It has emerged that the Environment Agency rejected calls to dredge the flood-hit lower reaches of the Thames because of the presence of the endangered mollusc. In a 2010 report, seen by the Mail, they ruled out dredging between Datchet and Staines because the river bed was home to the vulnerable creatures. And even though a public consultation indicated support for de-silting work, the quango said it would be ‘environmentally unacceptable’ due to the ‘high impact on aquatic species’. --Daniel Martin, Daily Mail, 13 February 2014
There is “no evidence” that climate change is leading to more extreme weather, Lord Lawson has said, as he called on the Government to use the floods as a “wake-up call” to stop “littering the countryside” with wind turbines and solar panels. Britain needs to have “cheap and reliable” forms of energy to ensure that the country is “resilent and robust to whatever nature throws at us”, Lord Lawson said. --Peter Dominiczak, The Daily Telegraph, 13 February 2014
I don’t blame the climate scientists for not knowing. Climate and weather is quite extraordinarily complex and this is a very new form of science. All I blame them for is pretending they know when they don’t. What we ought to focus on is what we’re going to do. I think this is a wake-up call. We need to abandon this crazy and costly policy of spending untold millions on littering the countryside with useless wind turbines and solar panels, and moving from a sensible energy policy of having cheap and reliable forms of energy to a policy of having unreliable and costly energy. Give up that. What we want to focus on – it’s very important – is making sure this country is really resilient and robust to whatever nature throws at us, whether there’s a climate element or not. Flood defences, sea defences – that’s what we want to focus on. –Nigel Lawson, BBC Radio 4, 13 February 2014
BUNGLING weather bosses predicted a drier than usual winter, it has emerged. The Met Office’s staggeringly inaccurate forecast was made at the end of November last year – just a month before the record-breaking deluge began. And the agency gave just a one in seven chance the three following months would “fall into the wettest category”. On Nov 21, its experts predicted: “For the December-January-February period as a whole, there is a slight signal for below-average precipitation”. The calamitous estimate emerged as Downing Street dubbed the devastation caused by the floods as “Biblical”. --Tom Newton Dunn, Political Editor, The Sun, 11 February 2014
Contingency planners were advised by the Met Office to expect a dry winter less than four weeks before the heaviest rainfall in 250 years. The official guidance to expect “drier than normal” conditions was issued in mid November, just weeks before the onset of the wettest new year period on record. The Met Office report, which claims to use “cutting edge science” to “help contingency planners prepare for and respond to emergencies”, predicted a pattern of high pressure weather systems would lead to dry conditions. It added: “The weakening of the prevailing westerly flow means that the normally wetter western or northwestern parts of the country may see a significant reduction in precipitation compared to average, while the east or southeast may be closer to average.” --ClickGreen News, 11 February 2014
1) Bad Weather & Bad Policies = Bad Flooding - Daily Mail, 13 February 2014
2) Nigel Lawson: Floods Are A Wake-Up Call To Focus On Resilience - The Daily Telegraph, 13 February 2014
3) Met Office Told Planners To Expect A "Drier Than Normal" Winter - ClickGreen News, 11 February 2014
4) BBC Today Programme: Lawson Vs Hoskins On Flooding & Climate Change - BBC Radio 4, 13 February 2014
5) And Finally: Met Office Forecasts - A Reality Check - The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 10 February 2014
1) Bad Weather & Bad Policies = Bad Flooding
Daily Mail, 13 February 2014
Daniel Martin
It has emerged that the Environment Agency rejected calls to dredge the flood-hit lower reaches of the Thames because of the presence of the endangered mollusc.
The Army has been called in, hundreds of families have been forced to evacuate their homes, and small businesses are wondering if they’ll ever be able to reopen.
But it’s not bad news for all the inhabitants of the Thames Valley. The river’s population of Depressed River Mussels is safe.
As residents faced an uncertain future, it emerged the Environment Agency rejected calls to dredge the flood-hit lower reaches of the Thames because of the presence of the endangered mollusc.
 River view: Pharoah’s island can be seen in the middle of the Thames as it passes between Shepperton and Weybridge
Submerged: now the island is indistinguishable from its surroundings after the river burst its banks
In a 2010 report, seen by the Mail, they ruled out dredging between Datchet and Staines because the river bed was home to the vulnerable creatures.
And even though a public consultation indicated support for de-silting work, the quango said it would be ‘environmentally unacceptable’ due to the ‘high impact on aquatic species’.
