Time Up For The Thames Barrier?
By Paul Homewood
It’s been protecting London from costly and potentially deadly flooding since 1984.
But as the Thames Barrier celebrates its 40th anniversary, scientists have warned that the £535 million structure – opened by Queen Elizabeth II on May 8, 1984 – might not provide an adequate flood defence until 2070 as planned.
Repeated closures of its 10 steel-clad gates due to wild weather from climate change will add wear and tear, prompting the need for a replacement much sooner than previously thought.
Richard Tol, a professor of economics at the University of Sussex, said using the Thames Barrier until 2070 could be ‘risky’.
‘It will need to be replaced at one point – a major infrastructure project,’ he told MailOnline.
When it opened back in 1984, the Thames Barrier was built to last until 2030.
But in 2009, the Environment Agency, which operates the Thames Barrier, decided that the structure could carry on protecting London until 2070.
However, the gates are only designed to close a maximum of 50 times per year, and experts say the number of annual closures will exceed this figure in the near future as weather becomes wilder.
According to Hannah Cloke, professor of hydrology at the University of Reading, this means a replacement barrier will need to be sorted out ‘quite soon’.
‘We’re walking into a future where we know we’ve got more rainfall coming,’ she told the Financial Times.
‘It’s definitely not looking the same as it was when the Thames Barrier was designed and built.
‘If we do need to close the Thames Barrier more than we thought we did, then it’s going to have a shorter lifespan.’
The fact that EA extended its life from 2030 to 2070 rather destroys Hannah Cloke’s arguments, even if 2070 may now be overoptimistic now.
It is not clear whether Richard Tol believes the wild weather nonsense too, but I would be disappointed if he does, because he usually separates the facts from the hype.
So let’s now deal with Hannah Cloke’s wild weather claims.
Fortunately we have rainfall data from the Radcliffe Observatory in Oxford back to 1853, which tells us exactly what has been going on in the Thames Valley.
Annual rainfall has not become more extreme, and neither has monthly rainfall:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/stationdata/oxforddata.txt
And daily rainfall has been much more extreme in the past:
https://climexp.knmi.nl/gdcnprcp.cgi?id=someone@somewhere&WMO=UK000056225&STATION=OXFORD&extraargs=
The article makes a big play about the winter of 2013/14:
But the history of the Thames Valley is littered with such events:
https://www.ecad.eu/utils/showindices.php?3v3vbv04mjqj76v3ctg57smrmt
As for sea level rise, Dr Jonathan Paul, who also believes the wild weather nonsense, still assumes that seas will rise by a meter by 2100:
The data says otherwise:
https://www.tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=170-081
But that does not stop the Mail quoting the loony from the Green Party:
The barrier will of course need to be replaced sooner or later. and given the inability of our bureaucracy to get any major infrastructure built on time and in budget, the sooner we start the better.
But the Mail is doing its readers a gross disservice by blaming it all on climate change.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Huh, well like the A9 Trunk road dualling, the SNP Western Isles Fiasco, HS2 Rail thingy, the PO Horizon affairs, …. sopping up public money with great delays in results / answers, Maybe the Kan-Do mannie can use his coffer funds …..
Blair reneged on completing the A66 dualling 20 years or so ago. The vast majority of the project was done at a cost of about £140m. The small bits left will cost £1.5 billion, and it has taken longer to put the planning application in than it took to dual the rest of it. Now it is held up by ecowarriors who object to all transport upgrades as a matter of course. Based on the A66 and HS2, I confidently predict London will do nothing about the Thames barrier until it is too late.
The logic in the article makes little sense. The primary purpose of the Thames Barrier is to protect against storm surges moving *up* the Thames from the North Sea due to a combination of high tide and easterly winds. It has no effect on high water levels caused by heavy rainfall in the Thames catchment area. The coincidence of high water flows moving downstream and storm surges worsens the risk, but the key variable is storm surges. Talking about rainfall, cloudbursts and similar weather variables is just irrelevant.
If somebody is going to claim that climate change will make all of this worse, they need far more accurate climate models than are currently available. Storm and wind forecasts from current models are close to being pure random variables. What this kind of article show is that the people they talk to are way outside their areas of knowledge and technical competence.
Yes, storm surges are issue, mostly northerlies I think funneling water down the North Sea causing flooding on both coasts. In 1953 at least 1,800 people died in Netherlands and 300 in England (200+ in storms at sea). The 60th anniversary flood of 6 December 2013 came half way up my garden from Stonebridge Pond (at the top of Faversham Creek). A lot of stuff online quotes the surge above average sea level (Ordnance Datum) which is obvious nonsense with tidal ranges of 6.3m at Sheerness. 2013 was 1.0m above predicted (thank goodness) at 7.0m. 1.0m above the highest predicted tide of 6.34m would have been swirling round my kitchen. The low pressure of a cyclone raises levels too of course. Top tip, if the level at Sheerness is 6.4m or above don’t drive your BEV through the flood along North Lane by S&N brewery. If you do don’t park it outside my house later (assuming you make it through the salt water).
https://www.environmentandsociety.org/arcadia/north-sea-flood-1953
https://ntslf.org/tgi/portinfo?port=Sheerness
I share your frustration but,
“If somebody is going to claim that climate change will make all of this worse, they need far more accurate climate models than are currently available”.
