Too much water?

[cee-dee]

I've been thinking.... (OK, so thinking's a bad idea?) about all this water we've had and the poor unfortunates that have been flooded.

Now, if you've got a pipe and it's full of water, it's full and if you try to put more water in to it, where you're trying to put more in, it will just not go.

Streams and rivers are not constricted like a pipe, I suppose they're more like half a pipe? So when they're full and more water is put in to them, the water spills over the sides. There's absolutely no way you can constrict it. OK, so you build the banks up and what happens? The extra water backs up all the storm pipes leading in to that water course?

Someone could say "Ah-ha, we can deepen that water course" but what'll happen then? I suppose some group or other will counter that by saying "Oh no ya don't, there's all the wriggly things that live there, oh no way can you do that"!!!!!!!!!!!!

What do we do? Put all the properties on stilts? Knock 'em all down and move the communities? Where to?

So, what's the answer then? What bright ideas can anyone come up with?

[cee-dee]

Now look, you know very well that's a FAR too sensible suggestion.

The deserts were once under water so they'd welcome the water being returned?

[astrologica]

It would cost millions to get it there. Also, it would not be very green to ship it. Africa, like the UK, is surrounded by water. They should have begun building desalination plants 50 years ago. I don't know what the answer is to all the flooding in this country, but I don't think exporting water is it. Lots of our Welsh water is 'exported' to England.😕

[upthecreekyetagain]

If you consider that a sensible suggestion I hate to think what you would consider a daft one!

[cee-dee]

Sticking with the status quo?

[upthecreekyetagain]

No - that's far more achievable

[cee-dee]

Easily achievable by sitting back, doing nothing and watching the flooding get worse?

[**bustysbargains**]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Easily achievable by sitting back, doing nothing and watching the flooding get worse?

---

What is the difference? sitting back and doing nothing and flooding getting worse or doing entirely the wrong thing and the flooding getting worse. 

It really is an impossible thing to get right in my opinion. 

I feel for everyone in the terrible situation of having their properties flooded time and again.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@**bustysbargains** wrote:

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Easily achievable by sitting back, doing nothing and watching the flooding get worse?

---

What is the difference? sitting back and doing nothing and flooding getting worse or doing entirely the wrong thing and the flooding getting worse. 

It really is an impossible thing to get right in my opinion. 

I feel for everyone in the terrible situation of having their properties flooded time and again.

---

Anyone would feel sorry on a personal level for those who have suffered flooding but the question still has to be asked, why buy a house that is liable to be flooded?

[**bustysbargains**]

Why indeed creeky.

My parents did exactly that. Bought a place right on the side of a river, did their research and the land hadn't been completely flooded for over a hundred years, only came up to a certain acceptable level.

Then one year, not that long ago it happened. 😲

[suzieseaside]

Maybe fewer people will in future, if they have a choice, now that they realise that flooding frequency has increased particularly in recent years. An area that might have been seen as having a one in a century probability of flooding earlier in our lifetimes might be one in a decade or more these days.

From Met office records over 110 years (since 1910) 9 out of 17 record-breaking rainfall months or seasons have occurred since year 2000. So more than half of them in just the last 20 years.

Still, someone is going to have to live in those homes, we have a housing shortage as it is (not least because of all those second homes around the country). I imagine that in future, properties that are liable to flooding will drop in value so the less well off will be the ones that have to put up with their homes being wrecked by increased rainfall and storm frequency.

For sure it will get worse and I see no obvious solution now that we have messed with river courses and mismanaged catchment areas (very important too) for so long.

Better start building on stilts and trade in cars for dinghies!

[suzieseaside]

Just saw lollypop's post after posting mine - illustrates the point about more frequent and serious flooding occurring relatively recently.

[**bustysbargains**]

Wasn't there a plan a few years ago to start building houses on tethered floats along flood risk areas?
Seemed like a good idea at the time but I've not heard it has been done at all.

[suzieseaside]

Some Dutch architects and a London one (and probably others) have designed floating homes, but I think relatively recently.
Does sound like a good idea to me too, depends how expensive they would be I suppose. But maybe those ideas will be taken more seriously now.

I have never known so much rain where I live as we have had in the last 5 months or so. It's been warmer and much wetter this winter. Possibly the same over most of the country.

[cee-dee]

On the subject of housing shortages.... the council here says that at any one time they have over 400 unoccupied council houses! What's the score with other councils?

As to the country in general, just have a look at all the unoccupied houses and buildings of many shapes and sizes. So, instead of building on yet more land adding to yet more water run-off, get cracking on those empty buildings first?

[suzieseaside]

Definitely!

Our Council has recently doubled Council tax on homes unoccupied for 2 years but that will be no deterrent to homeowners who can afford to keep empty properties so I can't see that resulting in homes being made available for occupancy.

Why are there so many empty Council houses in your area ceedee? No one wants to live there? No work?

[cee-dee]

Two years ago the number of empty houses stood at around 300, the council calls them "void properties" and they say the delay in re-letting is due to the amount of work needed to "Bring them up to modern standards". They say the contractors can't keep up with the work required.

[cee-dee]

I've just checked, as of February 12th 2020 the number of void properties was 471.

The average time to turn round a void property was 142 days.

[suzieseaside]

Meanwhile 250,000 new homes were built in flood prone areas between 2001 and 2014.
Duh!

[astrologica]

Well...would you believe it? The Head of the Environment Agency has advised that we stop building houses on flood plains! After having their heads in the sand for years, then have now woken up. And he says that whole communities may have to be relocated...to where I wonder? We have too many people!

[upthecreekyetagain]

What a difference a day, (actually two), makes