BUILDING ON FLOOD PLAINS IS JUST PLAIN CRAZY?

[J.R.P.]

Don't get your feet wet, as reported in my local KB news paper as shown December 2005. As global warming begins to effect our climate cousing sea levels to rise and rivers to burst their banks more readily,is your business prepared to cope with the possibility of flooding? The consequences of a flood can be devastating with astronmical financial losses as well as loss of livelihoods and high levels of trouble and stress.
Ask yourself the following questions:
* Do you know if you are situated in an area at risk of flooding?
* Do you know if and how you can receive flood warnings?
* Do you know how your business would respond to a flood?
* Are your staff trained on flood procedures?
* Do you have the relevant insurance to make sure you are covered in the event of a flood?
If you think you may be at risk and you answered no,to any of these questions,it is essential to implement a flood action plan to ensure the saftey of staff and to minimise any financial loss.
For more information about how you can protect your business from the possibility of a flood,call the Environment Agency on 08708 506506.
May I wish every one a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2006,and I hope you all live long and happy too. John. JRP.

[J.R.P.]

A SCRUTINY group has claimed Bexley's flood defences are inadequate,as reported in our local BE news paoer dated the 9-2-2006.
The council environment committee made its findings while investigating the aftermath of a giant storm in September 2005 which hit more than 100 homes and businesses in the borough.
The report,which was presented to council chiefs,recommends that extra money should be pumped into flood defence.
The document reads:" As a result of the intense rainfull,the capacity of drainage systems at a number of locations was exceeded.
Reports of exstreme flooding came in from more than 70 locations in the borough on the night of 10 September 2005.
A monitor reading,taken at Hall Place the morning after the storm,indicated it was the strongest for 90 years.
The worst hit areas were Bexley Village and Belvedere,where more than 50 homes were flooded,but Sidcup and Bexleyheath were also affected too.
A particular concern was the River Cray,which was unable in some areas to cope with the sudden downfall.
The report continues: "Some residents of properties along side the river reported water levels rising to the thresholds of back doors and garden furniture and boats being washed away."
Roads were flooded in Sidcup,Foots Cray,Bexley,Blackfen,Welling,East Wickham,Belevdere,Eirth,Bexleyheath,Barnehurst, and in Crayford many drivers had to abandon their cars.
In addition,the Thames Road was flooded beneath the railway bridge,and the busy A2 had to be closed for several hours.
A particularly bad case was Wrotham Road,Welling,where a foul sewer became blocked and overflowed.
North Kent and Surry were also hit. Council officers sent out questionnaires asking residents if they were affected,and have since met officials from Thames Water to descuss improvements to the borough's drainage system.
A council spokesman said: "Thames Water has confirmed that its wet weather procedure in Bexley will be reviewed. We have also met representatives from the Environment Agency to discuss their role and views given the severity of this storm.
"They confirmed that they do have some local resources available for clearing rivers and outlets and that it may be possible to use these in the future should a similar event occur."
Council officials have also pledged to pump £180,000 into their Cabinet Budget Strategy.
A spokesman for Thames Water said: "The implementation of our revised procedure are planned to take place before the onset of the late summer storms period. I hope we don't have any storms before then or Thames Water won't be ready,will they. If we do have any heavy downfalls of rain the ground is so dry in these areas it will flood any way,so why wait until it's to late. John JRP.

[J.R.P.]

The Environment Agency has come up with a pioneering answer to flood defence problems along the RIVER QUAGGY,in South East London- using people's gardens which back onto the river as a FLOOD PLAIN,as reported in our local news paper dated the 1-3-2006.
This is not a raw deal for the 40 residents whose back gardens are being transformed. In fact it is offering increased flood protection to these homes and to the surrounding borough.
The RIVER QUAGGY is a majar tributary of the RIVER RAVENSBORNE and while it poses a 1.5 per cent risk of flooding every year,to many it goes unnoticed.
As Lewisham has developed over the decades,big chunks of the QUAGGY have been built over,and now run underground.
Another aim of the final part of the three-year scheme is to "open out" the river,clean it up and encourage more wildlife.
The main element of the profect can be broken down into areas.
The QUAGGY is essentially a concrete bath tub and it's sidings have become very dilapidated.
The Environment Agency is upgrading and restoring the 10-15ft walls along the tributary. A team of about 50 workers are also removing enough Japanese Knotweed to fill 160 lorries.
The 40 back gardens being used as flood plains means residents are getting raised patio areas,with a choice of design,so the end of the garden which backs onto the river can be flooded in times of high rainfall. As " In tense rainfall is the biggest risk in the South East London."
Another key element of this work is encouraging the river to meander,reducing its flow and making it look more appealing.
This will be achieved by implementing granite block groynes.
The workers can travel up and down the stretch of the river on bikes,as it is both environmentally friendly and a quick way of getting around.
People living in Lewisham hailed the environmental improvements as "BRILLIANT". It's nice to know that someone is doing something about flood defences in the SOUTH EAST. May we all live long and happy. John. JRP.

