Valencia Floods Update

By Paul Homewood

 

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/31400639/spain-flooding-map-areas-worst-hit/

As the waters recede, we need to put the Valencia floods into perspective.

According to Wikipedia:

Starting on 29 October 2024, a "gota fría (cold drop)" brought drastic flash flooding to southern and south-eastern Spain, primarily in the Valencia region. Chiva saw nearly 500 millimetres (20 in) of rainfall,[4] while Utiel and Turís each recorded totals of 200 mm (7.9 in), with other southeastern municipalities receiving 100 mm (3.9 in).[5] In Andalusia, the storm caused landslides[6][7] and damage to buildings, roads, bridges and agricultural land.[8][9][10]

On October 30, 2024, the 1973 New Turia Riverbed surged to capacity, sparing Valencia’s city proper but worsening the catastrophic flooding across towns and suburbs to the south due to a funnel effect.[13]

The South Plan [es], the new riverbed for the Turia built after it catastrophically flooded in 1957 prevented flooding in Valencia,[14] but it caused all municipalities to its south to flood, causing tens of deaths in towns like Paiporta.[13] Floods ended up affecting all population centers in Horta Sud, as well as most in Camp de Túria and in Requena-Utiel.[15][16]

The resulting floodwaters caused the deaths of at least 95 people,[1] including 92 in the province of Valencia,[17] two more in Castile-La Mancha[18] and one in Andalusia.[19][20] Dozens of others were also missing.[21] The flooding also caused significant damage to buildings and infrastructure, sweeping away roads and cars while also derailing a high-speed train carrying nearly 300 people, resulting in no injuries.[22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2024_Spain_floods

As the Sun’s map indicates, rainfall peaked at around 180mm for the three-day duration of the storm, though likely higher in the hills where reliable measurements are not available, either now or in the past. This would appear to be confirmed by figures of 200mm at Utiel and Turis.

Wikipedia make reference to the 1957 floods, widely regarded as some of the worst in history in Valencia.

https://apiwp.thelocal.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/1280px-Riada_Valencia_15_octubre_1957.jpg

Photo of Valencia’s ‘Great Flood of 57’. Source: Wikipedia

Here is one account:

 

image

For most of the year the Turia was a dormant little stream which trickled along the sticky mudflats, which Valencia liked to call a river. Writing at the beginning of the nineteenth century, British writer Richard Ford mocked the Valencians for the false grandeur of their magnificent bridges and high river walls… all for a piffling little brook. What he didn’t know was that twice a year the river swelled with the autumn and spring rain or that every ten years or so it flooded the city. It was a supposedly normal Monday in 1957 in Valencia. On October 14th a flood came, which caused such devastation it was to be an historic turning point in the way the city developed. It helped shape what we know as Valencia today.

Valencians knew that you tended to get a bit of rain in these parts around October time but no one  could have imagined the scale of the tragedy which was about to befall them. On the Saturday, two days before the flood, was the festival of Pilar. There had been heavy rain and the scheduled bullfight had been cancelled. Sunday morning, however, had seen only a few showers catching people on their way to Mass. The afternoon had been dry, Levante’s match against Tetuán had gone ahead and people crowded into the city’s numerous cinemas. In a curious twist of fate, one of the most popular films that weekend was the disaster movie ‘Typhoon over Nagasaki’ at the ‘Olimpia’. They needn’t have bothered going to the pictures, it was all about to happen right in front of their eyes.

While people were turning in for the night, some of the heaviest rains ever seen had been falling further inland and some night owls marvelled at how the river had swollen. Not long after midnight, the first wave struck. At a rate of two thousand seven hundred cubic metres per second, water poured into the city. Within minutes, houses around Calle Alboraya and Calle Sagunto were letting in up to a metre of water. People scrabbled their way to upper floors, climbed trees and statues, the lights went out and the violent rush of water could be heard all over the city.

This first wave only affected people who lived in the vicinity of the river, especially along its North bank and nearer the sea at Malvarrosa and Nazaret. The ancient doors of the Monasterio de la Trinidad were wrenched off by the force of the water. Things calmed down at around 4 a.m. During that morning, people from the centre (as yet unaffected) ventured out to see the fast-flowing water and the eerie sight of drowned cows, floating down to the sea from a cattle farm further upstream. The Pont de Fusta (or wooden bridge) in front of the Estación del Puente de Madera had been completely washed away. Little did they know the worst was yet to come.

