Resisting Climate Hysteria

[trainspotter]

No what?

The last flood was mismanagement of Wivenhoe spill. But as hydrologists pointed out it, would have been even more epic if development hadn't increased the flood plain.

I'm not debating climate change, just offering an observation. The last one cost me tens of thousands of money so I'm rather interested in Wivenhoe and it's function.

You might be interested in this:


http://www.qhatlas.com.au/brisbane-floods-1893-summer-sorrow

Development increased the flood plain?

The ‘history books’, however, may also tell a different story of history repeating itself in tragic and predictable fashion. Questionable planning decisions, dubious waterfront development and the alleged parsimony of the insurance industry were all upshots of the disaster. While reducing the flood by approximately forty percent, many were shocked that Wivenhoe could not stop the flood water. Following the dam operation manual, the necessity to release water to ensure integrity of the dam wall caused downstream flooding.

http://www.qhatlas.com.au/brisbane-floods-1893-summer-sorrow

The flood has been termed a “dam release flood” by hydrologists appointed by the Insurance
Council of Australia. This suggests that a release of water from the Wivenhoe Dam was a principal
cause of flooding along the mainstream and tributaries of the Brisbane River downstream of the dam
over the period 11th–12th January 2011. Whilst the dam operators were acting in accordance with the
operations manual for the dam, their modeling did not take account of forecast rainfall in determining
the predicted dam water level, and this resulted in a sub-optimal water release strategy.

https://riskfrontiers.com/pdf/water-03-01149.pdf

Structures: Structures that are placed in a creek or waterway, for example culverts in an urban drainage
system or bridges in a river, reduce the water-carrying capacity of the waterway and may contribute to flooding. Debris can also become entangled on these structures, worsening this process. Levees along a waterway are designed to protect areas behind the levee from floods up to a certain level, but their constraining influence on flood flows can cause upstream flood levels to be higher than they otherwise would be. Road and railway embankments, with insufficient cross-drainage capacity (for example, use of culverts), can block off parts of the floodplain with a similar effect. Once levees or embankments are overtopped or breached, the way floodwaters spread over a floodplain can alter significantly and the impact of flooding is often severe.

http://www.chiefscientist.qld.gov.a...s/floods/understanding-floods_full_colour.pdf

The "Development" hardly contributed to the flood plain but actually made the flooding worse as the man made levees to protect the urbanisation increased the height of the water.

That is what I meant by "NO"

 

[explod]

Anyhoow, when the country was covered in forests heavy downpours were cushioned, cradled and to some degree absorbed more.

Stop all logging and plant more trees.

 

[Tisme]

Development increased the flood plain?



http://www.qhatlas.com.au/brisbane-floods-1893-summer-sorrow



https://riskfrontiers.com/pdf/water-03-01149.pdf



http://www.chiefscientist.qld.gov.a...s/floods/understanding-floods_full_colour.pdf

The "Development" hardly contributed to the flood plain but actually made the flooding worse as the man made levees to protect the urbanisation increased the height of the water.

That is what I meant by "NO"

Creek blockades were a non event because the king tide exceeded the height of the creeks. Deforestation, land levelling, etc mitigated a worse outcome

 

[noco]

Anyhoow, when the country was covered in forests heavy downpours were cushioned, cradled and to some degree absorbed more.

Stop all logging and plant more trees.

Plod, can you explain to me why we have had such good winter rains in central Australia and western Queensland recently causing flooding in many parts....Most unusual weather really.

 

[Tisme]

Anyhoow, when the country was covered in forests heavy downpours were cushioned, cradled and to some degree absorbed more.

Stop all logging and plant more trees.

The last flood in Brissy followed a relentless rain that went on month after month. As you may well know, Brisbane rains aren't like winter rains found in the southern states, they tend to bucket down. Every inch of the place was sodden and land locked by the various hill barriers that surround brisbane.