But last night a spokesman at the Environment Agency said the report on mussels was ‘badly worded’ and the presence of the mussels would not have been the only argument against dredging.
‘If protected species are living in a river and dredging would reduce the risk of flooding then we would ensure that dredging occurs without having a serious impact on wildlife,’ he said.
‘This is case not just for the Thames but all rivers.’
Saved, but at what cost: The endangered Depressed River Mussel
But he added; ‘An independent study carried out by engineering firm Halcrow has shown that the natural activity of the Thames removes significantly more silt than mechanical dredging would do.’
The revelation came as it emerged that EU waste regulations have made regular dredging on Britain’s rivers uneconomic.
Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the disposal of silt became so complex and expensive that it was more attractive to take advantage of financial incentives given by Brussels to conservation schemes.
This Despite the Agency describing that stretch of the river as one of the ‘largest and most at-risk developed and undefended flood plains in England’.
Hundreds of houses on the Thames are presently under water and there are fears the situation could get worse. [...]
A ‘strategy appraisal report’, compiled by the agency into the prospect of defence works on the Lower Thames in August 2010, said dredging was one of the ‘options rejected at preliminary stage’.
However, the previous year the Agency held a public consultation with residents along the banks of the Thames, and the official report shows that they thought ‘dredging of pinch points of the River Thames is essential to provide interim relief from flooding’.
Tory MPs said they were appalled that the Environment Agency appeared to be more interested in promoting the welfare of molluscs than householders.
Douglas Carswell said: ‘Ever since we have given responsibility for flood defences to this central quango, they’ve elevated the interests of the natural over and above the human.
‘We can see the consequences today. There is nothing nice about letting our rivers and coastline revert to nature. London used to be a swamp, and if we leave these clowns in charge it will return to that.’
Alok Sharma, Tory MP for the flood-affected Thames-side constituency of Reading West, said: ‘The priority has to be protecting people and property not mussels.
Ultimately, any decision on dredging any river has to take into account the impact on communities living further downstream.’
Regular dredging was undertaken for 50 years on the stretch of river from Datchet to Staines following the 1947 floods, but was stopped in 1996 when the agency took over responsibility.
Full story
2) Nigel Lawson: Floods Are A Wake-Up Call To Focus On Resilience
The Daily Telegraph, 13 February 2014
Peter Dominiczak
There is “no evidence” that climate change is leading to more extreme weather, Lord Lawson has said, as he called on the Government to use the floods as a “wake-up call” to stop “littering the countryside” with wind turbines and solar panels.
Lord Lawson, the former Chancellor, said that the floods should spur the Government to decrease the amount of renewable energy projects in Britain.
Britain needs to have “cheap and reliable” forms of energy to ensure that the country is “resilent and robust to whatever nature throws at us”, Lord Lawson said.
His comments come after Ed Davey, the Energy Secretary, attacked “head in the sand” Conservatives who question the science behind global warming.
Mr Davey will give a speech and will say that Conservatives who deny that human activity causes climate change are “ignorant” and contribute to “extreme weather events” like the recent flooding.
David Cameron has said he “very much suspects” that the flooding affecting Britain is linked to climate change, which is bringing more “abnormal weather events”.
But Owen Paterson, the Environment Secretary, has refused to endorse that position, and claimed in October that farmers would benefit from longer growing seasons. People get “very emotional” about the topic and should accept that the climate has been changing “for centuries”, he said.
Philip Hammond, the Transport Secretary, yesterday suggested that natural “solar rhythms” are contributing alongside human activity to climate change.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Lord Lawson said: “I don’t blame the climate scientists for not knowing. Climate and weather is quite extraordinarily complex and this is a new form of science. All I blame them for is pretending they know when they don’t.
“What we want to focus on is what we’re going to do. And I think this is a wake-up call. We need to abandon this crazy and costly policy of spending untold millions on littering the countryside with useless wind turbines and solar panels and moving from a sensible energy policy of having cheap and reliable forms of energy to a policy of having unreliable and costly energy. Give up that.
“What we want to focus on is making sure this country is really resilient and robust to whatever nature throws at us whether there’s a climate element or not.”
Sir Brian Hoskins, a member of the Committee on Climate Change, said that scientists “just don’t know whether the persistence of this event [the floods] is due to climate change or not”.
Asked if there is a link between the extreme weather hitting Britain and global warming, Sir Brian said: “There’s no simple and quick answer. We can’t say yes or no this climate change.