[J.R.P.]

WE are now having a lot of rainfall in the South East,I hope we are prepared for it. John. JRP.

[Richard]

Would you prefer that the drought continued John?

[J.R.P.]

Originally Posted by TheRobster

Would you prefer that the drought continued John?

Hi Robster,( NO ) it just the fact that like most things in life there's always a good or a bad side to things,we need the rain to fill our reservoir,it just puzzles me to think why we can't run a hose (PIPE) from where they have more than enough rainfall to where we need it in the South East for example. Scotland for example could supply us and the Government could pay them for it,even though the rain water it self is free. Who would pay for the hose (PIPE)the water companies who charge us,which does mean at the end of the day we will pay for it in some way,but at least we will be ok compared to some other countries,yet I'm sure they would do the same thing if we lead the way,or is this another idea of mine that's to far outside the box way of thinking. Please don't say it can't be done,if we can go to moon we can run a PIPE,it will just be a very long one . John. JRP.

[Richard]

John,

It's not a case of it can't be done - in fact every now and again someone in Government raises the idea of having a national water supply grid, usually in times similar to these when there is a water shortage problem in the south and south-east. So yes we have the technical know-how to do this.

It's more a question of cost. To build a pipeline from the north of the country to the south would be massively expensive to constuct and also very expensive to operate and maintain. We are talking many billions to construct and operating/maintenace costs in the tens of millions per year (the cost of electricity to run the pumps would be enormous).

When you compare this to the cost of more rational (although more mundane sounding) solutions then it is easy to see why it hasn't been done. Investing just a fraction of the required cost in, say, fixing pipe leakages would provide for much better value for money. Also, the water shortage problem is not due to insufficent rainfall. Volume-wise there is still enough rain to supply the needs of the whole country. It's more a case of we don't collect and manage it very well. So options such as the wide-scale implementation of rainwater harvesting systems are another option that would be very helpful and also relatively cheap.

So in a list of things that we could do increase water supply and/or reduce demand, building a pipeline from the north to the south is way down the list. Better options would include:

1) Fix more leakages
2) Change building regulations so developers have to fit water efficient fixtures and fittings as standard (why this isn't a legal requirement already I'll never know)
3) Provide incentives to install rainwater harvesting/greywater systems
4) Increase supply e.g. build reserviors or desalination plants
5) Provide grants and other incentives for people to fit more water efficient appliances and items such as water butts for the garden
6) Educational campaigns can help to some extent e.g. encourage people to take showers instead of baths
7) Bans on non-essential uses of water, such as hose pipe restrictions

Even if a water utility did propose a pipeline system, it's doubtful that OFWAT (the Government water utility regulator) would allow them to build it. Such a scheme would increase people's water bills significantly and OFWAT have a duty to keep a lid on the prices to some extent and to see that water remains affordable, so they would oppose any scheme that resulted in a big increase in water prices, especially when there are cheaper ways to provide more water (see list above).

Also don't forget that the water utilities in England are private companies, which means that the Government would be very reluctant to provide them with any money if things went wrong (e.g. if the pipeline went over budget, which in my experience of construction projects is prettty much a certainty).

-Rob

[J.R.P.]

Hi Robster again,whilst I did mention the money side of things and how I would help to solve our problem,of course all what you have said would help,but whilst you may have presumed I ment over land,my way would be around our cost line under our sea water,like we have laid telephone cables from one country to another,like my father help to do from a ship years ago. I know we could run a flexable pipe like a rubber hose from the South East to say Scotland, done by sticking it into a lake or lock or reservoir and pump it through a outlet system into where it's needed,cutting out a lot of the problems which you have mentioned.
A simple concept,you put a hose end in some water in say Scotland,and you put the other end of the hose in a reservoir in the South East of England. Who pays for it we will in some way,but doing it my way we would save millions of us paying more for our water in the future.
I now predict in the futuer my idea will be used as the simplest way to help solve a problem in the cheapest way.
The worst thing which could happen is you could get some salt water leaking into the pipe,which I'm sure could be sorted out in a simple way too,like most things. Good night. John. JRP.

[Richard]

Even if you could create a big enough hose pipe, how would you get the water from point A to point B?

[J.R.P.]

Originally Posted by TheRobster

Even if you could create a big enough hose pipe, how would you get the water from point A to point B?

Hi Robster again,it's not so much as how big,as how long a hose pipe you would need once connected to any pumping system it will travel along it until it come out,the straight line I can see is from point A to point B would be from say Aberdeen to Norwich without touching land. John.JRP.