This is definitely climate progress. Next up: urban rickshaws to reduce emissions?
From a Newcastle University press release:
Growth versus global warming
A three-year project led by Newcastle University for the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research has outlined how our major cities must respond if they are to continue to grow in the face of climate change.
Using the new UK Climate Predictions ’09 data for weather patterns over the next century, the research looks at the impact of predicted rises in temperature – particularly in urban areas – increased flooding in winter and less water availability in summer.
The report “How can cities grow whilst reducing emissions and vulnerability” focuses on the particular challenges facing London but can be used as a model for other UK cities on how policy-makers, businesses and the public must work together to prepare for climate change.
As well as protecting our homes and buildings against the increased threat of flooding from rising sea levels, the report emphasizes the need to reduce our carbon emissions, reduce our water usage and move towards cleaner, greener transport.
Newcastle University’s Dr Richard Dawson, one of the report’s authors, said: “There’s not one simple solution to this problem. Instead we need a portfolio of measures that work together to minimize the impact of climate change while allowing for our cities to grow.
“Most importantly we have to cut our carbon dioxide emissions but at the same time we need to prepare for the extremes of weather – heat waves, droughts and flooding – which we are already starting to experience.
“The difficulty is balancing one risk against another while allowing for the expected population and employment growth and that is what our work attempts to address.”
Led by Newcastle University’s Professor Jim Hall, the project is the result of three years’ work to decide how our cities should respond to the threats of climate change.
Promoting the development of cycleways and public transport, low-carbon energy and water recycling it also shows how solving one problem can exacerbate another.
Dr Dawson explains: “Heat waves like the ones being predicted to occur more frequently in future are extremely serious, particularly for the eldest members of our population.
“To combat the problem we often resort to switching on the air conditioning. This is not only energy intensive (and therefore has potential to raise carbon dioxide emissions that drive climate change) but works by cooling the inside of the building and expelling hot air outside, raising the overall air temperature in the city as well.
“This can amplify what is known as the ‘urban heat island’.”
To reduce this problem, the authors show that one option might be to stimulate growth along the Thames flood plain as the water helps to keep the overall temperature lower.
“The problem then is that you are building in the flood plain so you have to prepare for a whole different set of challenges,” explains Dr Dawson. “Houses built on stilts, flood resilient wiring where the sockets and wires are raised above flood level, and water resistant building materials are going to have to be incorporated into our building plans.
“Good planning is the key – we have shown that land use planning influences how much people travel and how they heat and cool their buildings, and hence the carbon dioxide emissions.
“Land use also determines how vulnerable people will be to the impacts of climate change. Our research enables policy makers to explore these many issues on the basis of evidence about the possible future changes and to analyse the effectiveness of a range of innovative responses, so they can better understand and prepare for climate change.”
The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research is funded by the Natural Environment Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and Economic and Social Research Council.
Mike Lorrey (03:32:23) :
As one who grew up in New Hampshire, I am well aware of the history of how cities like NYC and Boston were built of wood originally: by clear cutting our state by 90%.
Mike, this sounds extreme. New Hampshire forests were reserved mostly for the King’s Navy until the Revolution. Early settlers there were practical men and women indebted to natural resources. Much of old Boston was built on New Hampshire granite and brick. Today 83% of New Hampshire is forest –
with white pine, hemlock, oak, white birch, maple and sugar maple (Fall color and syrup) predominant.
You’re aware New Hampshire is known as “The Granite State,” and features the most adroit State motto in the nation: “Live Free or Die.” An appropriate declaration for humanity today.
Retired Engineer (08:44:36) :
As I have noted in the past, if you build on a flood plain, or below sea level, sooner or later, you will get wet.
Quite so. I, personally, live about 11 feet above sea level.
Ironically, it doesn’t matter where you build today. The government has a nice nifty monopoly on flood insurance; a protection racket if you will – it’s not optional. Buy or build a house where you like, and you are covered. It’ll cost you, of course – New Orleans doesn’t get built on wishes and good will.
So, the ‘insurance’ is quite high, which means houses need to be made for ‘rich’ people to live in, which means the coverage required is going to be greater, which means the premiums are higher, which means…
So, even those who take responsibility for their life choices, don’t actually have any responsibility: the government has assumed it weather you like it or not.