It's hard to describe the massive water flow that the dam's release caused as it also syphoned ground water into its tide. Down at Gailes, for instance, the river bank is a yawning chasm normally, but it filled and overflowed another 5 metres above with the torrent. I watched my factory become inundated with 4 metres of water in an industrial estate in a matter of a couple of hours....fortunately recent major roads works opened a relief path to a wider flood plain. The gentrification of riverside suburbs had seen the old factories disappear and large scale drainage installed, etc

Unless you live it, you can't understand it.

 

[SirRumpole]

Plod, can you explain to me why we have had such good winter rains in central Australia and western Queensland recently causing flooding in many parts....Most unusual weather really.

That is the point, it is UNUSUAL. The natural cycles are being disrupted and replaced by freakish events that are unpredictable.

It's pretty hard to determine what is seasonal weather these days, and that stuffs farmers up and a lot of other people too.

 

[noco]

That is the point, it is UNUSUAL. The natural cycles are being disrupted and replaced by freakish events that are unpredictable.

It's pretty hard to determine what is seasonal weather these days, and that stuffs farmers up and a lot of other people too.

Thanks Plod, you have been a big help....It must be climate change or all those wind turbines that are disturbing the air and killing thousands of birds

 

[noco]

That is the point, it is UNUSUAL. The natural cycles are being disrupted and replaced by freakish events that are unpredictable.

It's pretty hard to determine what is seasonal weather these days, and that stuffs farmers up and a lot of other people too.

Rumpy, unusual, seasonal weather,freakish events and stuffed farmers???????

This has been going on since Arthur Philip landed in Botany Bay in 1778......The old farmers knew what to do but unfortunately the modern farmer wants to do it all by computer just like these whacko Climate Change scientists who use computer modelling to try to determine whether their will be enough rains to fill the dams in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane or whether the temperature is going to rise .08 % in the next 100 years.

There were men like Indigo Jones who could predict the weather years ahead without computers...There were many men in the south west Queensland sheep stations in the 40's an 50's, many of whom I worked for in my plumbing days, who also could predict future weather conditions in advance and they prepared for it accordingly.

Now I know I was a bit facetious in answering you as Explod before when I asked him why we were getting so much good winter rains in central Australia and recent flooding in western Queensland, I had bet my bottom dollar he would have no answer because of the fact these Greenies get carried away with being brain washed by their UN Global Warming masters that when tough questions are asked, they either do not have any answers or more often than not they we will waffle on about something quite irrelevant.

Now for your information, and I will include Plod as well if he cares to take note, these good recent rains are the result of an Indian Ocean influence known as the Dipole and it normally brings good rains to Central Australia and Western Queensland....It will bring good rains through spring...It has happened before and it will happen again.....Nothing what so ever to do with Global Warming but a lot to do with the influence of bush fires in NSW, Victoria and South Australia meeting up the stream of cold air tracking down from the Himalayas.

 

[trainspotter]

Creek blockades were a non event because the king tide exceeded the height of the creeks. Deforestation, land levelling, etc mitigated a worse outcome

So the man made levees and culvert systems designed to protect the urbanisation had nothing to do with the flooding? King tide ??? What king tide????

Flooding started on the 9th January and peaked on the 13th January. The king tide event wasn't until the 21st January 2011 and effected mainly in the Albion and Breakfast Creek areas, with the Brisbane River level peaking at 1.75 metres only.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...hes-over-lowlying-streets-20110120-19xx3.html

With the flood peaking at 4.46 m in Brisbane, the floods were the sixth highest in the city's history.

Seven major flood peaks have been recorded at the Brisbane gauge since records began in 1841. A major flood peak of 4.46 metres (6th highest) was recorded at 3:00am on Thursday the 13th of January 2011. This is the largest flood peak recorded since the January 1974 flood when the Brisbane River reached 5.45 metres. Higher levels are possible in Brisbane with two floods (8.35 metres and 8.09 metres) being recorded two weeks apart in February 1893 and higher still in the record flood of January 1841 at 8.43 metres.

http://www.bom.gov.au/qld/flood/fld_history/brisbane_history.shtml

YERRRRIGHTO

 

[trainspotter]

The last flood in Brissy followed a relentless rain that went on month after month. As you may well know, Brisbane rains aren't like winter rains found in the southern states, they tend to bucket down. Every inch of the place was sodden and land locked by the various hill barriers that surround brisbane.

