Berberis Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 The pumps failed due to lack of power as the NEDL substation on Skeldergate failed. As a result the Foss barrier had to be raised which meant that the pump house was inundated, and then there was further damage from the riverwater pouring in which needed repair. Parts have been supplied to fix that problem, some coming in by Chinook, and the power station has been sealed and is being routed around. The reason I know this is I've been ferrying NEDL about in my landrover as part of the civil contingencies that are in place for such events. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 10:41 ---------- York does, if you go in the Kings arms you can see the flood record painted on the wall. Leeds flooding would have been prevented by the defences that were planned, and then cancelled. I notice that the Somerset Levels, all good blue heartlands got shedloads of cash and personal attention to solve the problem for forty - yes just forty houses that were flooded. If that money had been spent on Leeds and the villages up the Calder, then we wouldn't have had 2000 homes flooded out. Yorks 500 nice twee middle class houses are photogenic and get all the news, but there were twice that in Leeds alone got flooded. But they are mainly Asians so they are not deserving of sympathy as far as the BBC are concerned... You may have more information but thats not what is being reported today. They say the barrier was opened on purpose as they feared they would not be able to open it if the substation flooded. This is different to the BBC reporting today that the pumps failed when they tried to use them and the army came in and fixed them. I may well be wrong, but this is what has been reported also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 Well for a start, councils failing to clean the drains. The on outside my house has been blocked for years, despite SCC stating they were going to clean all drains after the flood in 2007. I dont think that is a big issue; how many emails or complaints have you sent to the council? You think its a problem, I dont, so its your issue to highlight to the council. Most flooding came 2/3 days after the rainfall, that is because it gradually drains into the rivers, not a gully drain issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubaidani13 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Odd as they reported today on the BBC that it was a faulty part of the pumps that made them fail and once they got the parts in, the pumps worked and started to lower the water. If it was a flooded power supply, the pumps would not have worked. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 10:32 ---------- I think helping to immunise babies from killer diseases is more important than preventing a relative handful of people from having to redecorate their first front rooms. its a pity that whoever designed the pumps didnt design it so the control & power box was waterproof? thats what failed. as for immunising babies i agree it is important and the government of the country where they live should be doing it not our taxpayers?! i would bet that your attitude would be different if you were in a flooded area and your front room was damaged year after year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 The York flood was caused by faulty pumps. Why have they not been services or tested? Another council cutting corners maybe? The Environment Agency said that if the barrier were not lifted, it could have jammed in the closed position, causing even worse flooding. Not sure how true that is; but the amount of water, I think that there would have been flooding, with or without the barrier; the Environment Agency work in the best interests of the people, they wouldnt lie, would they Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 You may have more information but thats not what is being reported today. They say the barrier was opened on purpose as they feared they would not be able to open it if the substation flooded. This is different to the BBC reporting today that the pumps failed when they tried to use them and the army came in and fixed them. I may well be wrong, but this is what has been reported also. If the BBC are reporting that it's completely half cocked. The Foss barrier is designed to stop the main river Ouse flooding back up the Foss waterway. Trouble is when you shut it - you dam the Foss so it fills up.... The pumps are used to lift the entire flow of the Foss over the barrier and into the Ouse where it can drain away. This protects the east side of the city. If the power fails then they barrier fails in the shut position and the flooding will be catastrophic as the river Foss is dammed, so they have to raise the barrier. This gives short term flooding from the Ouse as it surges up stream but it's not as bad as the longer term would be with a stuck barrier. When the barrier was lifted, floodwater damaged the pumps, but they were down because the power was off, as the environment agency were reporting - its their pumping station after all.. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 11:08 ---------- The Environment Agency said that if the barrier were not lifted, it could have jammed in the closed position, causing even worse flooding. Not sure how true that is; but the amount of water, I think that there would have been flooding, with or without the barrier; the Environment Agency work in the best interests of the people, they wouldnt lie, would they The Foss barrier is very effective when it works. 2012 it kept all of the east side dry and also in 2000 it worked too, these were the highest events ever. If it could have been left closed this time, which never got as high as the 2000 level then most of the property flooding in York would have been avoided. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 11:10 ---------- its a pity that whoever designed the pumps didnt design it so the control & power box was waterproof? thats what failed. Not the responsibility of the pumps designer though! The substation belonging to NEDL failed, not the pumps and it wasn't possible for whatever reason to reroute power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 I understand why the government is getting a bit of stick but are they supposed to build flood defences for things that haven't happened and if it was that obvious why hasn't it been done years before? Or has the risk of flooding in the UK jumped up THAT much in the past 5 years. They have cut money to the agency that deals with flooding; at a time when predictions are for more extreme weather and more precipitation. Some would say that we have already had more flooding in recent years, spending should have been doubled years ago, but it has been cut. Labour are to blame too. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 11:14 ---------- The Foss barrier is designed to stop the main river Ouse flooding back up the Foss waterway. Trouble is when you shut it - you dam the Foss so it fills up.... The pumps are used to lift the entire flow of the Foss over the barrier and into the Ouse where it can drain away. This protects the east side of the city. Its a big deal then, a **** up, someone needs to resign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 The EA spokesman couldn't have been clearer. Current measures aren't working as well as they could and we need to rethink. As unbeliever pointed out that does not necessarily mean throwing ever more cash at building defences. Doing that is the easy way out and you can see the results in Cameron's responses where he doesn't comprehend that the fact he may have spent more money doesn't make it OK when the money has been spent on the wrong things in the wrong places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 As unbeliever pointed out that does not necessarily mean throwing ever more cash at building defences. I am sure some councillors and MPs will get behind schemes to build more defenses, its the easiest way, letting some land flood is what we used to do. Which bits(large) of land can we allow to flood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 They have cut money to the agency that deals with flooding; at a time when predictions are for more extreme weather and more precipitation. Some would say that we have already had more flooding in recent years, spending should have been doubled years ago, but it has been cut. Labour are to blame too. ---------- Post added 29-12-2015 at 11:14 ---------- Its a big deal then, a **** up, someone needs to resign? Oh yes, the old someone's to blame game..... No-one needs to resign. It's not possible to build a completely robust system at sensible prices. That's like saying you should resign if your minibus got a flat tyre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Politics will ensure that we'll chuck loads of money to ensure that it will never flood as badly in the places that it has. Then next year somewhere else will flood, and we'll throw a load of money ensuring that it'll not fold as badly there again and so on. This seems to be the nature of floods and politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now