Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« The amazing Sarah Montague | Main | About that tech solution to climate change... »
Wednesday
Dec092015

All Trussed up - Josh 355

There is a bit of a furore about the money spent on Flood Defences, by the UK Gov, being less than half the amount spent on tackling climate change abroad. Not only that but Liz Truss says this is to help defend us from ISIS. Gosh.

Cartoons by Josh

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (20)

The ever imaginative Green Blob will want the money given away to Windmill builders, and a multimillion pound research study into more water mills.

Dec 9, 2015 at 4:42 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

A failure of guvemnts of ALL hues! You get e few drier than usual winters here & there, then you get much wetter ones, & you see where your defences are at! Not enough capital works me thinks!

Dec 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan the Brit

Why spend money on flood defences when you can spend it on wind farms and solar farms.

Dec 9, 2015 at 4:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Constable

The EA were bragging about spending £28M on the Flood Defenses in that area.
The cost of the Flooding and clean up £500M, they didn't do their sums very well did they.

Dec 9, 2015 at 5:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterA C Osborn

If they encourage more coastal flooding then it will become cheaper to build offshore wind farms...

Dec 9, 2015 at 5:22 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

michael hart, if they built offshore solar farms underwater, their unreliability would be more predictable, even at night.

Dec 9, 2015 at 5:39 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Convert all wind turbines to what they do best. Supplying intermittent power as suitable for pumping water. That way, when the floods come you will still get flooded but the politicians can claim that the reason is that the turbines weren't working in time. Since they expect people to accept unreliable intermittent electricity generation that is useless the politicians can expect the general population to believe that failure as well.

Dec 9, 2015 at 7:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterGraeme No.3

Why spend Money on Flood Defences in England needed to combat the effects of Climate Change

when

you can spend it paying the Salaries of thousands of Government Bureucrats and Climate Change Co ordinators in the third world whose general populous don't have access to electricity and running water but do have a space program

Dec 9, 2015 at 8:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

Quick one

Since the floods has anyone been on Right Move or Fish4Homes and checked the latest property prices in Cumbria.

I bet The Lake District is still the top retirement destination in the UK

Dec 9, 2015 at 8:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

They could spend even less on flood defences if they spent relatively a small amount on old fashioned waterway management.(eg dredging) The presumption that sediment should be left in place needs to go.

The Environment Agency's: "Good practice management of in-channel sediments"

Page 1.

Good practice management of in-channel sediments can also bring about a number of other benefits. For example, limitation of sediment removal may result in significant cost savings in both undertaking channel maintenance and disposal of sediments removed.

What an amazing insight. Stopping dredging saves money on dredging and sediment disposal costs. But then you have to spend a packet on flood defences and repairing damage when floods do occur.

Page 2:

1) there is a general presumption against the removal of sediment for a watercourse;

The presumption should be in favour of maintaining a carefully considered level of sediment in a waterway and when there is more you take some out.

Dec 9, 2015 at 9:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterGareth

Well said Gareth. See http://www.floodpreventionsociety.org.uk

Dec 9, 2015 at 9:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterMike Post

Gareth; earlier coverage on the beeb, I think it was Braithwaite, watercourses totally blocked with felled trees and brash. This flooding is not down to rainfall, but totally incompetent water management. No doubt, it won't affect the Local Authority's and EA's Xmas partys.

Dec 9, 2015 at 9:28 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

"Fish4Homes"

Currently trading as Homes4Fish...

Dec 9, 2015 at 10:59 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp

What a contrast with Owen Paterson's dynamic and effective action to rackle the Somerset floods.

Now we have Liz Truss bleating it's all the fault of climate change, despite a total lack of scientific evidence, and claiming financial aid to tackling climate change overseas will somehow persuade terrorists to lay down their guns.

Dec 10, 2015 at 5:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterIan Wilson

Thank you jamesp. Made my day.

Dec 10, 2015 at 8:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

The Carlisle floods were caused by lack of dredging and lack of upper water catchment area maintenance.

The Cumbria floods in general were about the same as in 1921; nothing to do with CO2.

Dec 10, 2015 at 8:47 AM | Unregistered CommenterNCC 1701EE

The Thames Water Authority, as was amongst others, was in part a creation as a result of the 1947 floods in the Thames Basin, vast areas were under feet of water. It took several years to get going, & flood alleviation plans put into place. This has generally now stopped. Greens are directly responsible for this outcome, with their stupid wishy washy namby pamby "ah, leave it mother nature coz it is all natural like!" mentality. Greens should be forced to live in all risky area of flodding from the sea & rivers int times of high storms & rainfall it might just fill them wit ha real true senase of Mother Nature's real power, instead of their cushy comfy view of it!

Dec 10, 2015 at 9:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan the Brit

If ISIS said they were slaughtering people in a bid to combat global warming, they'd be much better funded than they are selling fossil fuels, and they would have been cordially invited to COP21 to promulgate their views, instead of having to shoot the city up to get press attention.

Dec 10, 2015 at 11:24 AM | Unregistered CommenterRick Bradford

NCC

"The Cumbria floods in general were about the same as in 1921; nothing to do with CO2."

I'd love to know how the current flood level compares to the marker shown here. The top line is from 1898...

Link

Dec 10, 2015 at 8:07 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp

Truss under pressure has proved herself incompetent, and will have to go soon. So much for token women in government.

Dec 11, 2015 at 7:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Constable

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>