Somerset levels - complaining about the problem but not helping with the solution?

[Raptor Mike]

So when the floods came to the levels I did a little search and found that some residents protested against wind turbines a few years ago. Now there is talk of solar panels and again the complaints. Water levels are rising due to global warming and from what I've heard flooding is going to become more common. The levels having renewables wouldn't have stooped this but if every area resists its only going to get worse.

The reason for the resistance to renewables on the levels is due to ruiening the view. What and the flood didn't do that?The thing is that if we keep getting these resistance to renewables there will be no view due to the water lapping at our doorsteps.

IMHO I think its the rich people who move to the area from the city to retire, its the same here with off shore turbines in east Devon.

Please don't get me wrong the flooding was awefull but surely so soon after you wouldn't expect SOME of the residents to resist a way that would contribute to helping it get less worse.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

That is sadly a very typical but regrettable Bristolian / somerset attitude. Undereducated rich people...

re view - I think it looks best with the flood in, and ironically the wind turbines would make the view better

P.S. It is really not difficult to look up flood areas before buying. Somerset levels are clearly one to avoid.

 

[Garry Edwards]

I'm sympathetic to anyone who has problems like these, but the fact of the matter is that this is an area that is EXPECTED to flood, so people who buy land cheaply because of this shouldn't really feel hard done by, in the same way that my own small hill farm in North Yorkshire is difficult whenever it snows, and has pretty poor access in all weather conditions - which is why it was affordable...

And it's worth bearing in mind that "Somerset Levels" is actually a corruption of "Summer Levels" which meant that the land could only be used in the summer months.

 

[SFTPhotography]

When a naturally occurring event happens people feel the need to blame someone. Why not just blame the rich. Places flood, storms happen, s*** happens. It's not the guy in the big q7s fault, these things just happen

Anyway, I digress. Isn't it the rich folks money that comes from their high tax yields that pays for the clean up?

 

[LongLensPhotography]

When a naturally occurring event happens people feel the need to blame someone. Why not just blame the rich. Places flood, storms happen, s*** happens. It's not the guy in the big q7s fault, these things just happen

Anyway, I digress. Isn't it the rich folks money that comes from their high tax yields that pays for the clean up?

Where did Q7 come into question? In 5 years down there I didn't see a single one. The folk are pretty much still on horses wearing hipster glasses and patchy jacket despite having healthy bank accounts. And they protest against modern sensible developments... just because they aren't familiar with it, and maybe it will somehow cost them. Then they steal photos, and decide to defend by hiring the most expensive lawyers. c***s.

 

[neil_g]

NIMBYs

 

[seriousrikk]

Maybe the problem is the fact these renewables are too weather dependant and are not a solid reliable source of energy puts folk off? Although most of the time it is just the views...

But there is still a huge industry slapping them up everywhere they can to take advantage of government grants.

What needs to happen is either a change of strategy or some real investment in developing reliable renewable energy.

 

[Raptor Mike]

That's not entirly true. Solar panels these days hardly need any light because they are so sensitive. I can't remember the figures but they are pretty good. I thinks its strange that people don't want these renewables because of their view. I actually think turbines look graceful. But people are happy for someone else to have a nuclear power station in the back yard of other with the waste also evening dumped in the back yard of others.

I think reneabkes should be encouraged. All new houses should have panels and a little turbine where chimneys used to go. I a farmer wants to put renewables on his land there should be no hoops. Because if we don't do something soon more places will end up like the levels.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

That's not entirly true. Solar panels these days hardly need any light because they are so sensitive. I can't remember the figures but they are pretty good. I thinks its strange that people don't want these renewables because of their view. I actually think turbines look graceful. But people are happy for someone else to have a nuclear power station in the back yard of other with the waste also evening dumped in the back yard of others.

I think reneabkes should be encouraged. All new houses should have panels and a little turbine where chimneys used to go. I a farmer wants to put renewables on his land there should be no hoops. Because if we don't do something soon more places will end up like the levels.

Be realistic - a few turbines WON'T stop the floods. And please do not knock nuclear. Coal stations are the real enemy.

 

[viv1969]

Be realistic - a few turbines WON'T stop the floods. And please do not knock nuclear. Coal stations are the real enemy.

Last post in OOF.....Sure I read that somewhere

Edit.......Yep, thought I did....