[as a note, I just got my insurance bill recently and wanted to change it because it’s too high. I’m pretty POed at the moment].
CPT. Charles (21:57:41) :
Why stilts?
The Dutch simply decided to build houses that float.
We do have a good tradition with “Houseboats” but we are not the only ones nor the first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houseboat
Harold Vance (08:16:56) :
NOBEL PEACE PRIZE ALERT:
The Catlin Expedition (that got stuck in the Arctic ice) is predicting ice-free summers for the North Pole in 10 years.
Look what the cat dragged in.
“that less than half of the world population have a level of intelligence that is above the median.”
Uhm, exactly half the population has an intelligence level that is above the median. The problem is that more than half believe their intelligence lies above it. But the real problem is misinformation and disinformation. Many who believe they are “well informed” are, in fact, well informed but the information is bogus.
There has been no observed global warming for 10 years. There has been no trend in sea level rising for nearly 4 years. In fact, there was a rather dramatic sea level drop in the 1970’s recorded at the Maldives and that information was posted here back in March of this year.
CPT. Charles (21:41:32) : “News Flash: The WBGU has spoken. ‘the WBGU study says the United States must cut emissions 100 percent by 2020—i.e., quit carbon entirely within ten years.’”
More pseudoscience drivel from Dr. Schnellhubris.
Building on flood plains is wrong. Flood plains are for farming, You know food!
Duh, build on hillsides, much dryer and more stable. Also cooler and less humid.
“Build on stilts in flood plains”. Stupidity like this can only be learned behavour.
“the United States must cut emissions 100 percent”
What does the airline industry think of that?
“Nonsense upon stilts.” Jeremy Bentham 1789.
Maybe this has been pointed out already but…
Does this picture suggest that the convenience and comforts of modern life are a distant dream already (city in the distance), that the sun is setting on “excessive carbon foot-printing” (the sun setting on it)?
And just look at the houses… the roof, straw as straw can be. The lumber of the houses, wheathered and worn-looking. All the (little) boats with (little) sails. And only a tiny patch of green that the houses huddle around, in hope of some kind of new begining that will ultimately beget our salvation, through many, many generations of sacrifice.
So I guess green is the new (feeling) blue, then.
I found the report here:
http://www.ceser.org.uk/demonstrations/cities/tyndallcitiesreport/view
Quick flick through and I couldn’t see the Thailand on Thames picture in it though. Was that put on by someone else? I couldn’t find that much about houses on stilts. Will have a more detailed read though!
‘The United States must cut emissions 100 percent…’
crosspatch asked: “What does the airline industry think of that?”
Or the trucking industry? Or the car industry, both government owned car companies and publicly owned companies? What does the fertilizer industry think of no CO2 emissions? Or electric power utilities? Or the users of fossil fuel electricity?
Or anyone whose job depends on moving anything by truck, train, plane or ship?
I propose that anyone telling us to reduce CO2 must first show us how it’s done. Set an example: eliminate the percentage of electricity used, except the minor fraction that comes from hydro power, wind or solar. Give up your job if it entails utilizing transported goods, or manufacturing, or selling products.
No air travel, no driving, no electric washers, no gas dryers. There’s nothing wrong with using a washboard or river rocks, and winter bicycling is stimulating. Give up food that was produced with the use of fossil fuels. Who needs a tractor, thresher or combine? Scythes and oxen work fine. Give up anything made of plastic, no matter how useful. Give up heating or cooling your houses and apartments.
Cutting emissions 100% is an interesting proposal. So show us how it’s done, you’re the experts. Set the example for us by eliminating all “carbon” emissions from your personal life; you don’t want to be a hypocrite, do you? Do it for 30 days, then report back to us. Let us know how it’s working out.
These busybodies would squeal so loud after three days that they’d make the Caitlin clowns sound like they never uttered a single complaint.
Well now we know what to expect from the UN Dept for Building Permits!
I don’t know, maybe with a few “happy pills,” and a some of those strobe compact fluorescent light bulbs mandated by the gov’t, it might be kind of fun!