No. They need to do what Paul does and LOOK AT THE DATA. Models are a ruddy fiction and those from the Klymutt Fiction factory are about as close to reality as anything coming out of a politician’s mouth. As long as they continue the fraudulent claim that CO2 is some bizarre temperature control knob their models will never EVER work. There exists no empirical data to support the Arts degreed planet savers claims against CO2. No empirical data means no science. There is empirical data based physics and geological history which refute the claim. Strange do you not think that this information is ignored by the frontmen of the Climate Industrial Scam. Also look who they are. Nobel winning scientists? No………Al Gore, Weird Greta and not very good actors and associated celebrities ( my view). On that point where are the scientists so other scientists can question them as is the case in any scientific field (except Klymutt) where credibility is everything.
A model is an entity created in the absence of date (reality) in an attempt to approximate it. A model does not produce empirical data and should under no circumstance be used in place of empirical data. Strange but that is EXACTLY what is happening today.
“What this kind of article show is that the people they talk to are way outside their areas of knowledge and technical competence”.
These people are shamans or loony tunes at worst. Those who may have once had scientific integrity have thrown it away in return for easy money. The “scientists” mentioned clearly are incompetent because empirical data exists which refute their grant renewal claims. That each and every one of them ignore this data needs to be called out and yes they need to be shamed.
The whole of scientific research has been distorted and frankly compromised by a political scam of historical proportions. That so many “scientists” are willing to deny science in return for their 30 pieces of silver simple makes me ashamed.
Heavy rain will lead to more water flowing down the Thames. Therefore raising the barrier will trap this water and make flooding worse. Even if, which seems highly unlikely, CO2 emissions leads to an increase in maximum flow levels in the Thames this won’t affect the number of times the barrier has to be raised or it’s operational life. The only conclusion is that Richard Tol is talking out of his arse to try and push an agenda.
What type of meter is the Baroness using? Gas, Electricity or Smart?
But the weather will not become wilder so there is no need to do anything.
If it is designed to close 50 times a year but has only closed 221 times in 40 years, with regular maintenance it see out this century and well into the next.
Regarding Met Office data, I no longer trust anything they claim. Having got the list of weather stations by CIMO Classification under FOI I was attempting to use their data from long term Class 1 stations only to see what trend only those stations indicated.
I came across Hastings which has been operational since 1934. The Met Office own inspection declares this to be Class 1. Well here it is (using the exact co-ordinates supplied by the CEDA Midas stations data log and it is even annotated on google maps..
https://www.google.com/maps/place/50%C2%B051'20.8%22N+0%C2%B034'11.8%22E/@50.8558521,0.5698106,86m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d50.85578!4d0.56993?entry=ttu
That is what the Met Office feels meets Class 1 (reality dictates it is Class 5) so quite clearly they are not following any guidelines whatsoever.
For clarity these are some of the Class 1 parameters.
(c) Measurement point situated:
(i) At more than 100 m from heat sources or reflective surfaces (buildings, concrete
surfaces, car parks, etc.);
(ii) At more than 100 m from an expanse of water (unless significant of the region);
(iii) Away from all projected shade when the sun is higher than 5°.
Decide for yourself!
Nice one, Ray!
A lot of ifs and buts in that article.
I imagine one of mr P’s missiles might prove more damaging to Londonistan.
Related story about flood defences – if somebody could forward to Paul?
A friend of mine in the North West sent me this story:
https://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/24243816.call-investigation-west-kirby-sea-wall-spectacularly-fails/
A £20 million pound folly to fight the ‘climate emergency’ as declared by the council.
I would also draw readers attention to a following article which contains this image:
https://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/24243199.owner-flooded-west-kirby-cafe-counts-cost-sea-wall-fails/
You will note how the storm is long gone, the sea has subsided, and the flood wall is doing an excellent job of keeping the road flooded!
CK
“The flooding forced staff at Tanskeys Bistro to be evacuated by lifeboat, …”
With the first appearance of water in the street, I would have headed out the back door to a pub on higher ground. 🙂
Ms Jones says there are 7m of ice melting somewhere, does she expect this will all head up the Thames?
Yes, it’s bought a first-class express nonstop ticket from Greenland to London !!
Baroness Jenny Jones Bsc can’t even read let alone understand basic measurements, so thinks a rise of around 4 inches (10 centimeters) by 2100 [ IPCC figures ] is a problem … Stupid cow
I thought you would enjoy debunking that one.
But Paul you should know by now that ‘facts’ are out. Modeled ‘narrative’ is in. So if the models say that its going to happen then that is all that counts as its part of the ‘narrative’.
