Sky Blame Libyan Floods On Climate Change
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Magness
Why is a so-called Science Editor allowed to get away with writing drivel like this?
On the face of it there is a clear explanation for the tragedy in Derna.
Two dams across the river that runs through the city were too old and too weak to cope with an unusually heavy rainstorm.
But there’s another story written in the stinking channels of mud that carved through Derna‘s high-rises and low-lying neighbourhoods: that vulnerable places and their people will suffer the most through our failure to recognise and respond to the risks of a rapidly warming climate.
The floods were a direct result of the failure of the two dams up stream of Derna, which were built in the 1970s by a Yugoslavian company (hardly a recipe for success!). Experts say that when the dams broke, 30 million cubic metres of water was released into the city.
Neither dam has had any maintenance for over 20 years.
Before the dams were built, there would only have been minimal flooding of course.
The storm which triggered the collapse was merely a catalyst for a disaster that was waiting to happen, and there is not a single piece of evidence to suggest that climate change had anything to do with it at all.
Instead of printing Clarke’s pack of lies, maybe Sky should have told its viewers the real story:
Clarke goes on to claim that this is an example of how poor countries are most at risk from climate change. What the dolt really means is that they are more vulnerable to all natural disasters, weather and otherwise. That is why it is so important to make their economies richer and infrastructure stronger, by giving them the freedom to use fossil fuels.
That is why the death toll from natural disasters has shrunk to close to zero in recent years:
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Being rich is often not a good solution either, particularly when it comes to floods.
The US has had it’s share this century beginning with Hurricane Katrina. But the Hurricane missed New Orleans even though the city flooded. They had very good dikes along the river and Lake Pontchartrain but the canals connecting the two had much less substantial dikes and were poorly maintained. The dikes were not over-topped, they collapsed before reaching maximum height of the containment. Further, the people who designed the system with the canals connecting the river and lake, failed to provide a mechanism for shutting off the flow from the Lake Pontchartrain or the Mississippi.
In the spring of this year, a poor community got flooded out along the Pajaro river near Watsonville, CA. It had flooded before and they new the river containment was inadequate. However the residents were poor and the property not worth much and the high costs of construction in California made it difficult to justify the costs of improving the dikes along the river.
Has the “climate change” been demoted to injustice?
Indeed, “Climate Justice” is the new buzz phrase.
As usual, it means transferring money from the poor in rich countries, to the rich in poor countries.
The West messing around with Libya and then abandoning them is also a contributory factor.
So the dams were ‘too old and too weak’ – but climate change was why they collapsed. Idiot! Guess he never made it as an insurance assessor.
The disaster in Libya prompts the BBC and other science-deniers, to ever more blatently absurd GangGreen agit-prop.
Most (all?) major Libyan reservoir dams were inspected and safety managed by British registered All-Reservoir Panel Engineers under consultancy contracts. I worked closely with one of these Engineers in my technical management of four large dams in the UK. Although I am a retired Chartered Civil Engineer and was then a Member of the British Dams Society (and I was certainly responsible for the dams’ safety), the Panel Engineer had to work full time exclusively on the design, construction, inspection and technical management of large dams. Mostly very impressive specialists.
One of the requirements of the then current version of the Reservoirs Act was that the spillway of any Large Dam should be capable of safely passing a one in ten thousand years flood. Obviously, as Noah didn’t leave any technical data, this is tricky to calculate. But “1 in 10,000” actually signifies that spillways should be designed to withstand a flood event with (allegedly, according to some computer boffins’ models,) a 0.01 percent probability in any year. Perhaps a little more easily grasped is another requirement, that the approximate number of expected fatalities resulting from a failure of the dam from a spillway failure should be estimated.
The International Commission on Large Dams has produced a record of major failures which makes very sober reading indeed. And of course, dams can fail without a spillway being overtopped. (Piping failure being perhaps the most obvious).
In this case, I would be flabbergasted if a heavy prolonged rainfall event ( by no means especially unusual, and absolutely not equating to a one in ten thousand year probability) overtopped one dam and the resulting huge surge of water, partially exacerbated by flowing effectively through a gorge and made even more damaging by silt build up and the remains of the upper dam, literally blew the lower dam out into the Mediterranean Sea. Whilst washing away anyone nearby.
It is challenging for a fit adult to stay upright in a foot depth of fast running water. Mixed with thich mud, almost impossible.
It appears that after the “Arab Spring” and especially after the destabilisation of Libya following the West’s attacks and the deposing of the (certainly execrable) Gaddafi, the safety of dams had not been a priority. And both sides will be more than happy to blame their opponents.
But even the IPCC has recognised that flood events have not been getting greater.
To try to blame “Climate Change” for this disaster is a new low. And an insult to the dead.
Leaving aside the probable quarter of a million deaths from the collapse of Banqiao (magically kept secret for decades by the Chinese government) there has recently been the possibility of the even deadlier collapse at Mosul.
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2016/12/11/mosul-dam-collapse-will-be-worse-than-a-nuclear-bomb
Estimates of over a million potential deaths are not exaggerations. And people worry about nuclear reactors!
Still it can all be blamed on climate change.
@ Martin Brumby, excellent post, thanks.
In my experience (electrical, mechanical and civil, but not dams ), most large scale catastrophic failures are caused by incompetence, laziness and greed. Incompetence probably being at the top of the list.
Spot on Micky. And often two (or more), seemingly unrelated cock-ups, multiplying the bad end results.
An interesting approach is to be especially suspicious when some genius claims that the results of “the project” will be entirely “beneficial”. Or alternatively entirely bad. Life is seldom that clear cut.
