Home› General

General

Houston was warned by scientists but called them alarmists

Mike83Mike83
edited November -1 in General
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/houston-flood-concrete-planning-1.4271740

Like climate disruption we have politics being the problem.
«134567…82

Comments

  • SCCRENDOSCCRENDO
    edited November -1
    Thanks for the link MIke. It's time for the science deniers in general to start taking note and listen to scientists. While science does not always get everything right, following peer reviewed scientific facts brings you far closer to reality than your own random intuitions, religious beliefs, selfish greedy politicians and biased right wing news sources.
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited September 2017
    One doesn't need to give up religion to believe scientists but letting one industry control the politics is just plain dumb. I found this link for those people returning home to a flooded home. One thing that bothers me is mold. Very hazardous.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hurricane-harvey-return-home-guidelines_us_59a97e31e4b0354e4409e760?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
  • SCCRENDOSCCRENDO
    edited November -1
    This is far from over. FEMA will be there for a decade. Prevention is better than cure
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited November -1
    This is what scientists are saying about Harvey and not what DENIERS claim they say, again deniers attempt to never blame burning fossil fuels but try to scapegoat anything they can.

    https://www.nrdc.org/onearth/did-climate-change-cause-harvey
  • dchuckdchuck
    edited September 2017
    Mike83, keep in mind the CBC article has nothing to do with DENIERS, climate, or even politics. its about people building on flood plains and not recognizing that FLOOD is right there in the title and that water will have no place to go but up if you put something solid beneath it.
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited November -1
    Possibly 1 MILLION cars permanently damaged by Harvey. Be wary of people trying to sell flooded cars. This article has some advice.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/how-to-deal-with-flooded-cars-in-harveys-wake/2017/09/03/79c1812c-9098-11e7-8482-8dc9a7af29f9_story.html?utm_term=.67071283c29f
  • imjoeysuncle2_98170898imjoeysuncle2_98170898
    edited September 2017
    Im not an EV expert but I'd imagine a flooded EV is as bad as a flooded gas-fueled car? both "totaled" from an insurance viewpoint-any comments?
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited November -1
    The most expensive part of the EV is the battery which is sealed and is probably OK. ICE cars have many more parts to be damaged.
  • TeetoogrnTeetoogrn
    edited September 2017
    Dchuck, the question is does man's activities to date have any affect on the frequency and severity of those flood events. I'm sure it's hard to accept our actions as possible contributors. And if we have contributed, are we willing to change our behavior to improve things?
  • blue adeptblue adept
    edited September 2017
    @Teetoogrn

    At this point it really isn't a question of whether or not we should be "willing" to change our behaviors as it is that the unfolding environmental disasters dictate that we must.
  • blue adeptblue adept
    edited September 2017
    @Mike83

    Those people need shovels...to dig their heads out of the sand.
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited November -1
    LOL So true.
  • Al1Al1
    edited September 2017
    The link above gives a pretty large list of what could possibly go wrong. From what I could understand ICE cars are clearly not any better.

    Water can get into wires, transmission parts, the exhaust or other places. Deeper water could enter the cylinders that surround the pistons. Trying to start the car could bend parts that connect the pistons to the rest of the drive train, said John Nielsen, managing director of automotive engineering for AAA. Oil, gasoline, antifreeze, brake fluid and other liquids could have water in them that could cause damage if not replaced. Nielsen recommends having the car towed to a mechanic for inspection. Depending on the severity of flood damage, he says the cost of refurbishing a car likely will be more than replacing it.

    Here comes an interesting part though. The cost of refurbishing a car likely will be more than replacing it. That's clearly about ICE cars. Electric cars have nowhere nearly as many parts and most of them can be replaced.

    Most expensive part is battery indeed. However it is sealed. And besides even the electric battery has pretty decent salvage value. So the chances are pretty good you are still better off with an electric car.
  • Al1Al1
    edited September 2017
    I am sure there will be more of that discussion as we get more data about impact of the flood on electric cars in particular.