And guess what - my last post in OOF. Honest. It is quite obviously a complete waste of time I should spend in a more productive ways like hogging the roads and writing this direct to council / government.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Where did Q7 come into question? In 5 years down there I didn't see a single one. The folk are pretty much still on horses wearing hipster glasses and patchy jacket despite having healthy bank accounts. And they protest against modern sensible developments... just because they aren't familiar with it, and maybe it will somehow cost them. Then they steal photos, and decide to defend by hiring the most expensive lawyers. c***s.

I hate horses almost as much as I hate dogs but I'm sure they've got nice cars down the West Country too.

Wind farms are an eyesore. I hate the things but do concede they are a clean way to make power. But biting coal or having a nice nuclear station is the sure way to go.

I'm not sure photo theft is a problem restricted to well off people who don't like wind farms - I'm pretty sure that's not right

 

[Tringa]

Agree with Mike about solar panels on new houses (and other new buildings too). This is not going to solve our energy problems but it will help a bit.

IMO the only way to provide reliable energy without adding to greenhouse gases is nuclear. Spend the money - yes, huge amounts - to get it right and minimise risk.

However, and ever increasing population demanding increasing amounts of energy is the real problem.

Dave

 

[seriousrikk]

That's not entirly true. Solar panels these days hardly need any light because they are so sensitive. I can't remember the figures but they are pretty good. I thinks its strange that people don't want these renewables because of their view. I actually think turbines look graceful. But people are happy for someone else to have a nuclear power station in the back yard of other with the waste also evening dumped in the back yard of others.

I think reneabkes should be encouraged. All new houses should have panels and a little turbine where chimneys used to go. I a farmer wants to put renewables on his land there should be no hoops. Because if we don't do something soon more places will end up like the levels.

Now, micro generation. That is where I think the strategy should go. Solar panels on houses, turbines on chimneys/in the back yard. Absolutely agree there.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I hate horses almost as much as I hate dogs but I'm sure they've got nice cars down the West Country too.

You'd think. A few loaded Bristolians I knew with a large number of properties drove a 30 year old rusty banger and dressed like a tramp. Glastonbury witches is not just a fairy tale - it is a reality. You need to see to believe. Of course wind turbines and solar cells are way too modern for them.

 

[Raptor Mike]

A lot of talk about neclear here but people are turning a blind eye to its problems. Waste - if memory serves its radioactive for 2000 years so where do you dump it? I suggest in every site renewables are turned down due to protest. Danger - Japan and Chernobyl should have taught us a valuable lesson that this power cannot be tamemed. Open eyes people

 

[SFTPhotography]

A lot of talk about neclear here but people are turning a blind eye to its problems. Waste - if memory serves its radioactive for 2000 years so where do you dump it? I suggest in every site renewables are turned down due to protest. Danger - Japan and Chernobyl should have taught us a valuable lesson that this power cannot be tamemed. Open eyes people

Google the multi barrier technique. It is as safe as it gets

 

[SFTPhotography]

You'd think. A few loaded Bristolians I knew with a large number of properties drove a 30 year old rusty banger and dressed like a tramp. Glastonbury witches is not just a fairy tale - it is a reality. You need to see to believe. Of course wind turbines and solar cells are way too modern for them.

I wouldn't want to deface a nice English cottage or country house with solar panels. Coal, nuclear and gas burning. It's all good by me

 

[viv1969]

I think Japan's basic problem was the vast wall of water which engulfed said power station, not the power station itself.

 

[Nod]

Wrong button!

The planet is doomed anyway so we'll carry on as we are, avoiding the levels when they're underwater.

 

[boyfalldown]

I think Japan's basic problem was the vast wall of water which engulfed said power station, not the power station itself.

but Tsunami is a Japanese word. Earthquakes are hardly unknown there either. They could of protected it a tinsy winsy bit better. But thats hindsight. I'll leave you to comment on maybe what foresight could have been shown

 

[viv1969]

but Tsunami is a Japanese word. Earthquakes are hardly unknown there either. They could of protected it a tinsy winsy bit better. But thats hindsight. I'll leave you to comment on maybe what foresight could have been shown

The facility was had protection sufficient for a tsunami to a height of 30 feet. It was hit by one very slightly less than that.
The problem is that the earthquake which caused the tsunami caused the level of the ground to drop overall by over 10 feet.
You do the maths, smartarse

 

[boyfalldown]

The facility was had protection sufficient for a tsunami to a height of 30 feet. It was hit by one very slightly less than that.
The problem is that the earthquake which caused the tsunami caused the level of the ground to drop overall by over 10 feet.
You do the maths, smartarse

Resists all smart arse comments about the only maths that matters being the wall not being big enough

 

[viv1969]

Well clearly, but the fact remains that the problems with the Fukushima facility were caused not by the nuclear technology, but by an act of [ insert deity of choice here ], which was my initial point.