I wish I was joking or exaggerating, but I am not.
This doesn’t pass the basic primary school reading comprehension test. It appears just from the info provided in the article the Thames Barrier was built to last until 2030. In 2009 I suspect the question of what happens after 2030 came up it was somehow given a 40 year extension to dump the can down the road.
Is there a report by structural & other relevant engineers looking at the viability of a 40 year extension?
If this truly is a problem it seems like another case of poor infrastructure planning, potential negligence and no accountability but lets blame climate change.
If you read the article it states that it was designed to closed a maximum of 50 times per year. So from 1984 to 2030 it should be capable of 2300 closures.
it has actually only closed 211 times, so it should have 2089 closures in the bank to take it from now to 2070.
Hmmmm.
a. The weather is not getting wilder, as the tornado and hurricane records attest. Strong tornadoes have been reducing for 70 years, while hurricanes have been reducing for 120 years. See NOAA data, and Chand et al paper.
A sluice gate should be able to open and close once a day. What did they make it of – plastic?
Sea levels are only rising in the estuary, because the land is sinking due to isostatic rebound after the last ice age.
Ralph
Hmmmm.
a. The weather is not getting wilder, as the tornado and hurricane records attest. Strong tornadoes have been reducing for 70 years, while hurricanes have been reducing for 120 years. See NOAA data, and Chand et al paper.
A sluice gate should be able to open and close once a day. What did they make it of – plastic?
Sea levels are only rising in the estuary, because the land is sinking due to isostatic rebound after the last ice age.
Ralph
A lot of “could”, “might” “projections” and such. So not happening yet.
Well, I hate to say it.
But there are those who could contain their grief, if all one could see of The Great Wen was bubbles rising from the depths.
It would help those more charitable folk, with a sunnier appraisal of the “threat”; if there was some tiny possibility that the doomsaying “scientists” had a vestige of “skin in the game” and would be held to account for their incompetence and venality.
But one is strongly reminded of our old chum Professor Pantsdown Neil Ferguson, who, contemplating the tyranny of “Lockdowns” in an alleged Democracy, had a moment of Epiphany, realising that “we could get away with it!”
How right he was! The only recorded time he has been “right” about anything in his entire, shameful (if well renumerated) career.
The Thames is a tidal river. London’s natural state is wetland. Until Victorian times it was largely marshland with patches of dry, raised ground – islets. This is why so many places bordering the Thames’s end in -ea or -ey, Chelsea, Putney, or -ait like Ravens ait from Saxon meaning islet.
What is now Strand was at river level – strand is Saxon for beach – until it was raised.
London is in a basin and has been below or at sea-level for about 5 000 years. The southern part of the island is sinking and has been for some time.
The Thames Barrier was built to protect London from tidal surges caused by high tides – the Moon – or high winds at sea.
The effects from climate change are slow, marginal, over thousands of years. It took about 6 000 years to submerge Doggerland – the land bridge between Britain and the Continent – and make Britain an island.
To be fair, London could do with a reset
Fear not, sea levels are historically low
https://notrickszone.com/2024/05/06/newly-discovered-90000-year-old-human-footprints-reveal-how-much-higher-sea-levels-used-to-be/
Stating the obvious, but barriers don’t make water disappear. If there’s a bigger barrier, more water will go somewhere else when it’s raised.
There is no evidence that weather is becoming wilder, is there? I recall the IPCC have reported that extreme weather events were probably becoming milder and no more frequent. Is that right? Someone should tell the expert academic. At least they didn’t claim an acceleration in SLR. 3mm pa won’t do it. Seems it is a no news story that the whole thing will be knackered by 2070 and we need to plan Thames barrier 2.0, a real piece of climate adaption for the people of the UK. Cancel CO2 CCS and use the money usefully here, where the benefit is real?
When suggesting adaption is better value for money than “climate action” to “decarbomise” with no known measurable benefits, I like to use this picture. This from my U3A Talks.
More than a thousand words, right?
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/awkdlv8syftyl1w4475nk/Thames-Barrier-slide.png?rlkey=32swfuhphu7iyr3fm4xfaitjb&dl=0
When a professor said something years ago, people thought: let us listen to this, as this person is a true independent expert. Now, the response is: “Is this person serious and does he have a clue what he is talking about”. Sad, but true. Too many professors and lords at great cost to us all: answer is easy…..
What if, in 1984, the government said, “Y’all move back from the river a bit?”
It isn’t the rainfall records in the Thames Valley that matter for the Thames Barrier – it’s the tidal gauge records for the Estuary from places like Southend and Sheerness. Sadly, digital versions of these records are not easily available – the National Oceanographic system seems designed to make access as hard as possible.
Paul has already inclded the tide gauge data for Southend.
Let’s start calling it Global Warmlng as we did before the 1980s ‘hiatus’. One and a bit degrees a century is really calming.