Off Topic COP 26

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Had a wry laugh at the news this morning.
Item 1, US and China in historic climate deal.
Item 2, Britain sends an Airbus A350 to Jamaica on a deportation flight with 4 people on board.

There should have been 33 more on that plane, doesn't distract from your point though.
 
"Prof Parsons' assessment is not theoretical."

Really? So infilling the drains and building over the areas that formerly routinely flooded at times flood announcements on the radio were a regular event didn't happen then Dan? <doh>
New housing developments will be told to follow a design guide including water butts to catch water from drainpipes, permeable paving for rainwater and gardens filled with vegetation to soak up rain.

<laugh>
 
New housing developments will be told to follow a design guide including water butts to catch water from drainpipes, permeable paving for rainwater and gardens filled with vegetation to soak up rain.

<laugh>

The master plan, big buckets and ditches to make up for the land and waterways that it used to collect on that they covered up. It'll cost millions to get it near to what it used to be naturally.

In other news, the same people talking about this massive sea level rise, are scanning the sea bed to get images of Ravenserodd, lost to the sea in the 1300's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chazz Rheinhold
The master plan, big buckets and ditches to make up for the land and waterways that it used to collect on that they covered up. It'll cost millions to get it near to what it used to be naturally.

In other news, the same people talking about this massive sea level rise, are scanning the sea bed to get images of Ravenserodd, lost to the sea in the 1300's.
If they must build on flood plains they should build on stilts.
 
Keeping the drains and rivers free of silt would be a great help, I remember when barmy drain in North Hull was dredged on a regular basis. Boats used to go up the river Hull to Beverley, it will only be a small boat that passes that way now.
 
Keeping the drains and rivers free of silt would be a great help, I remember when barmy drain in North Hull was dredged on a regular basis. Boats used to go up the river Hull to Beverley, it will only be a small boat that passes that way now.

They did help the old Queens Dock silt up a fair bit, with shovels etc. Maybe the revamp of Queens Gardens for the Maritime City bid could have been linked to the flood plan.
 
Keeping the drains and rivers free of silt would be a great help, I remember when barmy drain in North Hull was dredged on a regular basis. Boats used to go up the river Hull to Beverley, it will only be a small boat that passes that way now.
I think the jury's still out on river dredging. For every learned article you read about why it can cause flooding there's another saying it doesn't. For what it's worth my layman's view is that water should be kept upstream as much as possible. So reservoirs, natural flood plains, natural river features, tree planting etc
 
I think the jury's still out on river dredging. For every learned article you read about why it can cause flooding there's another saying it doesn't. For what it's worth my layman's view is that water should be kept upstream as much as possible. So reservoirs, natural flood plains, natural river features, tree planting etc

It depends on the reason for the flooding, be it rain, groundwater, tides, snow melt etc, but mechanical control via sluices and gates to a watercourse if optimal size is generally better than relying on silt as for one, it gives more options.
 
I think the jury's still out on river dredging. For every learned article you read about why it can cause flooding there's another saying it doesn't. For what it's worth my layman's view is that water should be kept upstream as much as possible. So reservoirs, natural flood plains, natural river features, tree planting etc

There was a bloke for the Environment Agency on RH a few years ago and someone called in and had a go at him, saying that these issues didn't exist when the River Hull was regularly dredged. He said the river had never been regularly dredged, as the traditional heavy traffic on the river had meant that no dredging had been required in the past.
 
It depends on the reason for the flooding, be it rain, groundwater, tides, snow melt etc, but mechanical control via sluices and gates to a watercourse if optimal size is generally better than relying on silt as for one, it gives more options.
Maybe, I'm no expert. But the more I read into it the more it seems clear to me that water management can't be looked at in isolation, it's intrinsically linked to the overall issue of land management, farming methods, changing climatic conditions, et al. Complicated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: askewshair and DMD
They did help the old Queens Dock silt up a fair bit, with shovels etc. Maybe the revamp of Queens Gardens for the Maritime City bid could have been linked to the flood plan.

There are flood alleviation measures included in the Queens Gardens revamp, no idea what they are, but they were mentioned in the HDM article I posted.
 
There was a bloke for the Environment Agency on RH a few years ago and someone called in and had a go at him, saying that these issues didn't exist when the River Hull was regularly dredged. He said the river had never been regularly dredged, as the traditional heavy traffic on the river had meant that no dredging had been required in the past.
And there's another argument says rivers didn't silt up as much years ago because they didn't get as much topsoil blown into them as they do now because of lack of hedgerows and industrial scale fields.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD