The police would be not doing their duty if they did not check out several youths sitting on a bench outside a bakery in the Blue Mountains town of Glenbrook very late at night. As it happened, they were waiting to be picked up and taken home by the sister of one of the group who had been attending a local house party.
One young man was actually seventeen, but looked more like twelve or thirteen at the time. He took offence at the police approach and was heard to respond with " F--- off, dog. C---. " He was moderately affected by alcohol and in response the cop grabbed him by his shirt front and swung him around, causing him to drop heavily to the ground.
The teen was arrested and charged with assault, resisting arrest, using offensive language in public and failing to obey a move on directive. A children's court magistrate found the offensive language charge proven, but used his power to dismiss all the other charges. Now aged twenty-one this man sued the state for assault and battery, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. He claimed to have felt " humiliated, embarrassed and scared " by the arrest.
A District Court judge handed down a $124,000 judgement against the state. This consisted of $25,000 for assault and battery, $30,000 for false imprisonment and $45,000 for malicious prosecution - plus interest. The judge commented that the police officer was insulted by this personal and professional slight and over reacted by arresting the youth.
A fair minded person would concede that the police had every right to question youths lingering late at night to determine if they were planning a break-in or doing public damage. An explanation that they were waiting for the arrival of a lift home would have amicably settled the matter. Instead, this youth gratuitously insulted the officers profession and personally added an epithet that most people would consider very insulting.
The sticking point seems to have been the officer using force to respond to that insult. Surely the arrest should have been justified on that " using offensive language in public " charge. The fact that a Children's Court magistrate chose to drop the other charges and a District Court judge awarded $124,000 from the public purse sends a message that the police can be verbally insulted with impunity.
Police officers are also " people " and they have just as much right to civil rights as the rest of the community. The outcome from this case will probably see police taunted with insults that their superiors will demand they ignore. That is almost certain to result in aggressive police using the " bif " if they think they can get away with it.
In this instance, it seems that the courts have over played their power of discretion. The police have a right to a degree of respect. That young man was improperly rewarded.
Tuesday, 7 August 2018
Monday, 6 August 2018
The Ever Present Danger !
At 2 am on January 7, Evie Amiti, a 26 year old Transgender woman who used to be a drummer in a band walked into a Sydney 7-Eleven with a two kilogram axe on her shoulder and a 18 cm kitchen knife tucked into the back pocket of her jeans.
She circled the merchandise once and stopped behind the two other customers. One was a man buying a meat pie after a night out and the other a woman in need of coffee before catching an early flight. Without warning she swung the axe and hit the man in the face, caving in his nasal cavity and sending him to the floor in a flood of blood. Then she hit the woman on the back of the head, fracturing her skull. Prior to her trip to the 7-Eleven she had posted a rant on Facebook declaring " Humans are only able to destroy, to hate - and that is what I will do ".
That might have ended very differently. Had the police arrived before her exit they would have demanded she drop the axe and the knife and if she refused and they felt threatened they would have shot her dead. Police are trained to shoot to kill, not to wound.
When the police did arrive they tracked her to her home and arrested her. She was charged with " wounding with intent to murder " and this week a jury of eight men and four women found her guilty. She had defended the charge on the grounds that she was mentally ill and that her mental illness was accelerated by drugs and alcohol. In September, a judge will hand down the sentence that she will serve for this crime.
This was an unprovoked and heinous crime. A man will need his face rebuilt and have a degree of disfiguration and the woman spent a long time in hospital and missed her flight. The decision made by those jurors ensures that this crime will result in a prison sentence and while in jail the offender will be under medical supervision, and the warders will ensure that she takes whatever anti-psychotic drugs that are prescribed.
She will probably be a model prisoner, and that will be taken into account by the parole board. It is likely that in a very few years she is back on the streets of Sydney, and there is no guarantee she will continue to take the medication that ensures the publics safety. Had the jurors accepted that insanity defence she would have been placed under medical supervision - and in todays world that means sent to the secure ward of a public hospital.
That would probably mean quicker release than from jail. Hospitals are busy places with pressure to recycle beds. Anti-psychotic drugs quickly bring stability, but that problem of continuing medication after release seems to be a predictable cause of continuing crime by the same offenders.
