Black Swans? Dispatches from the front line of climate change.

Guest essay by Tony Brown

The sun was warm and the wind a friendly zephyr as we enjoyed coffee and a cake on Dawlish sea front. A place known to millions of British holidaymakers as a pretty, if rather faded, seaside resort

Black swans –a symbol of the town-and perhaps a metaphor of this time and place*- glided serenely by, whilst the first daffodils showed their faces to the sun.

Just across the road, Brunel’s railway from Paddington to the far west of Britain at Penzance hugs the coast of scenic South Devon. At Dawlish it picturesquely threads it way through a series of tunnels along the amber coast of red sandstone in one of the most spectacular train rides in Britain. 

Here the sea is a constant companion, sometimes washing the sea wall with a frivolous salty spray that glistens in the sun, and at other times is a treacherous and dangerous companion that threatens to overwhelm trains that edge circumspectly along the track. This is perhaps the only main line railway in the world where it useful to consult a tide table in conjunction with the railway time table.

But on Tuesday, three days before our morning coffee, Dawlish had become known worldwide when a giant storm hit the area. As luck would have it this storm- unlike many others-arrived during a Spring tide-when tides are extra high-and the winds came howling in from a direction-roughly from the south-which causes most damage to this part of the coast. From another direction, or at a lower state of tides, the storm would probably have passed unremarked except for a paragraph in the local newspaper. But this one… This one smashed a large hole in the sea wall which carries and protects the main railway line to the South West of England, causing a gaping chasm to open up under the railway, leaving a 30 metre length of track hanging in the air.

clip_image001

http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/update/2014-02-05/rail-line-damaged-after-seawall-collapses-at-dawlish/

Several of the houses directly behind the sea wall and the railway hang precariously close to the void, exposed to the elements and which caused evacuation of the residents. Fortunately no one was hurt-although many were traumatised- and tribute must be paid to the community spirit of this town and the efforts of the council, the emergency services and those involved in the railway in a textbook response showing a high degree of compassion and professionalism.

This line is of prime importance to the economy of the West country. There has however been talk of rerouting it for decades as its tourism value and scenic beauty is precisely because of its vulnerability as trains scurry along just yards from the ocean. Talk has been renewed as obviously the initial reactions to this disaster are that this was due to climate change and with rising sea levels it would be foolish to invest too much money in reinstating the old, when a new inland solution is surely needed.

The history of Brunel’s Great Western railway is well documented and is entirely relevant in examining whether the events of Tuesday-and indeed this winter as a merciless conveyor belt of Atlantic storms have marched in to Britain- are a harbinger of climate change. These few references below are taken as the most relevant for our story, but readers will find the entire history, linked below, to be fascinating.

http://www.greatcliff.co.uk/pages/railway_history.php

Firstly, Brunel never wanted to run the line along a sea wall as he foresaw problems with the sea. He wanted to run it inland, but due to environmental reasons-including protests from landowners- and no doubt cost concerns, he had to defer in agreeing to a new route next to the sea and through tunnels.

It is highly ironic that the first year of operation in 1846 also saw the first breach in the line. In that year Brunel personally inspected 8 breaches in the line, The original newspaper report from 1846 is here.

https://twitter.com/LeoHickman/status/431559126838030336/photo/1

In a space of 15 years from 1853 the line was breached continually, with many other breaches since. Just prior to the history linked above, I note that there were great storms locally in 1817 and 1824, the latter described as an ‘extreme hurricane’.

Perhaps the most significant event in the lines history was 1901 when part of the sea wall was rebuilt 5 metres further out into the sea. It was noted this had a dramatic effect on lowering the beach levels. Sand is an extremely good ‘soft defence’ and we mess with levels at our peril. The groynes along the beach that gather sand around them have been left to decay all along this part of the coast as more fashionable –but less effective- methods of coastal defence are implemented.

A local resident next to the breach tells me of large heavy objects sucked off the ground before hurtling sideways as the storms fury vented itself against the sea wall, the railway line, and the houses that huddle alongside it. A curious echo of the 1824 reference.