It's hard to describe the massive water flow that the dam's release caused as it also syphoned ground water into its tide. Down at Gailes, for instance, the river bank is a yawning chasm normally, but it filled and overflowed another 5 metres above with the torrent. I watched my factory become inundated with 4 metres of water in an industrial estate in a matter of a couple of hours....fortunately recent major roads works opened a relief path to a wider flood plain. The gentrification of riverside suburbs had seen the old factories disappear and large scale drainage installed, etc

Unless you live it, you can't understand it.

SHEEESHHH !!!!!! Nothing to do with Cyclone Tasha meeting up with an El Nina trough and the FACT that the operators of the Wivenhoe dam did not release water prior to the heavy rainfall or the FACT that they had excess water in the dam so that Brisbanites could use sprinklers during the summer months.

So the damage was severe due to the expansion of the population of the Brisbane and surrounding regions. In 1893 the Brisbane River peaked at 8.93 metres. 2011 was 4.46 metres. Was it CLIMATE CHANGE that caused that amount of rain to fall in the catchment areas 123 years ago??

 

[Tisme]

SHEEESHHH !!!!!! Nothing to do with Cyclone Tasha meeting up with an El Nina trough and the FACT that the operators of the Wivenhoe dam did not release water prior to the heavy rainfall or the FACT that they had excess water in the dam so that Brisbanites could use sprinklers during the summer months.

So the damage was severe due to the expansion of the population of the Brisbane and surrounding regions. In 1893 the Brisbane River peaked at 8.93 metres. 2011 was 4.46 metres. Was it CLIMATE CHANGE that caused that amount of rain to fall in the catchment areas 123 years ago??

Really mate? I mean really!! You are picking a fight with someone who went through the trauma and you want to points score?

Have a scour for the National Geo article that clearly points out how the dam was built to overflow, etc. Throwing up hindsight is for useless t1ts.

Just move on and suck it up cobber.

 

[trainspotter]

Really mate? I mean really!! You are picking a fight with someone who went through the trauma and you want to points score?

Have a scour for the National Geo article that clearly points out how the dam was built to overflow, etc. Throwing up hindsight is for useless t1ts.

Just move on and suck it up cobber.

No one is picking a fight Tisme. Just pointing out FACTS rather then incorrect stories. I went through Cyclone Tracy in 1974. I went through the 1999 flood in Gympie. Lost a lot of stuff in both. I have relatives living in St. Lucia, Ipswich and at Kangaroo Point that went through the 2011 flood.

Throwing up incorrect statements in regards to how flooding occurs (or did occur in this case) is not doing yourself a service of credibility.

Try reading the 5 or so links I have provided (or is the Chief Scientist of QLD wrong?) when you want some FACTS rather than a National Geo article or some flippant commentary from yourself.

SO back on track - The 1893 Flood, anyone want to explain that one?

P.S. The Wivenhoe dam water was intentionally released by the operators and did not just "overflow".

 

[Ves]

Try reading the 5 or so links I have provided (or is the Chief Scientist of QLD wrong?) when you want some FACTS rather than a National Geo article or some flippant commentary from yourself.

Where are you reading that the Chief Scientist of Queensland said that development DID contribute to the flooding? Must admit, bit confused where he comes into this.

I'm not saying the development did not and it's definitely possible it did, but the link your provided from the Chief Scientist doesn't confirm it DID (ie. it's not shown as a fact out of his mouth like you're making out).

Here's what you quoted:

Structures: Structures that are placed in a creek or waterway, for example culverts in an urban drainage
system or bridges in a river, reduce the water-carrying capacity of the waterway and may contribute to flooding. Debris can also become entangled on these structures, worsening this process. Levees along a waterway are designed to protect areas behind the levee from floods up to a certain level, but their constraining influence on flood flows can cause upstream flood levels to be higher than they otherwise would be. Road and railway embankments, with insufficient cross-drainage capacity (for example, use of culverts), can block off parts of the floodplain with a similar effect. Once levees or embankments are overtopped or breached, the way floodwaters spread over a floodplain can alter significantly and the impact of flooding is often severe.