We are seeing medical miracles from the drug industry and one aspect has been the development of slow release medication that can be implanted. It would be helpful if anti-psychotic drugs could be adapted to this form. That could deliver an interesting option for judges to deliver when pondering sentencing.
In some instances there would be a need for such drugs to be administered for life, and that would be included in release options. Failure to report for slow release renewal would bring an arrest order and hospital presentation for that to occur. It seems quite obvious that relying on the mentally impaired to continue taking stabilizing medication is simply putting the public at risk !
She circled the merchandise once and stopped behind the two other customers. One was a man buying a meat pie after a night out and the other a woman in need of coffee before catching an early flight. Without warning she swung the axe and hit the man in the face, caving in his nasal cavity and sending him to the floor in a flood of blood. Then she hit the woman on the back of the head, fracturing her skull. Prior to her trip to the 7-Eleven she had posted a rant on Facebook declaring " Humans are only able to destroy, to hate - and that is what I will do ".
That might have ended very differently. Had the police arrived before her exit they would have demanded she drop the axe and the knife and if she refused and they felt threatened they would have shot her dead. Police are trained to shoot to kill, not to wound.
When the police did arrive they tracked her to her home and arrested her. She was charged with " wounding with intent to murder " and this week a jury of eight men and four women found her guilty. She had defended the charge on the grounds that she was mentally ill and that her mental illness was accelerated by drugs and alcohol. In September, a judge will hand down the sentence that she will serve for this crime.
This was an unprovoked and heinous crime. A man will need his face rebuilt and have a degree of disfiguration and the woman spent a long time in hospital and missed her flight. The decision made by those jurors ensures that this crime will result in a prison sentence and while in jail the offender will be under medical supervision, and the warders will ensure that she takes whatever anti-psychotic drugs that are prescribed.
She will probably be a model prisoner, and that will be taken into account by the parole board. It is likely that in a very few years she is back on the streets of Sydney, and there is no guarantee she will continue to take the medication that ensures the publics safety. Had the jurors accepted that insanity defence she would have been placed under medical supervision - and in todays world that means sent to the secure ward of a public hospital.
That would probably mean quicker release than from jail. Hospitals are busy places with pressure to recycle beds. Anti-psychotic drugs quickly bring stability, but that problem of continuing medication after release seems to be a predictable cause of continuing crime by the same offenders.
We are seeing medical miracles from the drug industry and one aspect has been the development of slow release medication that can be implanted. It would be helpful if anti-psychotic drugs could be adapted to this form. That could deliver an interesting option for judges to deliver when pondering sentencing.
In some instances there would be a need for such drugs to be administered for life, and that would be included in release options. Failure to report for slow release renewal would bring an arrest order and hospital presentation for that to occur. It seems quite obvious that relying on the mentally impaired to continue taking stabilizing medication is simply putting the public at risk !
Sunday, 5 August 2018
Recycling Plastic Bags !
People driving on a 250 metre long section of the old Princes Highway in Engadine may be travelling on the answer to what we are going to do with the avalanche of plastic that is fast filling our landfills. This week that road section was resurfaced with what to the eye of motorists looks like the conventional bitumen mix that we use on blacktops.
In fact that short length of road disposed on 176,000 plastic bags, 55,500 glass bottles and toner from 3960 printer cartridges - all mixed with asphalt to form a road surface which last sixty-five percent longer that the previous bitumen mix. The boffins who created this idea claim that it delivers a better heavy traffic tread and costs only marginally more than the old mix used for past decades.
The timing of this innovation is fortuitous. We used to export much of our plastic waste to China but that country no longer takes such imports. That puts our household recycling industry at risk and leaves little other option than landfill disposal. Plastiphalt - as this road surface is named - is the answer we have dreamed of. The ability to convert plastic waste into a useful product and recycle it here in Australia.
Recycled plastic already has some uses here but the industry scale is not enough to put a dent in the mass being sorted through the household recycling bin system. Road resurfacing is the big industry that can make the difference and it introduces economy of scale. Once the amount being processed becomes large the price for the finished product falls precipitously. We could also be looking at export opportunities.
The Australian companies that have developed this method claim it is an improved process on a similar venture in India where 10,000 kilometres of road has been surfaced with plastic infused bitumen. The Australian operation is technically complex and it prevents the formation of microbeads which pollute waterways and poison marine life. The water runoff from Plastiphalt is free of that problem.