The 1901 reference is especially interesting as the remainder of the wall –badly constructed of stone backfilled with rubble-was scheduled to be re-built at that time, but never was. It was that old part that collapsed . This can be clearly seen in the picture below where the sea wall drops to just above sea level (where us locals scurry quickly past at anything other than low tide)

clip_image003

(Full story and many pictures are partway down this article here)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2552027/Britains-coastline-battered-storms-hurricane-force-winds-sweep-Atlantic.html

No doubt other breaches would have occurred in this papier mache thin wall if, over the years, the storms had coincided with spring tides and the winds came from the ‘wrong’ direction. One can only imagine the hammering it has taken over the many years of its existence. That a key section of the country’s only main line railway to the South West should be of such flimsy construction will be a surprise to many, and I suspect will be the main cause of delays in the line reopening, as clearly it does not begin to meet modern standards of construction.

So, has modern climate change caused the damage? The historic record shows numerous breaches and damage from severe storms in the past. This link shows the breach in the line in 1855; London Illustrated news

clip_image005

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/victorian_periodicals_review/v046/46.1.fyfe_fig02.html

This next more modern photo shows a train stranded in Dawlish station with mountainous waves crashing over it and is often touted as proof of climate change. clip_image006

Those able to visit Teignmouth Museum –just along the coast from Dawlish- will see a lithograph there from around 1850 showing an identical scene.

In 1846, Brunel went to inspect sea damage to the railway at Dawlish, as reported in The Standard. Brunel personally inspected 8 breaches in the line in 1846, the first year of the railways operation!

dawlish_rail_1846

It seems that storms are no different now to those over the last couple of centuries. The real story is that an already inadequate sea wall structure which carries the main line railway, has taken numerous hits from waves and storms since its inception and has become steadily weakened. Sand levels have been allowed to drop, thereby reducing soft protection to the base of the wall.

The line was clearly built to a budget in the 1840’s and the measures needed to compensate for its problematic location have only sporadically been implemented ever since. Decaying infrastructure-from sewers to roads to sea walls- is the plague of this country, with its make do and mend philosophy in sharp contrast to the high profile expensive grand follies beloved by our Politicians. The latest planned is a £50 billion project for a new rail line from London to Birmingham to shave 20 minutes off the journey. As Dawlish residents bitterly note, a tiny fraction of that budget would enable a proper sea wall built to modern standards to be built here, that would provide protection to the railway for a century.

That modern climate conditions seem no different to the past may be of no concern to those deciding the future of our railway. A new inland route may ultimately be more appealing than properly repairing and maintaining what we have already got, as the siren voices of climate change are loud and strident and emanate from influential people.

=================================================================

*black swans. The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that describes an event that comes as a surprise, has a major effect, and is often inappropriately rationalized after the fact with the benefit of hindsight

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

190 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Perry
February 9, 2014 2:11 am

For a long time in railway circles, as distinct from the political bubble, there has been discussion about reinstating the single track Teign Valley Railway, which was closed to passengers in June 1958 & fully closed, after FLOODING between Christow & Exeter in 1961. It’s all here!
http://www.teignrail.co.uk/index.php
Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin has now called for reports about the feasibility of a double track through the Teign Valley from Exeter St Thomas to Newton Abbott, with the line along the coastal route then being singled to serve Teignmouth, Dawlish, Dawlish Warren, Starcross & Exeter St Thomas.
Another idea is to improve the freight line that branches west towards Okehampton, from the Exeter St David to Barnstable line & continue south to Plymouth, virtually isolating Torquay & Paignton & the line from Newton Abbott to Plymouth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okehampton_railway_station#Future_options
View the map. http://www.geowiki.com/New_Adlestrop_Railway_Atlas.pdf
However, what’s the betting that when the damage has been repaired, the urgent report will be quietly shelved & forgotten? After all, the railway, with the exception of china clay related operations,carries no freight in Cornwall & fewer than 10% of the visitors to Devon & Cornwall.
Cordially,
Perry

Old England
February 9, 2014 2:12 am

Comments about HS2, the High Speed rail connection are puzzling and of no particular relevance. The key fact about HS2 and why UK politicians are determined to spend tens of billions on it is because they have to build it. It is not a UK decision it something required of the UK by our lords and masters in the EU as part of the European high speed rail network.
Truth is that the UK has no choice, it may get deferred, but sooner or later it has to be built whether it makes any economic sense or not. The joys of having given up democracy to be ruled by the unelected in Brussels !!!