“However, there’s a number of reasons to think that such events are now more likely. One of those is that a warmer atmosphere that we have can contain more water…so a storm can wring that water out of the atmosphere and we’re seeing more heavy rainfall events around the world and certainly we’ve seen those here.”
3) Met Office Told Planners To Expect A "Drier Than Normal" Winter
ClickGreen News, 11 February 2014
Contingency planners were advised by the Met Office to expect a dry winter less than four weeks before the heaviest rainfall in 250 years.
The official guidance to expect “drier than normal” conditions was issued in mid November, just weeks before the onset of the wettest new year period on record.
The Met Office report, which claims to use “cutting edge science” to “help contingency planners prepare for and respond to emergencies”, predicted a pattern of high pressure weather systems would lead to dry conditions.
It added: “The weakening of the prevailing westerly flow means that the normally wetter western or northwestern parts of the country may see a significant reduction in precipitation compared to average, while the east or southeast may be closer to average.”
And the calculations of the Met Office's £30million supercomputer were spectacularly wrong after it predicted a slight 15% chance of the December to February period falling into a “wet category”.
The rogue report was part of a package of data and information that helped the authorities evaluate the risk of future flooding.
One of the country's leading flood experts, Paul Quinn of Newcastle University, explained: “This demonstrates the uncertainty of weather modelling, the only window of realistically forecasting the weather is a week at best and that is based on our knowledge and experience on what has happened historically.
“The only guidance a planner should use is to be prepared for the unexpected.”
And environmental contingency planner Martin Parr described the blunder as “appalling”.
“This information was incredibly inaccurate,” he added. “It is hard to believe that someone could have allowed this information to have been passed through to planners.
“We rely on accurate forecast information. All contingency planners are taught to expect the unexpected but we still require the right data to have the correct plans in place and the appropriate personnel and equipment in the right locations.
“This information was released from the Public Sector that should be relied on for accuracy – this was no use to neither man nor beast.”
4) BBC Today Programme: Lawson Vs Hoskins On Flooding & Climate Change
BBC Radio 4, 13 February 2014
BBC Today Programme: Sir Brian Hoskins, a member of the Committee on Climate Change, and Lord Nigel Lawson, former Chancellor of the Exchequer and founding chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, discuss the extent to which man-made climate change is a factor in the recent extreme weather.
Audio: Is climate change a factor in the recent extreme weather?
Justin Webb, BBC: Is there a link, Sir Brian, between the rain we have seen falling in recent days and global warming?
Sir Brian Hoskins: There’s no simple link – we can’t say yes or no this is climate change. However, there’s a number of reasons to think that such events are now more likely. One of those is that a warmer atmosphere that we have can contain more water vapour and so a storm can bring that water vapour out of the atmosphere and we’re seeing more heavy rainfall events around the world. We’ve certainly seen those here.
Justin Webb: So it’s the heavy rainfall; it’s the severity of the event that points us in this direction?
Sir Brian Hoskins: Well, in this event we’ve had severe rainfall but we’ve also had persistence, and that’s where I say we just don’t know whether the persistence of this event is due to climate change or not. Another aspect is sea level rise – the sea level has risen about 20cm over the 20th Century and is continuing to rise as the system warms, and that, of course, makes damage in the coastal region that much greater when we get some event there.
Justin Webb: But can a reasonable person – possessed of the evidence as it is known to us at the moment – say look at the rain we’ve had recently and say “I do not believe that the evidence exists that links that rain to global warming?”
Sir Brian Hoskins: I think the reasonable person should look at this event – they should look at extremes around the world: the general rise in temperature that’s well recorded, the reduction in Arctic sea ice, the rise in sea level, the number of extreme rainfall events around the world, the number of extreme events that we’ve had – we’ve had persistent droughts, we’ve had floods, we’ve had cold spells and very warm spells. The number of records being broken is just that much greater.
Justin Webb: Lord Lawson, it’s joining the dots isn’t it?
Lord Lawson: No, I think that Sir Brian is right on a number of points. He’s right, first of all, that nobody knows. Certainly it is not the case, of course, that this rainfall is due to global warming – the question is whether global warming has marginally exacerbated it. Nobody knows that. He’s right too to say that you have to look at the global picture, and contrary to what he may have implied, people have done studies to show that globally there has been no increase in extreme weather events. For example, tropical storms – perhaps the most dramatic form of weather event – the past year has been unusually quiet year for tropical storms. And again going back to the “nobody knows,” only a couple of months ago the Met Office were forecasting that this would be an unusually dry winter.