The fact that plastic waste can now be refined and turned into pellets that reinforce bitumen as a road surface opens the door to inventive minds. What other uses can it be turned to ? Plastic was initially formed from a raw material and this process simply turns it into another newer raw material. The genius that is the human mind has measured progress over the centuries by creating new ideas and these recycled pellets await their turn to mesh with society's need.
Fame and fortune are the rewards waiting for the minds that successfully turn what we term " trash " into " treasure " !
In fact that short length of road disposed on 176,000 plastic bags, 55,500 glass bottles and toner from 3960 printer cartridges - all mixed with asphalt to form a road surface which last sixty-five percent longer that the previous bitumen mix. The boffins who created this idea claim that it delivers a better heavy traffic tread and costs only marginally more than the old mix used for past decades.
The timing of this innovation is fortuitous. We used to export much of our plastic waste to China but that country no longer takes such imports. That puts our household recycling industry at risk and leaves little other option than landfill disposal. Plastiphalt - as this road surface is named - is the answer we have dreamed of. The ability to convert plastic waste into a useful product and recycle it here in Australia.
Recycled plastic already has some uses here but the industry scale is not enough to put a dent in the mass being sorted through the household recycling bin system. Road resurfacing is the big industry that can make the difference and it introduces economy of scale. Once the amount being processed becomes large the price for the finished product falls precipitously. We could also be looking at export opportunities.
The Australian companies that have developed this method claim it is an improved process on a similar venture in India where 10,000 kilometres of road has been surfaced with plastic infused bitumen. The Australian operation is technically complex and it prevents the formation of microbeads which pollute waterways and poison marine life. The water runoff from Plastiphalt is free of that problem.
The fact that plastic waste can now be refined and turned into pellets that reinforce bitumen as a road surface opens the door to inventive minds. What other uses can it be turned to ? Plastic was initially formed from a raw material and this process simply turns it into another newer raw material. The genius that is the human mind has measured progress over the centuries by creating new ideas and these recycled pellets await their turn to mesh with society's need.
Fame and fortune are the rewards waiting for the minds that successfully turn what we term " trash " into " treasure " !
Saturday, 4 August 2018
" Off the Plan " Boondoggle !
When unit prices were rising on an almost weekly basis the best way for price relief seemed to be to buy into a new building under construction on an " off the plan " basis. It offered price certainty and there was the expectation of a completion date when the contract was signed.
As many people discovered, the building that finally emerged often had little relation to the plan and illustration contained in the promotional brochures. More floors may have been added and the unit plans changed to delete a bedroom or face the view in an entirely different direction, and often the quality would not meet the specifications advertised.
The developer was quite happy to cancel the sale and return the deposit. The rising price of units meant that they could be put back on the market at a higher price and the loser was the patient buyer, deprived of the home that was within their financial reach when they were thrust back into the ever rising price bubble. In contrast, the developer achieved a profit boost.The state government stepped in to end this boondoggle. In 2015 it passed legislation to stop developers cancelling contracts to take advantage of upward price movements. It's aim was to prevent developers creating false or misleading work delays to take the completion date beyond the rescission clause contained in off the plan contracts.
Now a case is before the courts and permission is sought to rescind the sales contracts of twelve buyers in a sixteen unit block in a fashionable suburb. The developer contends that after the construction started the builder went into liquidation and he was unable to find a suitable replacement or raise any more finance. The court heard that one purchaser was told the apartments may shrink from sixty five square metres to forty five square metres and each have a smaller balcony.. Others were offered their deposit back because the building had become " unviable ".
Those off the plan buyers saw it differently. They contend they were not only kept uninformed about the situation they were deliberately misinformed. and this was intended to cause uncertainty in the hope that they might choose to rescind their contracts voluntarily. The site has since been sold and the new owner is described as a " commercial pirate " who decided that he wants more money and embarked on a " bizarre and extraordinary " series of correspondence to those holding contracts.
This is fast becoming a totally untenable situation. If the court favours the buyers it seems unlikely that the finished apartments will bear much resemblance to the plan on which the buying decisions were made. This could easily descend into endless litigation to try and force an unwilling builder to either compensate or lower the price charged to be more in accordance with what was delivered.