At around two in the afternoon, a second wave crashed in. It was bigger than the first, at nearly four-thousand cubic metres per second. The river recovered its ancient course through the city centre, which had been dry since the eleventh century. Vast waves of water flowed furiously into the Barrio Carmen down Calle Baja, through to Bolseria, past the Central market, across the Plaza del Ayuntamiento and out again down Calle Barcas, a street which had originally taken its name from an ancient landing stage when the river had previously flown through the city. Most of the centre was under three metres of water, the worst hit areas were again on the North bank, Calle Doctor Oloriz was under more than five metres. Despite being close to the river, the Cathedral and the whole of the old Roman city was left completely untouched becoming once again the ancient island on which the city was founded.

The true death toll is unknown but official figures state that more than a hundred people lost their lives. Many more lost their homes, belongings and livelihoods in the case of some shopkeepers and traders. One body, found on the wall of the Viveros gardens after the waters had subsided, was that of Micaela Chulvi Benaches who hadn’t been killed by the flood at all. She had died of old age at 84 and was lying in state in the family living room when the waters washed her away. One man who had been trapped on the Puente de la Trinidad had climbed onto the head of the Statue of Santo Tomás de Villanueva to escape drowning. After holding on for more than two hours, he was finally thrown a rope and rescued to great cheers from the watching crowds. Many people had saved themselves by holding onto the railings and climbing up to first floor balconies along the Calle Barcas but the city itself would never be quite the same again.

The clear up began almost immediately and help came from all over Spain. The first to arrive was the Cartagena fire brigade from Murcia. Those doing military service in 1957 & 1958 were brought in to clean the city, spending most of their time up to their knees in the vast amounts of mud and sludge that the floods had left behind; they were known as the Quinta del fango “the mud generation”. New housing was built in the middle of the fields, which are now Avenida Blasco Ibáñez for those who had been made homeless. The development was named after l’Alguer in Sardinia. Rising up as it did in the middle of the Huerta it quickly became known as “La Isla perdida” (the lost island).

The river was diverted and a new river bed with a capacity to handle water flowing at up to 5,000 cubic metres per second was built to the south of the city. Just in case, the south wall of the new river is slightly lower so any future flood would flow south, away from the city. What the residents of Sedaví, Benitusser and Torrente thought of this at the time is not known.

After twenty years of bickering about what to do with the old riverbed, some bright sparks wanted to build a huge motorway right down the middle. Thankfully, the plan did not come to fruition.  Work finally started on the Turia park as a public green space, running right through the city, still known universally as “the river.” Subsequently, most significant public works have been centred on this previously neglected area, including the park itself, the Ciudad de las Ciencias, the Palau de la Musica, the Parque de Cabecera, the Bioparc. As a direct legacy of the flood, the seeds of modern Valencia were sown.

With many of its shops and houses devastated and destroyed, the Barrio Carmen was never again to recover its role as the business and commercial centre of the city. The shops and businesses moved out first to La Avenida del Oeste and later to Calle Colón. The last remaining aristocrats abandoned their crumbling Carmen palaces and joined the upper middle classes around the Gran Via and the barrio was left to rot. This may not have been such a bad thing. While the Calle Colón has lost all but a few of its original buildings to huge department stores & chains & franchises…the Carmen has been preserved in all its intricate, dusty, dilapidated splendour. Had it not been for the flood we might have had a huge concrete ‘El Corte Inglés’ built right in the middle of the Plaza de la Virgen or over what, thankfully, is still old Calle Caballeros.

https://247valencia.com/la-riada-the-flood-of-valencia/

Note the comment:

“While people were turning in for the night, some of the heaviest rains ever seen had been falling further inland “

KNMI confirm that 186mm of rain fell on Valencia over the three day period, including 125mm on the 14th. But this was evidently much less than fell inland. And as KNMI also show, daily totals of 120mm or more are not unusual there:

image

There is another relevant similarity to the 1957 flood, which as was also the result of a “Cold drop”:

image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957_Valencia_flood

A cold drop is a very common meteorological phenomenon in these parts, and as the BBC reported, it was this DANA event which made the storm so much worse this time:

image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_drop

Valencia has regularly flooded throughout history. One estimate suggest at least 75 floods in the last seven centuries. The floods of 1949 and 1897 also stand out in recent times.