Gareth Phillips
February 9, 2014 2:13 am

Moving the railway line is one option, but only part of the answer, There are houses immediately behind the railway, and given that this type of weather is likely to become more frequent we need to look at the wider issues and not treat this as if it is a one off, one hundred year event. There are those who will focus on one issue as the answer, such as dredging to resolve the widespread foods in the Southwest. These are important answers, and are an important part of the solution, but on their own, they are not enough. It is a complex and controversial issue – and critics say it cannot be the total answer when more intense rainfall is anticipated if the climate changes as predicted. They add that it is a particularly thorny problem because the Environment Agency is facing big cuts in the staff that might deal with flood policy – there are difficult decisions to be made over how much is spent and how much priority should be given to farmland compared with homes.
The Environment Agency says it spent £45m in the last financial year on improving river flow, including dredging and weed clearance. It says increased dredging would not have prevented the current flooding in the Somerset Levels – due to the sheer amount of water.
“Dredging is often not the best long term or economic solution compared with other flood risk measures such as building walls or providing storage upstream – and would not reduce flood risk on all the rivers on the Somerset Levels because of their tidal nature,” a spokeswoman said.

It’s the same with the railways and houses. Just building up the sea defences is probably not going to achieve a lot in the longer term with our climate in the UK changing for the worse. I understand there is an inland route closed under Beeching which may be worth considering. Maybe the billions being earmarked for HS2 could be diverted to the people of the South West to help them adapt to this increasingly damaging climate change.

February 9, 2014 2:13 am

So has modern climate change caused the damage? No.
They shoulda’ listened to Brunel, he had experience and
skin in the game. ..
Tony, lovely thread ‘n thx for your devoted study of the CET data and
historical records, context, context, context … cross referencing like
good police work.
Beth the serf.

tonyb
Editor
February 9, 2014 2:28 am

Peter
As regards the platform, we got a good view of that. It consists of a thin long strip that actually extends horizontally right over the beach and the sea. It often gets damaged. As it has now been stripped back it seems to consist of nothing more than horizontal rafters, like you might see in your loft, over which has been overlaid what looks like marine ply and the whole then covered with a layer of felt/tar.
Again, it doesn’t appear to meet modern standards and like the rest of this station needs more than a lick of paint (the rail co attended to the bridge last year) .
Are conditions more extreme than the relatively benign last three decades? Yes. Are they out of the ordinary in the broader historic context? No. Should we build in resilience in case this cycle of bad weather continues? Yes.
tonyb

Adam Gallon
February 9, 2014 2:32 am

Gareth, where’s the evidence that our climate’s changing? As Tony shows, this line has been breached by storms over 150 years ago, his work on CET record shows the ups & downs of our weather & climate.
Now, behind the flooding & the EA’s inaction, it’s our dear masters over in Brussels/Strasbourg.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/10625663/Flooding-Somerset-Levels-disaster-is-being-driven-by-EU-policy.html

simon abingdon
February 9, 2014 2:35 am

Tony Berry “one of the main reasons for Brunel choosing the line through Dawlish was because he wanted a very flat line to route his atmospheric railway”. Rubbish. The South Devon Atmospheric Railway was famous for its severe gradients.

Peter
February 9, 2014 2:45 am

Tony B
Are conditions more extreme than the relatively benign last three decades? Yes. Are they out of the ordinary in the broader historic context? No. Should we build in resilience in case this cycle of bad weather continues? Yes.
For decades I’ve thought it’s likely our climate will be changed as per IPCC science. Not certain, *likely*.
Likewise I can’t agree with your certainty the present weather is “not” outside broad historic context. I think it’s *likely* it is – you’re making a mistake to ‘never’ the weather, imo.
Fwiw, I think there are few certainties, few yes/nos with the weather and climate.