(my bolds)

http://www.chiefscientist.qld.gov.au...ull_colour.pdf

No where does he say they DID in the Brisbane event in January 2011.

In fact, the very front of the report says this:

Our report does not examine the specific events of the recent Queensland floods, but rather focuses on
a number of critical, underlying questions relevant to floods generally.

Maybe I missed it, but which of your links has the chief Scientist of Queensland stating development contributed to the flooding as a fact?


EDIT: It's possible I'm just misunderstanding what you guys are actually arguing about.

 

[trainspotter]

Where are you reading that the Chief Scientist of Queensland said that development DID contribute to the flooding? Must admit, bit confused where he comes into this.

I'm not saying the development did not and it's definitely possible it did, but the link your provided from the Chief Scientist doesn't confirm it DID (ie. it's not shown as a fact out of his mouth like you're making out).

Here's what you quoted:

(my bolds)

http://www.chiefscientist.qld.gov.au...ull_colour.pdf

No where does he say they DID in the Brisbane event in January 2011.

In fact, the very front of the report says this:

Maybe I missed it, but which of your links has the chief Scientist of Queensland stating development contributed to the flooding as a fact?

EDIT: It's possible I'm just misunderstanding what you guys are actually arguing about.

Not arguing VES ...merely pointing out some FACTS. So when the Chief Scientist "BROADLY" states that the urbanisation can contribute to floods this DID NOT happen in the 2011 Brisbane floods?

The other 4 links were more PRECISE in their wording as to what actually caused the flood but we are now ....



The point I was making is that in 1893 there was a flood that peaked at 8.93 metres in the Brisbane River. In 2011 the Brisbane River peaked at 4.46 metres. The 2011 flood has been blamed on Climate Change. What is to blame for the 1893 flood then?

Tisme claimed that the urbanisation lessened the height/impact of the 2011 flood as natural levees were removed to create suburbs/roads etc.

I submitted that the opposite is the case as the development contributed to the flooding as man made structures to protect the urbanisation heightened the flooding. As in culverts and bridges so on and so forth blocked up the natural flow of the water causing it to breach the containment levels.

If in 1893 there was little or no urbanisation and ALL the natural levees are in place then that must have been one hell of a lot of rain in the catchment area BEFORE the Wivenhoe dam was constructed as there was no impediment for the water to egress. As in it was PURE flowing water straight from the clouds into the catchment basins and then onto the Brisbane River !!!!!!!!!!!

Anyhoooooooo this is just my opinion

 

[Ves]

Thanks trainspotter that clarifies what you were trying to say for me. I think the point you were trying to make got lost (at least for me) in the back/forth nature of your conversation with Tisme (which obviously happens in most discussions on the internet as they go from a broad issue to splitting hairs over something within that broader issue).


I don't really have any answers for you about 1893. It's probably hard to infer much at all in regards to climate change from any of these extraordinary events.

 

[noco]

Jackie Trad, deputy Premier of Queensland has invited Leonardo Dicaprio, a well known Greenie, to visit the Great Barrier Reef.
Now we all know he is no Climate Change Scientist but he is coming here to tell us that 965 km of the reef has been ruined by man made global warming and the ABC and all the left wing rags will be all over it like a rash promoting more lies and propaganda about a phenomen that has taken place over the past 500,000 years....It is gross exaggeration.
I would like the know the motive behind this invitation by Trad..Will she be seeking more money from the Federal Government?
Who is paying for this guy to visit the reef.....Will it be the Queensland tax payer?


https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/32648271/qld-extends-reef-invite-to-dicaprio/#page1

The Queensland government has extended an invitation to Hollywood star Leonardo DiCaprio to visit the Great Barrier Reef and learn about its conservation efforts.

DiCaprio this week cited the plight of the reef at the Our Oceans Conference in Washington DC.