Justin Webb: Do you accept that, Sir Brian, just on that important point about the global picture – do you accept that we haven’t seen the extreme conditions that we might have expected?
Sir Brian Hoskins: I think we have seen these heavy rainfall events around the world. We’ve seen a number of places breaking records – Australia with the temperatures going to new levels.
Justin Webb: The trouble is we report those, and we’re interested in them, but there is an effect that is possibly an obfuscatory effect on the real picture, and you accept that that might be the case?
Sir Brian Hoskins: Absolutely, and we have to be very careful to not say “oh there’s records everywhere therefore climate is changing.” But we are very sure that the temperature has risen by about 0.8 degrees, the arctic sea ice has reached a minimum level in the summer which hasn’t been seen for a very, very long time, the Greenland ice sheet and the west Antarctic ice sheet have been measured to be decreasing. There are all the signs that we are changing this climate system. Now as we do this – as the system warms – it doesn’t just warm uniformly, the temperature changes by different amounts in different regions. That means that the weather that feeds off those temperature contrasts is changing and will change. It’s not just a smooth change – it’s a change in the weather. It’s a change in the regional climate we can expect.
Justin Webb: Lord Lawson?
Lord Lawson: I think we want to focus not on this extremely speculative and uncertain area – I don’t blame the climate scientists for not knowing. Climate and weather is quite extraordinarily complex and this is a very new form of science. All I blame them for is pretending they know when they don’t. Anyhow, what we ought to focus on is what we’re going to do. I think this is a wake-up call. We need to abandon this crazy and costly policy of spending untold millions on littering the countryside with useless wind turbines and solar panels, and moving from a sensible energy policy of having cheap and reliable forms of energy to a policy of having unreliable and costly energy. Give up that. What we want to focus on – it’s very important – is making sure this country is really resilient and robust to whatever nature throws at us, whether there’s a climate element or not. Flood defences, sea defences – that’s what we want to focus on.
Justin Webb: Can I just put this to you? If there is a chance – and some people would say there is a strong chance that man-made global warming exists and is having an impact on us; doesn’t it make sense whether or not you believe that’s a 95% chance or a 50% chance or whatever, does it not make sense to take care to try to avoid the kind of emissions that may be contributing to it? What could be wrong with that?
Lord Lawson: Everything. First of all, even if there is warming – and there’s been no recorded warming over the past 15, 16, 17 years.
Justin Webb: Well, there is a lot of controversy about that.
Lord Lawson: No there’s not, that’s a fact. That is accepted even by the IPCC.
Justin Webb: There’s no measured warming.
Lord Lawson: Can I continue my sentence?
Justin Webb: Well alright, we’ll get back to that.
Lord Lawson: No measured warming, exactly. Well that measurement is not unimportant. But even if there is some problem, it is not going to affect any of the dangers except marginally. What we want to do is focus with the problems there are with climate – drought, floods and so on. These have happened in the past – they’re not new. As for emissions, this country is responsible for less than 2% of global emissions. Even if we cut our emissions to 0 – which
would put us back to the pre-industrial revolution and the poverty that that gave – even if we did that, it would be outweighed by China’s increase in emissions in a single year. So it is absolutely crazy this policy. It cannot make sense at all.
Justin Webb: Sir Brian?
Sir Brian Hoskins: I think we have to learn two lessons from this. The first one is that by increasing the greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere, particularly carbon dioxide, to levels not seen for millions of years on this planet, we are performing a very risky experiment. We’re pretty confident that that means if we go on like we are the temperatures are going to rise somewhere between 3-5 degrees by the end of this Century, sea levels up to half to 1 metre rise.
Justin Webb: Lord Lawson was saying there that there had been a pause – which you hear a lot about – a pause of 10 / 15 years in measured rising of temperature. That is the case isn’t it?
Sir Brian Hoskins: It hasn’t risen very much over the last 10-15 years. If you measure the climate from the globally averaged surface temperature, during that time the excess energy has still been absorbed by the climate system and is being absorbed by the oceans.
Justin Webb: So it’s there somewhere?
Sir Brian Hoskins: Oh yes, it’s there in the oceans.
Lord Lawson: That is pure speculation.
Sir Brian Hoskins: No, it’s a measurement.
Lord Lawson: No, it’s not. It’s speculation.
