Rewilding Britian - increasing biodiversity
- Thread starter wilderlore
- Start date
Fall, bombs, fall on Slough...................Anyone remember that?
http://www-cdr.stanford.edu/intuition/Slough.html
http://www-cdr.stanford.edu/intuition/Slough.html
I would have thought that we still need airports so we can fly in members of our rewilding species. And, of course, they'd have to be microchipped, and have their rabies jabs, and interviews with Immigration Officials in case they've been radicalised. Plus they'd likely have to pass the Immigration Exam so some familiarity with the English language would be useful. It does sound like a bit of a problem.
They are doing... but not in a good way. I'm considering placing bets at the bookies on the likelihood of a third runway... they've delayed the decision until after the London Mayor election... so odds on, they're building it.
Which says that any commitment to climate change is a joke. Its known that aircraft emissions are far more damaging than land vehicle emissions - and yet we are encouraging more travel - almost all of which is not for work or business.
In an effort to bolster the cause, they've had a campaign to target support from Scottish travellers. Bit late IMO, when flights to Heathrow from northern Britain were slashed back in the 90's, us northern travellers were forced to look for another solution, and flying into Gatwick; then the M25 express coach to Heathrow certainly wasn't it.
With all the connections one could want from northern airports this frequent flyer couldn't give a fig for Heathrow, it's a busted flush for me!
A footnote on how uplands should be managed to retain their water retaining bogs.
http://newint.org/blog/2012/08/20/hebden-bridge-moor/
http://newint.org/blog/2012/08/20/hebden-bridge-moor/
That's a rather biased source though.
"New Internationalist reports on issues of world poverty and inequality. We focus attention on the unjust relationship between the powerful and the powerless worldwide in the fight for global justice."
Not naysaying the need to support the re-establish the peat, but there's still no way that the area could not flood with six months rain in six hours downpour.
At that point it's going to flood regardless of what's done.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ter-news/half-augusts-rain-falls-just-9857655
I think we need to re-learn how to live with the waters.
M
"New Internationalist reports on issues of world poverty and inequality. We focus attention on the unjust relationship between the powerful and the powerless worldwide in the fight for global justice."
Not naysaying the need to support the re-establish the peat, but there's still no way that the area could not flood with six months rain in six hours downpour.
At that point it's going to flood regardless of what's done.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ter-news/half-augusts-rain-falls-just-9857655
I think we need to re-learn how to live with the waters.
M
Of course, and we were in the area of Boscastle before their floods and could see the collapse of the moor's water retention. Lynmouth flooded because their moor was over full as well. Couldn't hurt though to retain the bogs etc.
Much under-rated land are good sound sodden bogs 
Seriously they are. They are biodiverse rich wetlands…..that's the bit that too many exploitative folks forget….wetlands.
Bit much though that the estate who own the land above the town that keeps flooding gets £2.5 million from Natural England, while the folks whose homes and businesses have been devastated in the floods in town, have less than a fifth of that to not only repair and replace, but re-inforce the flood barriers that they have
M
Seriously they are. They are biodiverse rich wetlands…..that's the bit that too many exploitative folks forget….wetlands.
Bit much though that the estate who own the land above the town that keeps flooding gets £2.5 million from Natural England, while the folks whose homes and businesses have been devastated in the floods in town, have less than a fifth of that to not only repair and replace, but re-inforce the flood barriers that they have
M
No, I haven't. I'll look out for that though.
I do have Wetlands; Archaeology and Nature Conservation, Eds..Cox, Straker & Taylor, and it's an interesting read.
It's more than surprising just how much of the UK's arable land is former wetland.
M
I do have Wetlands; Archaeology and Nature Conservation, Eds..Cox, Straker & Taylor, and it's an interesting read.
It's more than surprising just how much of the UK's arable land is former wetland.
M
At risk of taking us slightly off topic. With all the floods in the UK at the moment, a picture has been doing the rounds on twitter -
.
Which has been widely shared with comments along the lines of "This is all that is wrong with British house building.".
And it got me thinking.
If we are going to accept that the climate has changed (let's not argue that one here, lets do that over a pint in the pub), and thus accept that we are going to get more flooding, then we need to change the approach we take to building houses.
Building on the site in the above picture with traditional British house designs like the big development companies favour is a disaster waiting to happen.