It is clear that the government needs to go back to the drawing board and design new legislation to keep " off the plan " contracts on track - and on time. The easing of home and unit prices now taking place is unlikely to eliminate this scare and delay tactic to extract additional profit by artificially delaying new building completion. These contracts need to be legally enforceable !
As many people discovered, the building that finally emerged often had little relation to the plan and illustration contained in the promotional brochures. More floors may have been added and the unit plans changed to delete a bedroom or face the view in an entirely different direction, and often the quality would not meet the specifications advertised.
The developer was quite happy to cancel the sale and return the deposit. The rising price of units meant that they could be put back on the market at a higher price and the loser was the patient buyer, deprived of the home that was within their financial reach when they were thrust back into the ever rising price bubble. In contrast, the developer achieved a profit boost.The state government stepped in to end this boondoggle. In 2015 it passed legislation to stop developers cancelling contracts to take advantage of upward price movements. It's aim was to prevent developers creating false or misleading work delays to take the completion date beyond the rescission clause contained in off the plan contracts.
Now a case is before the courts and permission is sought to rescind the sales contracts of twelve buyers in a sixteen unit block in a fashionable suburb. The developer contends that after the construction started the builder went into liquidation and he was unable to find a suitable replacement or raise any more finance. The court heard that one purchaser was told the apartments may shrink from sixty five square metres to forty five square metres and each have a smaller balcony.. Others were offered their deposit back because the building had become " unviable ".
Those off the plan buyers saw it differently. They contend they were not only kept uninformed about the situation they were deliberately misinformed. and this was intended to cause uncertainty in the hope that they might choose to rescind their contracts voluntarily. The site has since been sold and the new owner is described as a " commercial pirate " who decided that he wants more money and embarked on a " bizarre and extraordinary " series of correspondence to those holding contracts.
This is fast becoming a totally untenable situation. If the court favours the buyers it seems unlikely that the finished apartments will bear much resemblance to the plan on which the buying decisions were made. This could easily descend into endless litigation to try and force an unwilling builder to either compensate or lower the price charged to be more in accordance with what was delivered.
It is clear that the government needs to go back to the drawing board and design new legislation to keep " off the plan " contracts on track - and on time. The easing of home and unit prices now taking place is unlikely to eliminate this scare and delay tactic to extract additional profit by artificially delaying new building completion. These contracts need to be legally enforceable !
Friday, 3 August 2018
Plastic Bag Surrender !
It was a noble aim to rid the planet of those pernicious plastic bags that are fouling the ocean and killing wildlife. The aim was to train the public to bring a re-useable bag with them when they went shopping and so the duopoly which controls the greatest share of the grocery market announced the end of free plastic bags at their checkouts.
Woolworths went first with that ban coming into place in June, followed by Coles on July 1. Bewildered customers were offered a bigger and stronger plastic bag to contain their shopping at a cost of fifteen cents each. Many simply rebelled and Woolworths began giving away those fifteen cent bags " until the concept of re-useable bags takes hold ". By the start of August, Coles was following suit.
Strangely, that is the retail experience here in New South Wales. Single use plastic bags are banned by legislation in Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, ACT and NT. Victoria plans to implement a ban by 2019 and that leaves this state as the only one to leaving plastic bag removal a voluntary issue.
It really boils down to the amazing power of Sydney shoppers to dictate their wishes to the mandarins who head the Woolworths and Coles duopoly. They nervously watch their bottom lines and at the first sign of a shopper revolt hoist the white flag and surrender. This was despite the month of June seeing an amazing number of people bringing sturdy bags to the shops and adopting the re-useable bag principle.
Unless the New South Wales government bites the cherry and brings in a statutory ban it is likely that those fifteen cent bags will simply replace those single use bags and get absorbed into the grocery cost structure. Add a few cents here and there to items on the family grocery shopping list and that added cost is covered.
Some may even argue that it solves the problem because the replacement bags are a brighter colour and avoid the appearance of jellyfish in water, which was a problem with sea animals mistaking single use bags for food. Hopefully, these more expensive bags are biodegradable and will not take centuries to rot away in landfills.
The fact that the single use plastic bag was voluntary in this state put Coles and Woolworths at a big disadvantage. All their smaller competitors avoided taking the plunge and they were left to take the blame from their customers. The media gleefully recorded customer outrage at the checkouts and it is likely that the public would have fallen into line had the bag withdrawal been allowed to continue a little longer, as it has in other states.