Ocean Two-I was being sarcastic.I believe it should be up to the individual.
but one needs to think about these things. Federal flood insurance shouldn’t be
a safety net for rebuilding in a 50 year flood plain,for instance.As for fire, I’ve seen it all as an Aerial Firefighter.The solution is simple big green lawn,
no brush or trees against the house, metal roof…
that soft of thing…
Ron de Haan (08:22:41) : “Don’t they know how dangerous these houses are for sleep walkers!”
Well… they could wear stilts to bed. But then we have to worry about sleepwalkers with bad balance. If they fall, they could knock everything down in the resulting domino effect, putting us all in the water. Kinda adds a whole new meaning to “there goes the neighborhood”, doesn’t it?
That aside, we also have to consider the tree factor. If only 1% of the world sleepwalks, that must add up to 3.5 million trees to make their stilts. That’s too many, obviously.
So they would have to be forced to sleep underwater. That way, they wouldn’t fall and hurt the naturalness of the water. Of course, that risks drowning, but given all the trouble these people are… it might not be a bad idea! But let’s be humane here… Which also rules out tying them down to the bed…So where does that leave us?
We need to have these houses in order to be green. So there’s only one SANE thing left to do, and that’s to disallow them any sleep. If they don’t sleep, they can’t take any unexpected walks!
There, see? Problem solved! You just have to think outside the brain! And if you buy one of these houses (ahem… Confucius say: man who buys house on stilts is high on pot) then you’re definately an outside the brain thinker!
It gets worse. After you’ve rowed your boat home after a day at work, tied it up and then climbed the ladder, you won’t find any tea or coffee in your humble abode either. All thanks to “climate change”. An Aussie without tea or coffee? I might as well slash my wrists now! http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/oct/10/climate-change-fairtrade-food
Smokey (10:17:46) :
It is technically possible to go on a massive nuclear construction campaign, double the capacity of the electrical grid, convert cars, buses, trains and even trucks to electric but an electric airliner is impossible with current technology. The airline industry is the one that can not convert to zero emissions.
So in order to meet that 100% requirement, all airplanes would need to be grounded which means no private jets for the green elite. In short: not going to happen.
crosspatch (09:44:18) :
More importantly, what does everyone that exhales CO2 think about that?
“When will the nonsense stop?” tarpon
Most of the nonsense can be traced to an unstable economic system based on an unstable banking and money system that has driven people insane and raped the environment too. And now a rhyme:
John Maynard Keynes,
you’ve had your fun
but we find we’re living
in your “long run.”
Pragmatic (09:00:42) :
Mike Lorrey (03:32:23) :
“As one who grew up in New Hampshire, I am well aware of the history of how cities like NYC and Boston were built of wood originally: by clear cutting our state by 90%.”
Mike, this sounds extreme. New Hampshire forests were reserved mostly for the King’s Navy until the Revolution. Early settlers there were practical men and women indebted to natural resources. Much of old Boston was built on New Hampshire granite and brick. Today 83% of New Hampshire is forest –
with white pine, hemlock, oak, white birch, maple and sugar maple (Fall color and syrup) predominant.
You’re aware New Hampshire is known as “The Granite State,” and features the most adroit State motto in the nation: “Live Free or Die.” An appropriate declaration for humanity today.
Pragmatic,
Old Boston was mostly wood for most of its history. Oh Fanuel hall is nice etc but Boston is mostly NH granite and brick today because of fires that happened back then. In 1900 AD New Hampshire was 90% clear cut, this is a fact. Proof is found whenever you walk in the woods almost ANYWHERE in the state, from the wilds of the southeast around Keene to the northern tip at the Connecticutt Lakes, you will ALWAYS find stone walls running through the woods, because once those woods were fields, and the stone walls separated them and were built from stones prized from the soil by hardscrabble yankee farmers.
In the 1930’s NH was nearly bankrupt and many families simply packed up and headed west, abandoning family farms. Since that time the mill industry moved south, and so there was no need for grazing fields for sheep any longer. With the advent of the automobile, the need for hayfields to grow hay for city horses in Boston and NYC died out. All those fields, abandoned, have grown back over which is why NH is today 84% wilderness again.
That is what a tremendous carbon sink our northern forests have become.
If God had meant people to live in England , he would have given them gills.
This really is not about science and never has been. They don’t mind any challenges, the main thing is to get the headline out, the rebuttal never gets published.
