter lives in Brisbane tells me that most if not all of the flooded houses were built on a flood plain. The authorities obviously thought that there was little or no risk.
The insurance companies were a bit wiser and I am led to believe that most of the houses were uninsurable!
Here's an imagined exam question for which this post and thread contains some useful pointers.
Australia and Canada - compare and contrast the influence of climate alarmist doctrines and native publicists / polemicists in these two nations over the past 10 years. Which country, in your view, has suffered the most from such influences? Be sure to illustrate your answer with some specific instances of misguided policies leading to substantial loss.
or, put another way, if you were to award the imminent, surely, Prince Charles' Award for Eco-Oafishness, which of those two governments would you go for today?
Angry Demo Sees Oz PM Rescued By Bodyguards
Better get used to it Julia! Lots of others out there not impressed with policy.
Maurizio, I live North of 50N and I suffer a tongue lashing from my wife when she insists that I must wear long pants, underwear and socks when there is snow outside.
Agriculturally I understand warmer weather is a good thing but if that Mike Mann/Jim Hanson CO2 dial works I want there to be a plebiscite.
The pseudo-religious nature of AGW means that people who pride themselves on the most part for being above religion becuase of their sophistication and enlightement are in fact acting like fundamentalists at a level similar to snake handlers.
Lost my latest CIF account today - for taking the p*ss out of Damian's "fire, brimstone & plague of frogs" piece.
Comment privileges for this account have been withdrawn.
CIF's getting interesting lately, As the warmist narrative crumbles and the usual suspects begin drop by the wayside, the mods are going into hyperdrive, slashing and burning sceptical posts left right and centre - so the threads look like the aftermath of the Somme.
Sadly for the Graunistas, though, the recommends are still running at least 2:1 against them.
The end of an era?
Jan 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM | Gareth
75% is its design "full" limit, and it was always thus. The dam was built for flood mitigation, with the ability to supply water for the city.
The question of the day is: Did the government force the dam opperators to let the dam fill to 100% (as opposed to 75% its design "full" capacity) just prior to the heavy rainfall, which then caused the flood?
@Marion & Ripper
it seems a bit much to believe this Agenda 21 at first read/research can be happening.
but it explains a lot, or am I a (unsustainable) paranoid idiot ?
Jan 27, 2012 at 12:39 AM | Unregistered Commenterdougieh
A quick google search finds that ICLEI is already way intrenched in Western Australia.
Hedley Thomas at The Australian has been the only standout member of the media on the subject of the Brisbane floods, and he has more today:
27 Jan: Australian: Hedley Thomas: Wivenhoe dam perator omitted key flood evidence
THE operator of Wivenhoe Dam omitted key official documents from its comprehensive major public report that purports to describe in minute detail its performance during the devastating floods last January.
The documents not in the 1180-page report, which SEQWater released publicly in early March and gave to the Floods Commission of Inquiry, indicate SEQWater used the wrong strategy on the weekend of January 8-9.
The omission of the documents is expected to be examined when the inquiry reconvenes for at least six days of public hearings amid concerns and allegations of a cover-up.
The Australian can reveal that a crucial situation report, authored by lead flood engineer Robert Ayre at 5.53pm on January 8 last year, and subsequent relevant technical situation reports (TSRs) were omitted from SEQWater's major report, titled "Report on the Operation of Somerset Dam and Wivenhoe Dam"...
The revelations came as Premier Anna Bligh denied there was any conflict over the appointment of Dan Spiller, the former director of operations for Queensland's WaterGrid, to a senior new job advising her on the floods inquiry...
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/elections/wivenhoe-dam-perator-omitted-key-flood-evidence/story-fnbsqt8f-1226254733730
the irony is the Premier is considered by the MSM as the "HEROINE" of the floods and nat geo or discovery have a repeating docu to remind us so.
what is unconscionable is the State Govt (Bligh) not only placed us under heavy water restrictions on account of CAGW alarmists like Flannery, they upped the price of bulk water to such an extent that when restrictions were eased, people couldn't afford to use it anyway, so they've been releasing zigalitres into the river for weeks before our usual summer rains which have now arrived, and are having to release water from Wivenhoe and other dams during the current rains. Wivenhoe is so big, at around 15% full, it can provide enough water for the area it covers for maybe 5 years without any rain falling during that time! the sooner our policy makers are held to account the better. for Bligh it will be in an election in March.
The Wivenhoe disaster did not really have much to do with CAGW zealotry. It was just incompetent operators.
The dam was full to normal storage levels and it had been raining quite a bit for a fortnight - which means a big fall of rain will generate much more stream flow than in dryer conditions. There was a very confident forecast of at least three days of heavy rain, (which was accurate). They clearly should have released some water ahead of the rain, or in the early stages of the downpour - that would have resulted in only very minor flooding. Instead they seem to have gone home for the weekend, the surge capacity of the dam filled, and early the following week they were forced to release 600 megalitres at the worst possible time, (or the dam would have overflowed and ruptured).
They then seem to have deliberately falsified their records, (or at least there are various Emails that directly contradict their "narrative"). Could be a $20Bn class action law suit here.
Jan 26, 2012 at 9:22 AM | Frosty
Streetcred is there is actually a political alternative that does not swallow the CAGW koolaid?
==================
You bet there is :)
@Bill ... Yes there was a very competent forecast of the approaching waters from the remote catchment areas. Unfortunately it appears that the government and its operators did not appreciate the misinformation of perpetual drought. The information was even communicated directly to the Premiers Department in the email recently focussed by The Australian newspaper ... hence the re-opening of the inquiry.
Greg Cavanagh,
I'm not sure I follow. SEQ water give the drinking water capacity of Wivenhoe as 1,165 gigalitres. This is the 100% capacity level that they used to be required to return the dam to in the event of the flood compartment being needed. They are now allowed to and have let it reduce to 75% in anticipation of heavy rain.
The charts available at the SEQ website show that Wivenhoe was nearly at 100% in March 2010 and never dropped below 90% before the flooding in January 2011. You can also go back to 1999 to see that they did the same thing then - the flood compartment was needed but the water was reduced to the 100% level. Water levels barely squeaked into the flood compartment only once in the intervening decade. On the strength of that, maintaining the drinking water level at 100% has been policy for a long time, it's just that only in 1999 and 2010 did they achieve it.
In between the 1999 and 2010 wet seasons there has been engineering work on the dam which reduced the total capacity of the dam. If they want to retain the original flood compartment they need to reduce the full supply capacity. Is this what you mean?
Its been a very great article since then. Reliable ideas and beneficial.