It is unlikely that Coles and Woolworths will try again in this state without a legislative ban. That bigger, brighter, sturdier bag looks likely to be permanently accepted as a necessity of doing grocery business, and there is absolutely no incentive for the retailers of other commodities to take up the challenge. The danger is that pressure will build in the other states to drop the ban in the interest of uniformity.
Woolworths went first with that ban coming into place in June, followed by Coles on July 1. Bewildered customers were offered a bigger and stronger plastic bag to contain their shopping at a cost of fifteen cents each. Many simply rebelled and Woolworths began giving away those fifteen cent bags " until the concept of re-useable bags takes hold ". By the start of August, Coles was following suit.
Strangely, that is the retail experience here in New South Wales. Single use plastic bags are banned by legislation in Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, ACT and NT. Victoria plans to implement a ban by 2019 and that leaves this state as the only one to leaving plastic bag removal a voluntary issue.
It really boils down to the amazing power of Sydney shoppers to dictate their wishes to the mandarins who head the Woolworths and Coles duopoly. They nervously watch their bottom lines and at the first sign of a shopper revolt hoist the white flag and surrender. This was despite the month of June seeing an amazing number of people bringing sturdy bags to the shops and adopting the re-useable bag principle.
Unless the New South Wales government bites the cherry and brings in a statutory ban it is likely that those fifteen cent bags will simply replace those single use bags and get absorbed into the grocery cost structure. Add a few cents here and there to items on the family grocery shopping list and that added cost is covered.
Some may even argue that it solves the problem because the replacement bags are a brighter colour and avoid the appearance of jellyfish in water, which was a problem with sea animals mistaking single use bags for food. Hopefully, these more expensive bags are biodegradable and will not take centuries to rot away in landfills.
The fact that the single use plastic bag was voluntary in this state put Coles and Woolworths at a big disadvantage. All their smaller competitors avoided taking the plunge and they were left to take the blame from their customers. The media gleefully recorded customer outrage at the checkouts and it is likely that the public would have fallen into line had the bag withdrawal been allowed to continue a little longer, as it has in other states.
It is unlikely that Coles and Woolworths will try again in this state without a legislative ban. That bigger, brighter, sturdier bag looks likely to be permanently accepted as a necessity of doing grocery business, and there is absolutely no incentive for the retailers of other commodities to take up the challenge. The danger is that pressure will build in the other states to drop the ban in the interest of uniformity.
Thursday, 2 August 2018
A New Banking Code !
That Banking Royal Commission certainly dragged the banks - kicking and screaming - into the public media forum and revealed the irregularities that have plagued customers for years. Bank chiefs have vowed the industry will be under new obligations to be more ethical and customer focussed as part of a revamped code of conduct.
It is promised that from 2019 it will be far easier to cancel credit cards, and customers will get a warning letter when any interest free periods are due to expire. This is to be the start of a more open regime with a more sustainable banking industry. There will be stronger protection for customers who act as guarantors on loans - and they will be given a three day cooling off period.
This revised code of conduct will be mandatory for retail banks that are members of the Australian Bankers Association and there will be a stronger commitment to ethical behaviour. Customers will get better information about changes to their accounts and there will be delays in offering add on insurance products. Contracts for business loans will have fewer conditions to be met. In the past, banks had been too quick to call in loans to small business.
This banking revision has come at a critical time for the agricultural industry. Australia is suffering the worst drought in recorded history and it is quite possible that it may extend well into next year. In the past the banks took a heavy handed approach. They often downgraded the value of the property because of the drought and this brought the risk ratio of the loan into negative territory. As a result, farmers were forced off their land and the property sold.
It is important that the people who manage rural banking have at least a working knowledge of the agricultural industry. Farming strategy is very different from merchant banking and banks need to be very selective when deciding promotions to rural areas. A city whiz kid may be hopelessly lost in charge of a branch with mostly farming customers.
Farming presents a different risk ratio. Droughts eventually always end and then the farms are busy restocking and the cash flow hikes. It is very much a boom and bust business but with a steady hand on the money supply the risk evens out over a period of time. In the distant past, the patience of both the farmer and the bank was legendary.