Ironically a year before the 1957 floods, Valencia had its highest daily rainfall on record, 262mm on Nov 17th. This appears to have had less flooding impact, because the waters flowed away downstream. The really bad flooding occurs when heavy rain falls inland, and goes on to be channelled into the River Turia.

There is one final and highly relevant comment I must make. From the 24/7 Valencia article:

“The river was diverted and a new river bed with a capacity to handle water flowing at up to 5,000 cubic metres per second was built to the south of the city. Just in case, the south wall of the new river is slightly lower so any future flood would flow south, away from the city.

And as Wikipedia note, it was this diversion which led to the catastrophic floods to the south of the city:

image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2024_Spain_floods

It serves as reminder that flood defences more often than not simply transfer problems elsewhere.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/pLZPW52

October 31, 2024 at 06:12AM

Why does Lake Geneva emit large quantities of CO2? A forgotten piece of lakes’ carbon cycle, say researchers

Lake Geneva
A co-author/professor in the study says: ““It’s very important to have in-depth knowledge of how CO2 is naturally transported, stored and transformed between continents, water and the atmosphere”. In other words, knowledge of nature’s carbon cycle. But to then assert their findings can help with ‘fighting global warming’ is opinion, not science.
– – –
Unlike oceans, lakes are significant emitters of CO₂, says the University of Lausanne (via EurekAlert).

But why is this the case, and what mechanisms are at play?

For the first time, UNIL scientists have successfully explained the complete carbon cycle in Lake Geneva, creating a model that can be applied to several of the world’s largest lakes.

— Contrary to previous beliefs, it is the natural erosion of rocks that is responsible for the significant CO2 emissions from Lake Geneva and many of the world’s large lakes.
— This study provides the missing piece for understanding the carbon cycle in lakes.
— The LéXPLORE lake platform in Switzerland played a major role in this discovery of international significance.

Like most lakes in the world, Lake Geneva is an emitter of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2). Annually, it produces as much CO2 as the automobile transport of the city of Lausanne (≃ 150,000 inhabitants).

This phenomenon – the production of CO2 by lakes – has been known for years. There is, however, widespread debate as to the mechanisms at work.

Traditional scientific theories suggest that lake CO2 emissions are primarily due to the influx of organic matter from surrounding soils. This material, originating from the decomposition of plant and animal residues, is carried into the lake by rainfall, where it is broken down by microorganisms, leading to the release of CO2.

This process is known as respiration. While this theory accounts for the behavior of some lakes, it doesn’t apply to Lake Geneva, which receives very little organic matter from its shores.

In theory, its annual carbon balance should be neutral, with winter CO2 production (from organic matter decomposition and water mixing) balanced by summer CO2 absorption (due to algae photosynthesis). So why does Lake Geneva still emit large amounts of CO2?

A team of UNIL scientists has just deciphered the mechanisms involved. Most of the emissions actually come from the natural erosion of rocks in the lake’s upstream basin.

When rainwater hits the rocks, it releases bicarbonate and calcium ions, which then find their way into the lake. In summer, under the effect of heat and the growth of algae – which change the PH of the water and act as a catalyst – the ions form microparticles of limestone. This is known as calcite precipitation.

This chemical reaction releases CO2, giving the lake its milky blue-green appearance in the warm season. Algae continue to absorbCO2, but this is not enough to compensate for the massive production resulting from rock erosion.

The additional emissions are therefore the result of a geological process, not just a biological one, as previously thought.

Full news release here.
– – –
Image: Lake Geneva [credit: discoverwalks.com]

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/Mjn2Zaw

October 31, 2024 at 05:39AM

Put Policy Pragmatism Over Climate Obsession

By Kristen Walker

We are continually being told that climate change is getting worse and natural disasters are becoming more frequent and intense. Neither is true.

Tropical hurricanes have battered the southeast for centuries, spanning the spectrum of severity. Category 4 and 5 storms, considered the worst of the worst, are nothing new; plenty occurred prior to the world’s so-called addiction to fossil fuels. The Labor Day Storm, considered one of Florida’s most powerful and destructive hurricanes, hit their shores in 1935. Governor DeSantis recently said, “This is something that the state has dealt with for its entire history. It’s something it will continue to deal with.”