The Tyndall Centre is not a single institution. It was established in 2000 and is based at the University of East Anglia. At that time it comprised the ten UK research institutions listed here:
University of East Anglia, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, (UMIST), Southampton Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton, University of Cambridge, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
Science and Technology Policy Research, SPRU (University of Sussex)
Institute for Transport Studies (University of Leeds), Complex Systems Management Centre (Cranfield University), Energy Research Unit (CLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory).
It has since added other institutions such as the Oxford Climate Change Institute, whose Head of Department, Diane Liverman, (PhD supervised by Stephen Schneider), has just set up a new Institute at Arizona U. with Jonathan Overpeck.
Tyndall is core funded by the National Environmental Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council & Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, with additional support from the DTI.
The first Executive Director was Professor Mike Hulme, from the University of East Anglia, (CRU), now back there after a year long sabbatical. The first Director of Research was John Schellnhuber from Potsdam. The new Tyndall Director is Kevin Anderson, an engineer and modeller. Director of Strategy is Bob Watson, former adviser to Al Gore, World Bank and IPCC chairman.
Check out the personnel and be afraid, be very afraid at the number of fresh-faced, just-out-of college “scientists”. This is the new generation, just out of the Nu-Labour education system and fed the Al Gore story, trained at UEA, Oxford, etc by the warmers. They also have brought in youngsters from other countries as well. They are qualified not in climate science, but in global warming mitigation, sociology, engineering, economics, etc.
They remind me of the Midwich Cuckoos.
http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/people/staff-list-with-pictures?page=3
Professor Jim Hall is Director of the Centre for Earth Systems Engineering Research in Newcastle University. He was co-developer of the national flood risk analysis method, which is now applied to all of England and Wales in the UK Environment Agency’s National Flood Risk Assessment. He played a core role in the Foresight Future Flooding project, which analysed risks and responses to flooding and coastal erosion in the UK over the period 2030-2100.
The Foresight project provided key evidence on flood risk to the Stern Review, to which Professor Hall was a named advisor. He was also an advisor on uncertainty and decision analysis to the Environment Agency’s Thames Estuary 2100 project, which explored options for long term flood risk management in London. Amongst other projects, Professor Hall managed the UK programme Sustaining Knowledge for a Changing Climate.
He is Deputy Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and coordinator of the Tyndall Centre’s research programme on climate change and cities.
He is also a member of the UK Climate Change Committee which tells the government what measures to put into climate legislation. This their latest offering: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/29/2927.asp
The opposition Tories support this Committee and their proposals. It is a UN Trojan Horse into the UK economy.
Someone asked about funding, read here about the £1 BILLION over ten years going into the program called “Living with Climate Change” from The Economic and Social Research Council’s Global Environmental Change Programme, http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/features/story.aspx?id=73
The Natural Environmental Research Council directs science funding in the UK and currently has Bob Watson on the Board, together with an assortment of greens and members of the Universities who receive the funding.
We really are in a desperate state in the UK, the process is well underway in the US and elsewhere. You must try to stop this hydra growing any more in your own countries.
For more background on how we got to where we are, read Dick Lindzen’s paper from last year, “Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?”
mbabbitt (21:46:40) :
To the dyslexic among us, the acronym for Global Warming Anxiety Disorder is GAWD–as in OH MY GAWD.
ricky: stilts mentioned on p 33.
New series: Monty Pylon’s Flying Circus…..
DennisA (11:51:36) posted :
“Already, taxes account for half of the cost of gasoline in the UK. Officials have already approved an increase in the gas tax of 6p (US 10 cents) by 2013. In addition, the group proposed reducing the national 70 MPH highway speed limit to 60 MPH and using
GPS-enabled devices to cut off power to engines attempting to exceed existing limits.
Another 4.6 million drivers would be forced to go through “eco training.” Taxpayers would also heavily subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles and the new infrastructure that would be required to recharge them. The report explained that batteries for an electric vehicle with an 80-mile range cost $13,000, while those of a vehicle with a 200-mile range cost $42,000. As most consumers would refuse to spend such a premium, the report recommended £9.8 billion (US $15 billion) in subsidies to promote the technology.
If that artists rendition is supposed to depict London, then my only comment is … bwaaaaaaaaahaaaaaahaaaaahaaaa!!!