He told the gathering over 600 miles (965km) of reef previously "teeming with life" had been devastated in an unprecedented coral bleaching event.

"We are seeing this level of impact to coral reefs around the world from Hawaii to the Florida Keys, from Madagascar to Indonesia," he said.

Deputy Premier Jackie Trad on Saturday extended an open invitation to the actor to visit the reef.

"He can come any time he likes, he's absolutely welcome to come to Australia, to come to Queensland and to come to the Great Barrier Reef," she said in Brisbane.

"I know he's been there before and I really applaud his passion and his commitment to conserving and protecting the earth's oceans."

The reef remains at risk of being placed on UNESCO's "in danger" list - a move that would be both embarrassing for the state and federal governments and economically damaging to the tourism industry.

The Queensland government last month declared it would take reef protection to the next state election as a major platform after its tree-clearing laws were defeated on the floor of the hung parliament.

Labor linked that bill to the reef's health, given vegetation management can influence sediment in-flows.

UNESCO is due to review Australia's progress on its Reef 2050 plan later this

 

[Tisme]

Thanks trainspotter that clarifies what you were trying to say for me. I think the point you were trying to make got lost (at least for me) in the back/forth nature of your conversation with Tisme (which obviously happens in most discussions on the internet as they go from a broad issue to splitting hairs over something within that broader issue).


I don't really have any answers for you about 1893. It's probably hard to infer much at all in regards to climate change from any of these extraordinary events.

"The rainfall continued in various parts of the Brisbane River Basin until Wednesday 12 January 2011, resulting in the largest inflows into both Dams ever recorded."
https://www.dews.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/78145/report-append.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"It is, unfortunately, not possible for me to determine the depth the flood of 2011 would have achieved without dams on this information with any precision. I can, however, compare its actual depth to the probable depths of historical floods if the two dams has been built at the time of those floods. Making that comparison we find that the highest floods since settlement would have been, if Wivenhoe and Somerset had both been built at that time, in ascending order:


17/2/1893 at 3.31 meters,
4/2/1893 at 3.36 meters,
14/1/1841 at 3.43 meters,
27/1/1974 at 3.48 meters, and
13/1/2011 at4.46 meters. "

"(Edited 12/3/2011. New modelling has shown the the height of the 2011 flood without dams would have been seven meters at the port office. On that basis, it would have been the fourth largest of the historical floods. Based on flood volume, it is the third largest at 14000 cumecs ignoring the effects of Wivenhoe and Sommerset. That places it behind 1893 at 14600 cumecs, 1841 at 14100 cumecs, but ahead of 1974, which would have reached 10,360 cumecs where it not for Sommerset.)"
http://bybrisbanewaters.blogspot.com.au/2011/02/2011-and-history-how-big-was-brisbanes.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So 1974 had 10360/14000 the volume but the flood extent was slightly less of comparable....the water had to drain somewhere against a king tide:
https://riskfrontiers.com/pdf/water-03-01149.pdf

 

[Tisme]

Extent of "Great Flood" of Brisbane River 1893

 

[Tisme]

By Comparison with say Sumner Park 1893 = non flooded, but 2011 havoc and suicides:

 

[trainspotter]

Really mate? I mean really!! You are picking a fight with someone who went through the trauma and you want to points score?

Have a scour for the National Geo article that clearly points out how the dam was built to overflow, etc. Throwing up hindsight is for useless t1ts.

Just move on and suck it up cobber.

Pot kettle black anyone?

"(Edited 12/3/2011. New modelling has shown the the height of the 2011 flood without dams would have been seven meters at the port office. On that basis, it would have been the fourth largest of the historical floods. Based on flood volume, it is the third largest at 14000 cumecs ignoring the effects of Wivenhoe and Sommerset. That places it behind 1893 at 14600 cumecs, 1841 at 14100 cumecs, but ahead of 1974, which would have reached 10,360 cumecs where it not for Sommerset.)"
http://bybrisbanewaters.blogspot.com...brisbanes.html

my bolds