Comments on: Not the FT As Well!

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:11:08 +0000

See, if it’s sinking 2.3mm a year, WE DON’T NEED TO SHUT THE BARRIER! Because, like, it’s not real water or something.

Who here knows where the C&W Docklands Telecoms Centre is?

Tim adds: You’ve told us where it is before Alex.

The point is only that while climate change accounts for some of the sea level rise in the SE UK, it doesn’t account for all of it. (About 50% in fact). So those who use increased raising of the Thames Barrier as proof of the effects of climate change are not being entirely factual. That’s all.

By: devilskitchen

devilskitchen — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:02:34 +0000

"Although sea levels have risen only slightly through climate change, the Thames barrier is now raised about six times a year, having been designed to be raised twice a year." It doesn't help that, as Factchecking Pollyanna summarised, this isn't even true... DK

By: john cramer

john cramer — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 22:51:35 +0000

You sure that you have the right cause for some of England sinking? Might it not be due to all those people standing on it weighing it down. They weren’t there in the good old days.

By: Randy (Internet Ronin)

Randy (Internet Ronin) — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:26:08 +0000

Ah, Tim, such an idealist. Their way sells newspapers. Yours doesn’t.

By: John

John — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 15:33:59 +0000

Whether or not the Thames barrier is raised depends on decisions by the operators. They will have a set of operating rules to aid this decision. I am told that when the barrier was first installed the operating rules envisaged raising the barier only rarely, but a few years ago it was decided to raise it much more frequently, i.e. for smaller surges. This could be justified for training of staff, testing the operation and so on. To use this change of operating policy as evidence for climate change is perverse.

By: countingcats

countingcats — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:23:09 +0000

SE of England is dropping 2.3 mm a year

I thought it was about that per decade, anyone got a reference?

Tim adds: As far as I’m aware, 2.3 cm per decade, 2.3 mm per year.

By: dearieme

dearieme — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:38:13 +0000

“Fiona has a degree in English Literature from Cambridge” – so, she’s an expert on wetness.

By: Andrew Paterson

Andrew Paterson — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:20:24 +0000

Also, can it be accepted that weather conditions such as this, at this time of the year, aren’t exactly abnormal? Apparently everything and anything is down to global warming.

By: Mark Wadsworth

Mark Wadsworth — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:20:24 +0000

Firstly, I’d appreciate my promised geek points.

Secondly, this last FT para is something that is difficult to analyse; it sort of melts away under the microscope:

‘as climate change intensifies’, well unless you know in which way it is changing (warming or cooling) you can’t say that it’s intensifying

‘floods such as this could …’ there again maybe they could not.

‘Although sea levels have only risen slightly through climate change’ FFS. ‘through’ means ‘because of’? Please quantify ’slightly’, over what time period and mapped against what global warming/cooling?

‘The Thames barrier is now raised six times a year, having been designed to be raised twice a year’, no you stupid fucks, it was designed to be raised as often as was needed every time there was a perceived risk of flooding to London. Even when built, it was accepted that a bigger better replacement might be required a few decades hence.

Thanks for that, g’night.

By: View from the Solent

View from the Solent — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:06:16 +0000

Doubtless the term ‘isostatic adjustment’ would be greeted with a blank look from her.

By: Bishop Hill

Bishop Hill — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:51:15 +0000

Fiona has a degree in English Literature from Cambridge.

Never mind the science, feel the empathy.

By: Kit

Kit — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:22:16 +0000

You would think the Environmental Correspondent of the FT would have at least read up on the subject she reports on. If you read this blog Fiona try this website http://www.ipcc.ch/