You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So I was thinking, which normaly ends in trouble.
I live in Yorkshire, the good bit (west). So I'm not majorly concerned about rising sea levels, but it got me thinking about water tables and the general mayhem that is the govenments plan, or lack therof.
Barren hills with run off spring to mind.
I'm sure we've all seen the news reports of water companies dumping sewerage into rivers and the sea on a regular basis rather than only as an emergency measure.
Apparently its due to a lack of investment in the water system as a whole, over many decades and it's going to be something we all pay for by way of more expensive water bills, or possibly higher general taxation.
This is problematic.
Yes overland flooding is a major issue over the barren Yorkshire landscape. This is why major flooding management work has been happening in the likes of Skipton and Leeds, to be able to hold the water back at times of high flow. https://environment-analyst.com/uk/71252/178m-skipton-flood-alleviation-scheme-opens
in my mind this doesn’t explain why Yorkshire water still dump waste during non storm events!
Yorkshire water still dump waste during non storm events!
Because they can and it saves having to deal with it.
This is the epitome of everything that is wrong with the Uk.
I’m not sure the water companies can use global warming as an excuse for decades of chronic underinvestment and profit stripping.
But I’m pretty sure if they thought they could they would.
It seems like they can, and they did. 🙁
Climate change is probably a better term to use as "global warming" might difficult to sell in Western Europe if the Gulf Stream collapses in a few years time.
In terms of run off and so on, there are ways to improve this and it all involves soil. Soil has been treated really badly over the last few decades, particularly since the 1970s as intensive farming became a thing.
The EU has just launched the final details of its Soil Monitoring Law which aims to improve soil health by 2050. Some of the main things in it are to improve soil organic matter and structure. One of the main drivers for that is climate change and the expected increase in extreme weather events - heavy rain and drought. Soil that's been compacted, eroded and generally damaged by industrial farming can't retain much water. That means much more runs off, and that causes flooding elsewhere. It also causes problems when there's long dry periods - less water is retained in the soil, impacting crop growth and groundwater levels.
Improving soil organic matter and structure should help alleviate the problems of run off and flooding and water scarcity, all in one go. As a result, the EU has put a lot of effort into getting this soil law passed (they've been trying for 20 years). That doesn't help us in the UK though. Scotland has a soil framework but it's not law, and not much is being done about it, and England and Wales have, effectively, nothing. It is something that could be done, and be exceptionally good if it's not trying to balance the interests of EU member states - Switzerland passed their soil laws years ago and they're really effective at improving soil quality.
Climate change is probably a better term to use as “global warming” might difficult to sell in Western Europe if the Gulf Stream collapses in a few years time.
If/when the gulf stream fails, semantics will not matter.
In terms of run off and so on, there are ways to improve this and it all involves soil. Soil has been treated really badly over the last few decades, particularly since the 1970s as intensive farming became a thing.
I'm paraphrasing here but I recall a George Monbiot article - not this one but it was very similar - saying roughly:
Trees and vegetation draw water down into their roots, and so massively help slow water runoff
Agricultural subsidies are based on keeping land in farmable condition
That means clearing all trees and shrubs and stuff
So that's what landowners do, even if they have no intention of farming that particular bit of land
So water runoff becomes a much bigger problem, for no sensible reason
The answer to a lot of this stuff is simply plant more trees
There's a lot more to it than that TJ, trees alone solve nothing. Many of the coniferous monoculture environments we created post-war are really bad for drainage, the landscape and bio-diversity.
In West Yorkshire we'd get a quicker/better response if the grouse estates stopped draining the land and tried to revert the damage back to a "wetter" landscape where retention of water will really slow down flooding. The irony that the utility companies don't do this more on their land is somewhat lost on them
I didn't think anyone would think I meant sitka spruce monoculture.