Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

C of E Flood Predictions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • C of E Flood Predictions

    City of Edmonton says no to releasing neighbourhood flood predictions.

    “It’s climate change that’s causing a lot of these problems,” said Mack. “These raging cloud bursts that we get and all the sudden dump a ton of water and our infrastructure just wasn’t built for that climate. Huge problem.”
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...od-predictions

    (highlighted by me)

    C of E does not want to release flood warning predictions in case it effects house values in vulnerable areas etc.
    The issue I have with this is the knee jerk reaction is to blame this on climate change. Most cities are concrete jungles. It's all the concrete poured in cities that cause a lot of the problems when there is a exceptional downpour. All this concrete is a major cause of flash flooding. To blatantly call in due to climate change is bogus. Soil/wood/park settings tend to absorb and handle downpours a lot better than huge swaths of areas with concrete all over. Concrete tends to funnel water and shed it a lot faster than natural means that's what causes the problems. Not necessarily climate change.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  • #2
    ^ I think they should release such data. Already I am paying a higher home insurance rate, since the year before, due to previous flooding in Alberta, despite the safety of my location. A friend at Sherwood Park had the same hike from a different insurer.

    Comment


    • #3
      You know what drives me freaking nuts these days? Anytime there's a bout of hot weather or cold weather, a "polar vortex", a generic flood, a flash flood in the desert that has occurred for hundreds of years, a pineapple express, some sh1tty hail that damages houses and cars, a crappy drought, a sort of drought, anything more or less than average...

      ... is because of global warming. I think we have forgotten that climate and weather is dynamic, mostly ruled by that big yellow ball in the sky.

      For all the believers, don't ever read the climate history books of the last few thousand years (and especially the last 500 that are quite accurate, yes, even before the evilZ Industrial Revolution).
      Time spent in the Rockies is never deducted from the rest of your life

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kitlope View Post
        You know what drives me freaking nuts these days? Anytime there's a bout of hot weather or cold weather, a "polar vortex", a generic flood, a flash flood in the desert that has occurred for hundreds of years, a pineapple express, some sh1tty hail that damages houses and cars, a crappy drought, a sort of drought, anything more or less than average...
        ... is quickly followed by insurances companies' own flash floods of jacked up premiums for everybody and anybody.
        Nisi Dominus Frustra

        Comment


        • #5
          Funny you mention insurance companies. Because they certainly believe in climate change, it's impact on freak weather and the resulting increases in claims.

          http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/insu...lity-1.3323132

          http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...5331/?page=all

          Comment


          • #6
            ^its an excuse to rack up premiums / increase profits. The bigger the disasters that will supposedly happen, the more money they make if they can use evidence to build a bigger fund. Take for example the Calgary flood. Yes, its a once in a 100 year event - with or without climate change it happens every 100 years or so, so its not an indication of anything. But, there is nothing to indicate its going to happen more or less than that in the future. Doesn't mean it wont happen again this month, and then maybe not again for 300 years, that's the way stats work, you have to look over thousands of years. Insurance companies don't typically have that horizon.

            They should be doing pretty well right now, hasn't been a devastating hurricane hit the US in some time, this decade is on track to be the lowest in a hundred years.
            Last edited by moahunter; 25-04-2016, 11:19 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Insurance companies usually stack everything in their favour. Scare people enough with the worse case scenarios and they can jack the premiums up with impunity. Global warming, another excuse to tell the masses the sky is fallen.
              Floods in big cities are due to concrete ground cover and lack of adequate drainage. I can see in the future cities adding a new tax on property bills to mitigate the problem. Then a double whammy on your home insurance as the insurance companies will convince mortgage companies that its a necessity.
              Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
                Funny you mention insurance companies. Because they certainly believe in climate change, it's impact on freak weather and the resulting increases in claims.

                http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/insu...lity-1.3323132

                http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...5331/?page=all
                It is funny though their belief wasn't priced in until they incur a cost. A flood in Calgary and they had to pay. No worries, everyone else NOW pays for that cost.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ^Agreed. Isn't it funny we aren't getting discounts for less hurricanes in the US? Seems when "climate change" is favorable they conveniently ignore it...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    They really should tell us. Homeowners can do a lot to mitigate risks if they know the risk is there.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by highlander View Post
                      They really should tell us. Homeowners can do a lot to mitigate risks if they know the risk is there.
                      This.

                      Unbelievable that a legit cause for discussion related to COE immediately turns into a conspiracy thread.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        One of the reasons C of E does not want to release the data is they think it will effect were people buy houses. If you see an area that C of E says is likely to flood you may be put of buying in that area. They do not want house prices to be effected. They could start sending out pamphlets telling people how to grade their property and where their downspouts should be placed etc. how to build an ark etc.
                        Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by smithereens View Post
                          Originally posted by highlander View Post
                          They really should tell us. Homeowners can do a lot to mitigate risks if they know the risk is there.
                          This.

                          Unbelievable that a legit cause for discussion related to COE immediately turns into a conspiracy thread.
                          What 'conspiracy' is highlander talking about. There is absolutely nothing in his post that suggests that.
                          Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gemini View Post
                            Originally posted by smithereens View Post
                            Originally posted by highlander View Post
                            They really should tell us. Homeowners can do a lot to mitigate risks if they know the risk is there.
                            This.

                            Unbelievable that a legit cause for discussion related to COE immediately turns into a conspiracy thread.
                            What 'conspiracy' is highlander talking about. There is absolutely nothing in his post that suggests that.
                            Was referring to almost everything other than highlander's comment. (I agree with highlander)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              ^Obviously you did not read the original Journal article cited.
                              Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X