Justin Webb: Well, it’s a combination of the two isn’t it? As this whole discussion is…. Lord Lawson and Sir Brian Hoskins, thank you very much.
5) And Finally: Met Office Forecasts - A Reality Check
The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 10 February 2014
The Met Office’s temperature forecasts issued in 13 out of the last 14 years have been too warm. None of the forecasts issued ended up too cold. That makes the errors systemic and significant.
2014: Met Office global forecasts too warm in 13 of last 14 years – BBC Weather, 27 January 2014: So far this century, of 14 yearly headline predictions made by the Met Office Hadley Centre, 13 have been too warm.
2013: Met Office winter forecast: For the December-January-February period as a whole there is a slight signal for below-average precipitation.
Reality Check: Met Office confirms England is suffering wettest period for 250 years
2013: Met Office Spring Forecast: Feb-March Above-Average UK Temps More Likely – Met Office, 20 December 2012: For February and March the range of possible outcomes is also very broad, although above-average UK-mean temperatures become more likely.
Reality Check: Met Office confirms coldest March in more than 50 years – Press Association, 29 March 2013: This March is the coldest in the UK since 1962, forecasters have confirmed. After weeks of speculation about whether this miserable March would top the list, the Met Office has announced it is the coldest in 51 years according to provisional statistic.
2012: Met Office Spring Forecast: “The forecast for average UK rainfall slightly favours drier-than-average conditions for April-May-June as a whole, and also slightly favours April being the driest of the 3 months. With this forecast, the water resources situation in southern, eastern and central England is likely to deteriorate further during the April-May-June period… This forecast is based on information from observations, several numerical models and expert judgement.”
Reality Check: Wettest April for 100 years – April: 2012 had wettest April for 100 years, Met Office says “It has been the wettest April in the UK for over 100 years, with some areas seeing three times their usual average, figures from the Met Office show. Some 121.8mm of rain has fallen, beating the previous record of 120.3mm which was set in 2000.”
25 June: Spring is wettest in Britain for 250 years - England and Wales are on course for the wettest late spring and early summer for 250 years, experts said yesterday. June has just seen its fourth washout weekend and yet more downpours are forecast. Now it is feared combined rainfall for April, May and June will break the record of 13.2in (336mm) set in 1782 and be the highest since records began in 1766.
2010: Met Office Winter Forecast: Winter To Be Mild Predicts Met Office – Daily Express, 28 October 2010: IT’S a prediction that means this may be time to dig out the snow chains and thermal underwear. The Met Office, using data generated by a £33million supercomputer, claims Britain can stop worrying about a big freeze this year because we could be in for a milder winter than in past years… The new figures, which show a 60 per cent to 80 per cent chance of warmer-than-average temperatures this winter, were ridiculed last night by independent forecasters. The latest data comes in the form of a December to February temperature map on the Met Office’s website.
Reality Check: December 2010 “Almost Certain” To Be Coldest Since Records Began – The Independent, 18 December 2010: December 2010 is “almost certain” to be the coldest since records began in 1910, according to the Met Office.
2009: Met Office Winter Forecast: Trend To Milder Winters To Continue, Snow And Frost Becoming Less Of A Feature – Met Office, 25 February 2009: Peter Stott, Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Despite the cold winter this year, the trend to milder and wetter winters is expected to continue, with snow and frost becoming less of a feature in the future. “The famously cold winter of 1962/63 is now expected to occur about once every 1,000 years or more, compared with approximately every 100 to 200 years before 1850.”
Reality Check: Winter Of 2009/10 Coldest Winter For Over 30 Years – Met Office, 1 March 2010: Provisional figures from the Met Office show that the UK winter has been the coldest since 1978/79. The mean UK temperature was 1.5 °C, the lowest since 1978/79 when it was 1.2 °C.
2008: Met Office Winter Forecast: Trend of Mild Winters Continues – Met Office, 25 September 2008: The Met Office forecast for the coming winter suggests it is, once again, likely to be milder than average. It is also likely that the coming winter will be drier than last year.
Reality Check: Winter of 2008/09 Coldest Winter For A Decade – Met Office, March 2009: Mean temperatures over the UK were 1.1 °C below the 1971-2000 average during December, 0.5 °C below average during January and 0.2 °C above average during February. The UK mean temperature for the winter was 3.2 °C, which is 0.5 °C below average, making it the coldest winter since 1996/97 (also 3.2 °C).
|