The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) records don’t indicate a strong correlation between hurricane intensity and carbon dioxide levels. Quite a few of those tropical storms struck various parts of the U.S. well before global warming became a concern.

Nor does NOAA show that tornadoes have become more powerful. The 1925 Tri-State Tornado, with a 219-mile path across three states in just 3.5 hours, is considered among the most intense.

When last year’s Maui wildfire raged, and many were quick to point fingers at climate change, countless climatologists cautioned not to link the two. Experts had warned for years that the over-grown brush and ignoring recommended mitigation measures would likely lead to deadly infernos.

Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does not detect a strong relationship between climate change and extreme weather events.

Yet the panic-stricken rhetoric is driving energy policy with the belief that enacting legislation and overhauling how we develop and use energy will somehow alter global temperatures. Such drastic measures are affecting consumer welfare through energy shortfalls and price hikes, leaving increasing numbers of households energy poor. It has driven inflation and increased federal deficits. Adding insult to injury, these actions are having very little (if any) impact on climate.

Some researchers even assert that a few degrees of warming will benefit plant life and agriculture, and growing seasons will be longer. Renowned Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg often shares the fact that rising temperatures save lives because cold weather is more deadly.

Regardless, the U.S. has made tremendous progress in reducing its carbon footprint and curbing greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions and other pollutants over the last several decades. Much of the headway is due to operational improvements and innovation within the industry.

Despite record production levels, oil and natural gas companies continue to reduce ghg emissions through upgraded and modernized infrastructure. The increased use of natural gas, which has replaced a significant amount of coal, is responsible for nearly half the electric power sector’s emissions reductions since 2005; increasing its use has actually done more to cut emissions in the U.S. than solar and wind combined.

The Environmental Protection Agency notes that between 1970 and 2023, GDP increased 321%, vehicle miles traveled increased 194%, energy consumption increased 42%, and America’s population grew by 63%. During the same time frame, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 78%.

Energy is produced responsibly in America. Curtailing production here only spurs production in other nations like China and India, which do not maintain the same strict environmental standards as the Western World. Both developing countries are seeing record levels of coal production and are the greatest contributors to global emissions. It makes little sense to restrict oil, gas, and coal generation on our soil only to have it shift to a substantially bigger polluter. Such maneuvers do not change global energy demand; they merely relocate where the resource originates.

Letting the market work and allowing individuals to innovate have facilitated abundant and sensible energy production. The U.S. has already established rigorous environmental requirements, and the industry has shown it can succeed within reasonable confines.

Alarmists would do well to cease the catastrophizing and end-of-world fearmongering. Energy is the lifeblood of our economy. Pragmatism and common sense, rather than climate hysteria, should be driving energy policy.

Energy demand is on the rise; practical solutions are vital to meeting those needs. Rather than a one-size-fits-all mentality, we must implement energy sources that best serve circumstances and do not restrict access to reliable and affordable energy. Consumers need energy that works, is plentiful and cheap, and allows them to carry out day-to-day functions. Anything less is unacceptable. Their well-being as well as the health of the economy should not be sacrificed at the altar of climate agendas.

Kristen Walker is a policy analyst for the American Consumer Institute, a nonprofit education and research organization. For more information about the Institute, visit www.theamericanconsumer.org or follow us on Twitter @ConsumerPal.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/bqFW0pD

October 31, 2024 at 04:02AM

DEFY LABOUR’S GREEN LUNACY, SAYS DAILY MAIL ARTICLE

I seem to detect a shift in the media here in the UK, or at least in the part that has traditionally been right leaning. This article is encouraging the continuation in the extraction of fossil fuels – not something I have seen in recent times, but welcome none the less. This is an admission that these fossil fuels are essential for our survival as a modern nation, and that renewables are simply not up to the job of supplying the reliable economical power that is needed. The penny has dropped, but I doubt it will penetrate the cloth ears of our new Labour government.

 Why BP and the other oil giants should defy Labour’s green lunacy – and give Britain the power up it needs | Daily Mail Online

via climate science

https://ift.tt/cmCoaBt

October 31, 2024 at 02:57AM