 

[Ian D J]

I think we should go back to the root of the problem and that is the human population continuing to grow at an exponential rate while at the same time contributing to global warming (even though the latter isn't completely proven yet). As well as putting strain on natural resources (oil, gas and coal), we continue to build on known flood or earthquake prone land anyway and then blame everyone else when it does go off.

At the end of the day, we only have ourselves to blame.

 

[seriousrikk]

I think we should go back to the root of the problem and that is the human population continuing to grow at an exponential rate while at the same time contributing to global warming (even though the latter isn't completely proven yet). As well as putting strain on natural resources (oil, gas and coal), we continue to build on known flood or earthquake prone land anyway and then blame everyone else when it does go off.

At the end of the day, we only have ourselves to blame.

Nail. Head.

But any measures to limit growth are apparently quite distasteful.

 

[Nikon_Nick]

Nail. Head.

But any measures to limit growth are apparently quite distasteful.

I dont agree with measures to limit growth either, but I do think we could have a cull in certain areas, and no-one would care

 

[4wd]

Sea levels have been rising at a gradual but steady rate since we started seriously measuring.
They aren't going up faster in anyway directly linked to CO2.

It's a very tentative to imply rejecting solar panels and wind turbines are any part of the reason Somerset got flooded.
For a start there is no clear link to the unusual number of rain events which was the problem more than sea levels.
The flooded area would be salt marsh were it not for the water management installed centuries ago.
In an effort to pretend to be green while saving money, the maintenance of the channels has been much reduced if not neglected over the last twenty years.
That is the primary reason floods were worse.
Some areas intended to hold water as a buffer in storm events have been routinely flooded and kept full at the start of winter to benefit wildfowl - no longer fulfilling their original purpose to manage peak flows.

 

[viv1969]

I dont agree with measures to limit growth either, but I do think we could have a cull in certain areas, and no-one would care

Might I suggest somewhere...ohhhh I don't know.....rather far north?

 

[Raptor Mike]

I think Japan's basic problem was the vast wall of water which engulfed said power station, not the power station itself.

Its an example to show that these things can and do happen. I'm sure when they built it they didn't think there would be a tsunami as I'm sure they didnt think they have a melt down at Chernobyl.

As for the waste its very much a burry it and let it the problem of future generations. Nuclear is a pollution that cannot be cleaned up.
Coal, gas and fracking is bad news too.
We are an island so what's wrong with wind, solar and tidle/wave power? I really worry about my kids future due to the naivity of current generations making the desisions.

 

[Raptor Mike]

The facility was had protection sufficient for a tsunami to a height of 30 feet. It was hit by one very slightly less than that.
The problem is that the earthquake which caused the tsunami caused the level of the ground to drop overall by over 10 feet.
You do the maths, smartarse

The problem was that there was a neclear power station there in the first place. Not the quake or the wave, humans can't stop those but they did build the power station.

PS one day we'll agree on something Ruth lol

 

[viv1969]

Its an example to show that these things can and do happen. I'm sure when they built it they didn't think there would be a tsunami as I'm sure they didnt think they have a melt down at Chernobyl.
.

As above though...they did, and they fortified rather well against the possibility.
Yes yes, the water overwhelmed, but how high are they supposed to go on the off chance?
If built in Britain, the plant would barely be showerproof, let alone anything else.

 

[viv1969]

The problem was that there was a neclear power station there in the first place. Not the quake or the wave, humans can't stop those but they did build the power station.

PS one day we'll agree on something Ruth lol

So the Japanese, because of it's geography, is supposed to have had a big ol' "pow wow", and decided not to pursue nuclear power as an option? Hmmmm.

(You're right...One day we will. That'll shock 'em all )

 

[Raptor Mike]

Sea levels have been rising at a gradual but steady rate since we started seriously measuring.
They aren't going up faster in anyway directly linked to CO2.