    From an owners perspective probably all Teslas currently on the road are insured and have full coverage. Yet what it costs to insurers is important as it will have impact on future insurance fees.
  • science-isbetter_93424848science-isbetter_93424848
    edited September 2017
    Reminder. Plenty of smart Republicans are also supporting the warnings. It's the haters who see science conspiracies.
  • rxlawduderxlawdude
    edited November -1
    It looks like our friends in Florida and the Carolinas may be next. Cat 3 at least, Cat 4 probable, Cat 5 possible.
  • Uncle PaulUncle Paul
    edited September 2017
    Strong storms have been causing carnage as they come ashore since the beginning of recorded history.

    Not sure if we can blame it on human caused climate change, or just climate.

    We have had several years of below normal hurricane damage in the US. Would not be unusual for storms to revert to the average or even more than average in the coming years.

    My biggest gripe is with our government continuing to provide below market rate insurance for coastal communities. Would be far better for us to locate our population centers inland where things are safer.

    Low lying coastal communities should be discouraged from building in known storm paths.
  • SamOSamO
    edited November -1
    @Uncle Paul,

    Please explain why Houston is experiencing its 3rd 500 year flood in 3 years?

    We can "blame it on humans."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/29/houston-is-experiencing-its-third-500-year-flood-in-3-years-how-is-that-possible/?utm_term=.49a4f00fc2b5
  • rxlawduderxlawdude
    edited September 2017
    "My biggest gripe is with our government continuing to provide below market rate insurance for coastal communities. Would be far better for us to locate our population centers inland where things are safer.

    Low lying coastal communities should be discouraged from building in known storm paths."

    Agree. These should be considered "open space" and not zoned to build.
  • DramseyDramsey
    edited November -1
    @SamO,

    "Please explain why Houston is experiencing its 3rd 500 year flood in 3 years?"

    Because the statisticians were wrong?

    Guessing flooding probabilities is as dicey a prediction about a weather event as one can make. We don't have anywhere near 500 years' worth of data for what's now the Houston area, so the predictions are made based on what paltry weather records we do have, leavened with guesses about how the area would respond to X inches of rainfall in Y hours. Do they update the guesses to account for the effects decades of building? Beats me.

    You can "blame it" on AGW, paving over swampland, or the wisdom of building in known flood plains. Maybe all three.
  • SUN 2 DRVSUN 2 DRV
    edited November -1
    "You can "blame it" on AGW, paving over swampland, or the wisdom of building in known flood plains. Maybe all three."

    Not sure why everyone is so concerned..., I heard from a high profile source that "It's called WEATHER!"
  • massimob30_92902779massimob30_92902779
    edited September 2017
    There were 14 Category 4 or greater hurricanes that made U.S. landfall from 1926 to 1969 — but only four from 1970 to 2017.

    Devastating as Harvey is, it was not unprecedented. It tied for 14th among the worst U.S. hurricanes since 1851, says climatologist Judith Curry.

    http://triblive(dot)com/opinion/editorials/12677741-74/climate-change-or-canard

    As bad as this was, there have been many worse with lower levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
  • Mike83Mike83
    edited September 2017
    The 3% that deny fossil fuel burning causes climate disruption are FLAWED.

    https://qz.com/1069298/the-3-of-scientific-papers-that-deny-climate-change-are-all-flawed/?utm_source=
  • SCCRENDOSCCRENDO
    edited September 2017
    @massimo. Judith Curry is a well know denier who twists facts. Let's hear from NOAA
    https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/
    This is an objective scientific assessment.
  • SCCRENDOSCCRENDO
    edited November -1
    Massimo. Here is your link that was Mollom infested. This is a 3 paragraph opinion vs the science I showed you.
    http://triblive.com/opinion/editorials/12677741-74/climate-change-or-canard
Sign In or Register to comment.