Gareth Phillips
February 9, 2014 2:52 am

Adam Gallon says:
February 9, 2014 at 2:32 am
Gareth, where’s the evidence that our climate’s changing? As Tony shows, this line has been breached by storms over 150 years ago, his work on CET record shows the ups & downs of our weather & climate.
Hi Adam, indeed you are correct, this line was breached in the past on a few occasions. What we are looking at is the increasing frequency of these events and intensity. My rallying cry is to stop quarrelling about the reasons for this change in climate, and learn to adapt to it. Personally I believe we are making things worse, but I accept others have differing opinions. Are things getting worse? if you live in the UK you will probably have a pretty subjective idea that all it seems to do is rain for months on end,in the mainland US it is extremely cold while Alaska bathes in unseasonal warmth, but we need to be more more objective and recognise the here and now of our our situation if we are going to adapt to meet these challenges. This is a good place to start to see if these weather events are getting more intense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_extreme_weather_events

February 9, 2014 2:54 am

stephenj says:
February 9, 2014 at 1:07 am
RE: Lichen
After 2 years without washing my car it has gradually gone green. Yesterday, to my delight, I noticed I now have my the first lichen colonies. Next week I will be going away for a few days and parking the car at Heathrow, it will be interesting to see if the lichen survive the Heathrow air.
Anyway no one can complain that my lifestyle is not green.

Alan Robertson
February 9, 2014 2:55 am

Gareth Phillips says:
February 9, 2014 at 2:13 am
“… given that this type of weather is likely to become more frequent we need to look at the wider issues and not treat this as if it is a one off, one hundred year event. ”
_____________________________
Do you have any actual data to support that claim? No, you don’t. You are repeating a lie. The actual data shows the exact opposite effect, that extreme weather events are diminishing is size and frequency. if warming actually happens. As you statists are fond of saying, when weather events make a joke of your foolish claims: “it’s only weather.”
Didn’t you read rjt1211‘s appeal for honesty, above?

climatereason
Editor
February 9, 2014 3:02 am

Hello rtj1211
Is that your real name? No, thought not. Why not stand away from the dark shadows of anonymity so I can see who is accusing me of being a liar?
You sound as if you have a vested interest in the new line if you choose to take my passing comment as being so worthy of your vitriol. Are you a paid lobbyist?
My main point as you must surely realise is that we need to spend money on maintaining the existing failing infrastructure before we embark on highly expensive new rail projects.
You say;
‘The cost of HS2 is £50bn from London to Manchester AND Leeds, via Birmingham: a Y-shaped line of around 300 miles (100 miles common from London to Birmingham and 100 miles on each of the Y branches). ”
Not so in the real world. Here is the home page of HS2
http://www.hs2.org.uk/
There is a phase one to Birmingham and a phase 2 to Manchester and Leeds.
http://www.hs2.org.uk/about-hs2/facts-figures/route-trains-cost
The 2 phases are years apart with the second phase not likely to happen until the 2030’s , 6 years after phase 1.
here is a BBC Q and A
http://www.hs2.org.uk/about-hs2/facts-figures/route-trains-cost
This report has a headline
‘Cost to double to 80 billion.’
http://news.sky.com/story/1130058/hs2-rail-project-cost-to-double-to-80bn
It reads;
“The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) says the plan “defies economic logic” and is calling for the project to be cancelled. The Department for Transport’s official estimate currently stands at £43bn – a rise from its original figure of £33bn.
The think tank argues that the £80bn price tag could deliver £320bn of value if spent on road and other rail and transport projects. Work on the first leg between London and Birmingham is due to begin in 2017.
The report’s author Dr Richard Welling said: “It’s time the Government abandoned its plans to proceed with HS2.
“The evidence is now overwhelming that this will be unbelievably costly to the taxpayer while delivering incredibly poor value for money.”
So, instead of arguing with me take your case to the IEA.
£50 billion for the first slice of the pie to be delivered around 2025 and 80 billion for the completion of the project 6 years later seems a perfectly reasonable estimate bearing in mind our proud history of overspending and that it is some 20 years in the future.
You owe me an apology. Why not tell us who you are and then we can have a sensible debate. I am not against high speed rail per se just against grand projects when much of the rest of the country needs money spending on it.
tonyb