But, if we change the way we build are houses, that land can be used to house people. Where perhaps it might not be suitable to many other uses.
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina people looked at the houses that had been destroyed and set about how to build a better house. One that can withstand the high winds of the deep south, and yet also stay dry when the waters rise. They came up with this:
It's raised up on stilts that provide a parking space for your car, or somewhere to sit out of the sun when it's not flooding. Yet when the water rises, you park the car else where (or just accept you're gonna lose it...), and your house stays high and dry. These homes are also designed to withstand flying debris and high winds.
An alternative approach is one used by the Dutch.
They build their homes with a basement that is an empty concrete box, rather than a foundation. They then moor the house to a post driven deep into the ground (Dutch geology means this can be upto 30m deep). When the waters rise, so does the house. it floats up and down with the waters, staying in place because of the post.
You can see the flotation basement and the central post that keeps the house in place but allows vertical movement.
Simple designs that allow us to work with the floods, not against them.
Now can you imagine the local authority planning committee approving either design? or of developers like Bovis homes paying out to build such homes?
And so volunteers as well as members of the emergency services are out risking their lives to help those hit by the floods.
Sorry, wanted to get that off my chest.
J
Which has been widely shared with comments along the lines of "This is all that is wrong with British house building.".
And it got me thinking.
If we are going to accept that the climate has changed (let's not argue that one here, lets do that over a pint in the pub), and thus accept that we are going to get more flooding, then we need to change the approach we take to building houses.
Building on the site in the above picture with traditional British house designs like the big development companies favour is a disaster waiting to happen.
But, if we change the way we build are houses, that land can be used to house people. Where perhaps it might not be suitable to many other uses.
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina people looked at the houses that had been destroyed and set about how to build a better house. One that can withstand the high winds of the deep south, and yet also stay dry when the waters rise. They came up with this:
It's raised up on stilts that provide a parking space for your car, or somewhere to sit out of the sun when it's not flooding. Yet when the water rises, you park the car else where (or just accept you're gonna lose it...), and your house stays high and dry. These homes are also designed to withstand flying debris and high winds.
An alternative approach is one used by the Dutch.
They build their homes with a basement that is an empty concrete box, rather than a foundation. They then moor the house to a post driven deep into the ground (Dutch geology means this can be upto 30m deep). When the waters rise, so does the house. it floats up and down with the waters, staying in place because of the post.
You can see the flotation basement and the central post that keeps the house in place but allows vertical movement.
Simple designs that allow us to work with the floods, not against them.
Now can you imagine the local authority planning committee approving either design? or of developers like Bovis homes paying out to build such homes?
And so volunteers as well as members of the emergency services are out risking their lives to help those hit by the floods.
Sorry, wanted to get that off my chest.
J
I'd be over the moon if they started building the dutch-style housing over here... maybe not the designs you've posted up Q, but they have such a variety and they are really very practical.
Completely agree though, we have a very odd attitude in this country when it comes to flooding... its been happening for thousands of years across the country, yet councils continue to allow building projects onto flood plains without providing any alternative drainage... and in existing towns, the councils attitude to flood defences is always reactionary rather than having things in place for when the water inevitably comes.
Without getting into a debate about it (as you say, probably better down the pub) the floods seem to be worse around the El Nino and La Nino periods (although not exclusively) and areas like Rochdale and Carlisle seem to get hit more often than most... instead of vanity projects like the HS2, why can't that money go into building proper defences... not just sandbags and the odd barrier, but digging storm drains capable of taking away the worst. Even an extended project to expand existing drainage and ensure it was clear would help.
We all sat by while the monstrosity that was the Millennium Dome was built, wasting millions and eventually it being sold to a private firm for a pittance... we really shouldn't let it happen again with the HS2 line. With HS2 gone, it frees up billions to concentrate on flood defences, coastal defences, offshore windfarms, infrastructure development and improvement in the poorest towns and a wide range of other things that would benefit the population for decades to come... not just shave 20 minutes off a train journey and destroy acres and acres of woodland and countryside!
Completely agree though, we have a very odd attitude in this country when it comes to flooding... its been happening for thousands of years across the country, yet councils continue to allow building projects onto flood plains without providing any alternative drainage... and in existing towns, the councils attitude to flood defences is always reactionary rather than having things in place for when the water inevitably comes.
