• Heads up: BBC1 tonight

    From N_Cook@diverse@tcp.co.uk to uk.d-i-y,uk.sci.weather on Tue Jun 24 13:44:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.sci.weather

    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.
    --
    Global sea level rise to 2100 from curve-fitted existing altimetry data <http://diverse.4mg.com/slr.htm>
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jethro_uk@jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com to uk.d-i-y,uk.sci.weather on Tue Jun 24 14:04:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.sci.weather

    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.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From N_Cook@diverse@tcp.co.uk to uk.d-i-y,uk.sci.weather on Tue Jun 24 15:58:32 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.sci.weather

    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>
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jethro_uk@jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com to uk.d-i-y,uk.sci.weather on Tue Jun 24 16:34:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.sci.weather

    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.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2