🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 13:44:57 +0100, N_Cook wrote:

> 9pm Why cities flood I hope they show why the Spanish relevant agency
> sat on data rather than sending out alert/warning immediately.
> L'aquila effect?
>
> As far as marine flooding in the UK , the Environment Agency for 6 hours
> deliberately sits on the surge data from the NSLF before sending out a
> warning. Of the 4 off 6-hourly NTSLF updates prior to any surge, the
> first, a day ahead, is little more than a hint, the second firms up or
> nullifies the first, the third is always near enough the same as the
> fourth. But the EA does not activate the warning process on the third
> update.
> When a third update of a surge is say 1.2m over predicted normal high
> tide level, the 0.1m more or less deviation from 1.2m of the fourth
> update is pretty irrelevant.

TL;DR is that water management eats into shareholder profits. I don't
need to watch 5 minutes worth of BBC facts crammed into an hour to not
learn that.

The climate is changing. The climate has always been changing with or
without man, who can do nothing about it except adapt to it.

On 24/06/2025 15:04, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 13:44:57 +0100, N_Cook wrote:
>
>> 9pm Why cities flood I hope they show why the Spanish relevant agency
>> sat on data rather than sending out alert/warning immediately.
>> L'aquila effect?
>>
>> As far as marine flooding in the UK , the Environment Agency for 6 hours
>> deliberately sits on the surge data from the NSLF before sending out a
>> warning. Of the 4 off 6-hourly NTSLF updates prior to any surge, the
>> first, a day ahead, is little more than a hint, the second firms up or
>> nullifies the first, the third is always near enough the same as the
>> fourth. But the EA does not activate the warning process on the third
>> update.
>> When a third update of a surge is say 1.2m over predicted normal high
>> tide level, the 0.1m more or less deviation from 1.2m of the fourth
>> update is pretty irrelevant.
>
> TL;DR is that water management eats into shareholder profits. I don't
> need to watch 5 minutes worth of BBC facts crammed into an hour to not
> learn that.
>
> The climate is changing. The climate has always been changing with or
> without man, who can do nothing about it except adapt to it.
>

Especially for anything climate-wise related to the oceans. If all
countries went net-zero tomorrow, the oceans are locked into at least a
century of warming , rising etc. We're doomed !

--
Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data
<http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm>

On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 15:58:32 +0100, N_Cook wrote:

> On 24/06/2025 15:04, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> [quoted text muted]
>
> Especially for anything climate-wise related to the oceans. If all
> countries went net-zero tomorrow, the oceans are locked into at least a
> century of warming , rising etc. We're doomed !

Bit hysterical ?

Yes, the future will possibly be objectively less pleasant for our
descendants than us. However shit happens. And it's highly likely they
will curse us for the positive things that we failed to do, rather than
the negative things we failed to stop.