David L
February 9, 2014 3:08 am

The reason the warmists think the storm is unusual is because, contrary to this excellent history lesson, they think the beginning of the world occurred in 1978.

johnmarshall
February 9, 2014 3:27 am

Brunel had great problems, mainly the tight fisted GWR owners.
From ignored infrastructure on the railways to flood protection on rivers we have been badly served by the politicians. And yes £50B could be better spent on general repairs and upgrading of existing infrastructure which we do pay taxes to protect.
The climate change idea seems to insist that any change will be warming rather than cooling. Julia Sligo, senior scientist for the UKMO, has just claimed that recent poor weather is due to climate change. Models ”predict” stormier weather as the planet warms. History shows the opposite, the LIA included some of the worst storms ever recorded including the Great Storm of 1703.

lyn roberts
February 9, 2014 3:27 am

wildlife more important than people, sounds familiar.
In australia 5 year ago we had black Saturday, some years before that, Ash Wednesday, lots of do-gooders did not allow trees and underbrush to be cut down, or burnt off in small back burns, because it might hurt the wildlife, instead we had a fire so hot that it destroyed everything including 180+ people and all the wildlife in the area’s affected.
The fire was so hot it melted aluminum rims on cars, cremation of people and animals caught in fire, cars & remains of houses marked as containing no bodies had to be looked at days later for ashes. Today we have more of the same, Melbourne area has serious fire problem this afternoon and tonight, with another 40C day tomorrow to face.
Do gooders in England may find drowned animals and wildlife, as I said sounds familiar.

February 9, 2014 3:28 am

Reading this post reminds me of hearing so many people say that the “monster storm” Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and destroyed much of it.
The cane missed a direct hit on New Orleans. The gusts of Katrina were in cat 3 range but the sustained winds were not, and besides, the winds did not do the damage. A combination of events led to breaches in the poorly maintained drainage canal levees and navigational canal levees. There were those who had warned of this sort of thing for years before it happened. This was a political disaster of unbelievable magnitude. But now, it is an example of “how global warming is causing more hurricane damage”. MONSTER STORMS! Hide the women and children!!
Likewise the “Super Storm” Hurricane Sandy is said to have been “the largest ever”. The most costly! The northeast destroyed! It was at most a category 1 hurricane when it made landfall in the northeast. Of course, “global warming caused cold” made it even worse they say. But it was yet again a disaster made much worse by years of poor planning. It was as if the people of the northeast can’t read history and did not know that such things can happen. Let us build in low lying areas — cause the nothing bad ever happens here! Let us have no emergency plan to help in the event of such an occurrence and just muddle about getting in the people’s way.
Many say that both events were black swans that caught us unawares and we could never have seen things like this coming. It was CO2! The demon molecule did it! Burn the witches!
I hope everyone who reads here realizes that we are engaged in a political war as much or even more than a scientific debate.
Note: It is possible that some of the above might be sarcasm.

johnmarshall
February 9, 2014 3:45 am

rtj1211
I read your biased dit and I find accusations of lying of the detractors of HS2 hypoctitical in the extreme. The HS2 project was built on lies from day 1. Its business plan is unworkable, from train numbers to passenger growth. Passenger numbers on French TGV are highly subsidised, unlike HS2 and Spanish High Speed trains on some routes run nearly empty due to cost. Recent HS2 outpourings are full of unfounded claims, lies, about how much money it would spread north, based on an economic model. This claim can only be verified AFTER the event.
There were no lies in the post you disliked and criticized.

richardscourtney
February 9, 2014 3:46 am

markstoval:
I write to support the statement in your post at February 9, 2014 at 3:28 am that says

I hope everyone who reads here realizes that we are engaged in a political war as much or even more than a scientific debate.