Without getting into a debate about it (as you say, probably better down the pub) the floods seem to be worse around the El Nino and La Nino periods (although not exclusively) and areas like Rochdale and Carlisle seem to get hit more often than most... instead of vanity projects like the HS2, why can't that money go into building proper defences... not just sandbags and the odd barrier, but digging storm drains capable of taking away the worst. Even an extended project to expand existing drainage and ensure it was clear would help.
We all sat by while the monstrosity that was the Millennium Dome was built, wasting millions and eventually it being sold to a private firm for a pittance... we really shouldn't let it happen again with the HS2 line. With HS2 gone, it frees up billions to concentrate on flood defences, coastal defences, offshore windfarms, infrastructure development and improvement in the poorest towns and a wide range of other things that would benefit the population for decades to come... not just shave 20 minutes off a train journey and destroy acres and acres of woodland and countryside!
There are several different approaches, to the same problem, I just posted the first I could find a clear picture of. Having lived in .nl there is much about it that is lovely. But then it does have it's downsides... But we digress...
Can you imagine if someone in central Carlisle was to put in a planning request to demolish their flooded house and replace it with one on stilts?
It's not just about councils and government tho. Who's supposed to provide the sandbags that protect your home? legally, it's you. Councils do make them available. There are also all sorts of things like flood gates you can put across doors and the like. Obviously they all have a certain limit in what they can keep out.
I was talking to one flood victim recently and they said "Well when this happened 5 years ago the council..." I felt like screaming. You know this happens, you know the risk is there, you've been flooded once. Why aren't you better prepared? But alas that's never a productive route...
You say that, but actually if HS2 wasn't so short sighted it would be a better project. Right now people fly from Manchester to London, because it's quicker... and cheaper... and SERIOUSLY BAD for the environment. People fly from Glasgow and Edinburgh to London, because it's quicker... and chepaer... and SERIOUSLY BAD for the environment. We're sold HS2 as reducing the travel time to Brum by 20 minutes. But what we should have been sold it as is a way to reduce the travel time to Scotland. So that the trip from Edinburgh to London for business is more sensibly done by the more environmentally friendly train, than the extremely polluting plane. That's what we should have been sold it on.
Or we could just stop fannying about with austerity. The whole Austerity and cutting the deficit rubbish that Osborne has been touting is destructive and harmful. Swinging cuts to welfare, public services, the NHS. and yet out deficit isn't reducing. So let's say sod that, let's stop messing about. The money is there, we can find 2 billion when we want to drop a bomb on someone, we can find it to save the environment. Afterall, you can't seek shelter under a deficit cut. You can't eat a reduction is state spending...
If we want to do these things, the money is there, this was proved when the government found hundreds of billions to bail out the banks. It's just an ideological view from a bunch of Selfish Privileged Malicious Etonian idiots out to line theirs and their friends pockets.
Arrgh. sorry, had to vent, now if you don't mind I'm gonna go sit under a tree until my pulse drops to sensible again...
J
The Carlisle problem shouldn't be a problem if they thought it through... Carlisle is 95ft above sea level and less than 3 miles as the crow flies to the estuary. Several storm drains installed beneath the town, the water gets whisked away and no more flooding in Carlisle. Large capital outlay to begin with, but the savings in property damage alone in the life span of the storm drains... more than pays for itself. Or, a 19th century approach... widen the existing river, dig it deeper and line it. In short, increase the capacity for water that will inevitably flood the town.
Business from Edinburgh to London? Easy... abandon the railway and the air travel... install fibre optic cables capable of making video conferencing a reliable alternative... with the money left over from laying the cables, every business could be kitted out with the technology needed to video conference properly... environment not effected, woodlands and countryside stay intact. Less travel, rather than thinking up ways to make travel quicker.
Everything else... I reckon we'll get a slap if we start down the road of politics
Business from Edinburgh to London? Easy... abandon the railway and the air travel... install fibre optic cables capable of making video conferencing a reliable alternative... with the money left over from laying the cables, every business could be kitted out with the technology needed to video conference properly... environment not effected, woodlands and countryside stay intact. Less travel, rather than thinking up ways to make travel quicker.
Everything else... I reckon we'll get a slap if we start down the road of politics
Similar threads