And pretending that (for example) closing down schools and giving kids the old “Safe & Effective” will save thousands of lives, (or covering the country with whirligigs wll make energy cheaper), are a couple of classics which will cause disbelief and hilarity amongst future Schadenfreude fans.
It is the dams and the dams only which should be investigated in relation to this disaster. So called ‘Medicanes’ are not uncommon in the region and they do NOT require especially warm surface waters – unlike true tropical cyclones. In fact, most form during winter (Sept-Jan). Unless the climate propagandists can prove that the imaginary ‘climate crisis’ is increasing the DIFFERENCE between warmer surface water and colder temperatures aloft, then Medicane intensity and/or frequency cannot be formally attributed to increased surface temperature trends. I would really like to know how the first dam failed, and whether water levels reached the point where the circular spillway started operating. No MSM outlet is going to be bothered looking into this – they are not interested in investigative journalism.
https://jaimejessop.substack.com/p/derna-disaster-experts-and-msm-link
I think we would all be shocked if Sky and the BBC told the truth as we are so unused to it. Even the rag the Guardian managed a bit of truth in its articles before finally lying.
What does he suggest we do about it? Reduce CO2 emissions?
I remember the spring 1973 floods in North Africa ( and other ones) . This is dishonest, insane, stupid, climate activists reporting instead of just telling the truth.
https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/153645/
I recall that Tom Clarke used to be the chief climate change propagandist at ITV/Channel 4. I also recall that he has zero qualifications for the job as science and technology editor.
A bit like Hugh Pym and Covid19 at the BBC then?
The first reason for your CV to be put in the bin for a job in the media as ‘science editor’ is if you have sufficient knowledge about science to actually challenge scientists about their claims.
A science editor is a propagandist, not a journalist, after all.
‘the stinking channels of mud’
Must be really stinky if he can smell it from 1,700 miles away.
Or, he just made it up.
Clarke’s adolescent rant is devoid of “cause-and-effect.” Just silly innuendo.
And there was me thinking “innuendo” was the Italian for suppository. Then again maybe Clarke just pulled that line out of his backside.
+ 1 for that, Ray. !
🤣🤣
Here’s the lower dam.
https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=d8fb4cc8-b925-46db-8d52-ff6b23699757&cp=32.753161~22.631451&lvl=19&style=h&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027
Water levels were low when the satellite image was taken, so the water offtakes in the reservoir are visible (the circular trumpet and the channel nearby). Both faces of the dam are visibly broken with vegetation, which was also a factor at Whalley Bridge as many of you will recall. The evidence of lack of maintenance is right there.
Here is the upper dam:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/qp6keU3yLZKoXP9A6
Likewise, vegetation and breaks in the face.
The ‘circular trumpet’ appears to be a syphonic spillway, designed to safely and rapidly drop water levels once charged by flood water. But who knows if some genius politician decided that the water should be retained rather than ‘wasted.’
Flood water has clearly cut substantial channels on two sides of the spillway, as you suggest. And yes, it looks as if some substantial trees have been allowed to get established where there should be none.
I remember causing some upset, when referring to objections from a Council Environmental Protection Officer, because I was removing trees from a large dam crest. I pointed out to the Group Surveyor (who handled such correspondence) that there was absolutely no way that my instructions, based on Reservoir Act safety concerns, would be influenced by an ignorant bunny hugger. Then unfortunately hit “reply to all” rather than “reply”. Ah well…
These days, Mr Brumby, you don’t even need to hit ‘reply’. The keystroke hackers of GCHQ/MI5/77th Brigade/Common Purpose will be reading everything you type, even if it never gets shared beyond your computer.
It’s a very useful way to insult the media, you know. They can’t admit they hack computers, so you can call them all kinds of dreadful things and the rest of the peepshow perverts can have a really good laugh.
Poor maintenance and corruption caused by climate change.
Calling them dams is stretching the definition.
Google Maps has a before and after of the upper structure, more or less a pile of compacted stones blocking the watercourse.
50yrs old and not maintained in 20yrs due to the political strife.
The ‘circular trumpet’ appears to be a syphonic spillway, designed to safely and rapidly drop water levels once charged by flood water. But who knows if some genius politician decided that the water should be retained rather than ‘wasted.’
Flood water has clearly cut substantial channels on two sides of the spillway, as you suggest. And yes, it looks as if some substantial trees have been allowed to get established where there should be none.
I remember causing some upset, when referring to objections from a Council Environmental Protection Officer, because I was removing trees from a large dam crest. I pointed out to the Group Surveyor (who handled such correspondence) that there was absolutely no way that my instructions, based on Reservoir Act safety concerns, would be influenced by an ignorant bunny hugger. Then unfortunately hit “reply to all” rather than “reply”. Ah well…
Tom Clarke…the world renowned climate authority. He has all the qualifications needed
“Keele UniversityKeele University
Bachelor of Arts (BA), English Literature and American Studies Bachelor of Arts (BA), English Literature and American Studies
1994 – 1997”
Followed up with
“University of East Anglia
Master of Arts (MA), Theatre Directing
1997 – 1998”
https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-clark-b4917435/?originalSubdomain=uk
What I want to know is where did he get his PhD in being a self opinionated wanker? Who need experts eh?
Ray – the reality is that plenty of ‘experts’ are actually gravy train addicts who can only get another ticket through trotting out their predetermined script.
Enormous numbers of real experts have simply retired because telling the truth become a political crime, especially in academia, the MSM and in politics.
Article is written by Tom Clarke.
Wouldn’t have expected anything different.