Yes, we are involved in a “political war” but many do not recognise that.
I draw your attention to my above post at February 9, 2014 at 1:24 am which is here and its link to the previous thread.
As example of the problem of failure to understand the issue you state, I copy to here a post I made in that thread.
Richard
—————
richardscourtney says:
February 7, 2014 at 1:06 pm
rgbatduke:
At February 7, 2014 at 12:39 pm you ask

I very much doubt that Gareth is trying to fool us or that his beliefs are not sincere. I merely challenge those beliefs. Are they defensible?

His “beliefs” are his own. His assertions about the tragedy in the Somerset Levels are NOT defensible.
Furthermore, his claim that he said other than he did when his words were specifically quoted is either delusion or deliberate lie. In either case, correction is not amenable to reason.
But the fact is that the campaign posed by his ilk – and which he still tries to defend – has caused a disaster for hundreds of families, and failure to expose that truth to onlookers assists continue of many similar campaigns which are being conducted.
This is not merely some academic discussion. It is a fight against an insane philosophy which places a bird sanctuary above the lives and homes of hundreds of people.
Richard

Speed
February 9, 2014 3:51 am

In other news …

Rail routes into Devon and Cornwall remain cut off by the problems caused by the flooding and the storm damage, as well as a landslip in Somerset.
Rachel Sutton, acting leader of Exeter City Council, has called for more government funding to improve rail lines.
She said rail lines were blocked near Exeter 12 months ago because of flooding, and government funding was needed to protect lines which were “vulnerable in a number of places”.
“The local authorities can’t do this on their own, particularly when we’re having to cut back because of cuts to our grant from central government,” she said.
Network Rail said a landslip at Crewkerne and flooding near Bridgwater and Athelney meant there were “no routes to the West Country open to trains”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26106290#

richardscourtney
February 9, 2014 3:58 am

Speed:
Thankyou for your post at February 9, 2014 at 3:51 am but it is not “other news”.
It is the result of the reduction to infrastructure maintenance and cuts to water management which are justified by “care for the environment” and which we in the South West have been complaining about for years.
Richard

Bananabender
February 9, 2014 4:11 am

@Lyn Roberts:
The problem is not “do gooders”. [The biggest fires in Victoria occurred in 1855 long before the environmental movement even existed.]. The problem is that burning off will not prevent fires.
Bush fires are normal events that cannot realistically be prevented. The only effective way to protect property and people people is to avoid living in fire-prone localities.
http://www.afr.com/p/national/controlled_burns_to_manage_bushfires_oLZ0F1z4jcHydUziwUZVWN

hunter
February 9, 2014 4:22 am

One working definition of “climate change” seems to be “a weather event we do not recall”.

climatereason
Editor
February 9, 2014 4:23 am

Richard
You will be amused by this;
“Britain’s Communities Secretary Eric Pickles says the government “made a mistake” and should have dredged the flood-hit Somerset Levels. He told the Andrew Marr Show it may have relied to much on the Environment Agency’s advice and it now recognises that the area should have been dredged. He added: “I apologise unreservedly and I’m really sorry that we took the advice, we thought we were dealing with experts.” –BBC News, 9 February 2014″
Substitute Met office for Environment Agency and we will be getting somewhere. ‘We thought we were dealing with experts.’ Priceless.
tonyb

hunter
February 9, 2014 4:46 am

Bad government policy results in vulnerable infrastructure. Thanks to environmental extremists and AGW policy demands, we are experiencing our infrastructure becoming weaker. The policies are not failing because the underlying environmental and climate concerns are accurate. The infrastructure issues- storm surges in the US and elsewhere, power grid costs and reliability, flooding due to poor flood control, dangerous wild fires in Australia, etc. – are increasing due to our responses to what turns out to be historically typical events. It is the ideas that drove the policies that are creating weak policies.
Those who care about good government should pay close attention. Environmental and climate change based policies are leading to bad government policy.

Robin Hewitt
February 9, 2014 4:46 am

Also from the BBC, doesn’t this sound like a Green journalist squeezing some unfortunate scientist for that killer quote?…
Dame Julia Slingo said the variable UK climate meant there was “no definitive answer” to what caused the storms.
“But all the evidence suggests there is a link to climate change,” she added.
“There is no evidence to counter the basic premise that a warmer world will lead to more intense daily and hourly rain events.”