It's a very tentative to imply rejecting solar panels and wind turbines are any part of the reason Somerset got flooded.
For a start there is no clear link to the unusual number of rain events which was the problem more than sea levels.
The flooded area would be salt marsh were it not for the water management installed centuries ago.
In an effort to pretend to be green while saving money, the maintenance of the channels has been much reduced if not neglected over the last twenty years.
That is the primary reason floods were worse.
Some areas intended to hold water as a buffer in storm events have been routinely flooded and kept full at the start of winter to benefit wildfowl - no longer fulfilling their original purpose to manage peak flows.

Renewables on the levels wouldn't have stopped the flood alone, but if everywhere across the globe prevents renewables then yes it will, and I think already has, make a difference.

As for the river the amount of water that was on the levels they recon dredging would have made very little difference

 

[Raptor Mike]

So the Japanese, because of it's geography, is supposed to have had a big ol' "pow wow", and decided not to pursue nuclear power as an option? Hmmmm.

(You're right...One day we will. That'll shock 'em all )

Yep and nor should anyone else. As for the tsunami I will word it differently. I'm sure the Japanese did think they'd have to worry about a tsunami braking the wall and then not only cause major flooding but also make it worse by throwing in nuclear fallout

 

[SFTPhotography]

Yep and nor should anyone else. As for the tsunami I will word it differently. I'm sure the Japanese did think they'd have to worry about a tsunami braking the wall and then not only cause major flooding but also make it worse by throwing in nuclear fallout

I am very pro Nuclear power but the American West coast, and Japan that sit on major fault lines aren't the best places from these power stations. In saying that, more people have died from carcogens from coal fumes than have ever died from a nuclear powerstation going pop. Japan has many earthquakes due to being on a subduction zone. rUSA, a lot of China, France, UK, Germany simply do not see this level of tectonic activity and they never will.

 

[LCPete]

I am very pro Nuclear power but the American West coast, and Japan that sit on major fault lines aren't the best places from these power stations. In saying that, more people have died from carcogens from coal fumes than have ever died from a nuclear powerstation going pop. Japan has many earthquakes due to being on a subduction zone. rUSA, a lot of China, France, UK, Germany simply do not see this level of tectonic activity and they never will.

Yes you're right about the coal fired power stations
It's not generally known that the waste material from the burning of coal is radioactive

 

[4wd]

As for the river the amount of water that was on the levels they recon dredging would have made very little difference

This is a completely false premise, how about using this principle to supply a large town with water down a one inch pipe.
If you halve the flow by letting the channels silt up you can only remove half the water and the already borderline drainage can get overwhelmed in a long wet spell.

The problem is the wildlife groups have had too much say in how the manmade environment is managed.
This is an area which has been kept reasonably well drained and habitable for centuries.

If recent trendy politics want it to be reverted to salt marsh; throwing away the labours of centuries past, then pay the people who live there compensation and be done with it.
It was originally drained with little more than hand tools and careful management of sluice gates.
Gradually control of the system has been removed from local people and through the Environment Agency has become into the responsibility of politicians many miles away.
We have machinery which cold do more work in an hour than they could previously be done in a month, and can pump huge volumes 24/7 if need be but suddenly it is all too much trouble for the distant controllers, and it's more convenient to blame Global Warming for making it rain more.

 

[Raptor Mike]

I am very pro Nuclear power but the American West coast, and Japan that sit on major fault lines aren't the best places from these power stations. In saying that, more people have died from carcogens from coal fumes than have ever died from a nuclear powerstation going pop. Japan has many earthquakes due to being on a subduction zone. rUSA, a lot of China, France, UK, Germany simply do not see this level of tectonic activity and they never will.

Nor was Chernobyl.
My point is accidents happen. But if its a nuclear power station it makes large areas uninhabitable for centries. Its dangerous and even though you and me don't see the waste its a hell of a lot worse than coal dust.

But I suppose because you don't see clouds of smoke coming from nuclear power stations they are safer... Ignorance is bliss!

 

[DemiLion]

The flooding on the Levels has b****r all to do with global warming. It's primarily due to the lack of maintenance and dredging of the drainage runs by the EA.

 

[Raptor Mike]

The flooding on the Levels has b****r all to do with global warming. It's primarily due to the lack of maintenance and dredging of the drainage runs by the EA.

The expert on the tele that said that the amount of difference to the flood had the river been dredged would have been minimal must be wrong then.

There was so much water the river would never be able to cope even if it had been dredged.