Hopefully, the thinking of banks will have changed. Prior to this Royal Commission the impetus of the banks - from the top down - was gouging to deliver profits. Ridiculous policies were put in place and their instigators richly rewarded. There was an atmosphere of sheer greed prevailing and it became a race between the big four as to who could deliver the most bloated bottom line. It was a day of champagne and cigar parties on the day profits were announced.
The customers will be sceptical. Now it is up to the banks to prove that they have turned the corner and behave ethnically !
It is promised that from 2019 it will be far easier to cancel credit cards, and customers will get a warning letter when any interest free periods are due to expire. This is to be the start of a more open regime with a more sustainable banking industry. There will be stronger protection for customers who act as guarantors on loans - and they will be given a three day cooling off period.
This revised code of conduct will be mandatory for retail banks that are members of the Australian Bankers Association and there will be a stronger commitment to ethical behaviour. Customers will get better information about changes to their accounts and there will be delays in offering add on insurance products. Contracts for business loans will have fewer conditions to be met. In the past, banks had been too quick to call in loans to small business.
This banking revision has come at a critical time for the agricultural industry. Australia is suffering the worst drought in recorded history and it is quite possible that it may extend well into next year. In the past the banks took a heavy handed approach. They often downgraded the value of the property because of the drought and this brought the risk ratio of the loan into negative territory. As a result, farmers were forced off their land and the property sold.
It is important that the people who manage rural banking have at least a working knowledge of the agricultural industry. Farming strategy is very different from merchant banking and banks need to be very selective when deciding promotions to rural areas. A city whiz kid may be hopelessly lost in charge of a branch with mostly farming customers.
Farming presents a different risk ratio. Droughts eventually always end and then the farms are busy restocking and the cash flow hikes. It is very much a boom and bust business but with a steady hand on the money supply the risk evens out over a period of time. In the distant past, the patience of both the farmer and the bank was legendary.
Hopefully, the thinking of banks will have changed. Prior to this Royal Commission the impetus of the banks - from the top down - was gouging to deliver profits. Ridiculous policies were put in place and their instigators richly rewarded. There was an atmosphere of sheer greed prevailing and it became a race between the big four as to who could deliver the most bloated bottom line. It was a day of champagne and cigar parties on the day profits were announced.
The customers will be sceptical. Now it is up to the banks to prove that they have turned the corner and behave ethnically !
Wednesday, 1 August 2018
The Rain Threat !
Last year we had the hottest summer on record and this winter has been unusually mild. The usual end of a hot day in Australia is a thunder storm. They are spectacular, but we mostly regard them as harmless.
This rise in heat has produced a new phenomenon that has attracted attention on a world wide basis. It is now delivering what is being called the " Flash Flood ". The intensity of those thunder storms concentrates the water delivered to a small section of the earth beneath to such an extent that there are landslides, intense flooding that sweeps away cars and houses - and people. This is the destruction that we view on our television screens when nature delivers one of these flash floods on an unprepared community.
That has always been an eventuality, but now it is becoming more common. We are living in a warmer world and there is the expectation that it will warm further still in the years ahead. We need to take this into account in the way we build houses and in the planning of new estates to ensure that wastewater systems can clear this water and avoid it becoming a major flood descending on those living at lower levels.
Unfortunately, the engineering standards we are using were calculated before world warming became a new threat. It has long been understood that the atmosphere contains about 6.5 percent more moisture per degree of temperature, but that is magnified by the storm intensity. The fury of the storms we are seeing is now dropping a greater degree of intense rain in concentration to a smaller area below.
The demand for new housing is seeing new estates established on flood plains and new housing standards needs to apply. Building a single level home on a slab almost guarantees a flood in the event of a flash flood event. That would be better served by the living quarters on the upper level and the grounds floor reserved for garage parking and play areas.
More attention needs to be given to waste water disposal. The damage from a flash flood can be mitigated if the drains are capable of quickly handling that excess water and limiting the damage. Even a small amount of water penetrating homes ruin carpet and destroy furniture, and usually this is not covered by insurance. Cleaning and repairing a flood damaged home is a miserable experience.
Global warming has been a divisive issue. There seems to be no doubt that the ferocity of thunder storms has increased and this flash flood phenomenon has become a reality. Due to its intensity, there is now no such thing as a " flood free area ". Our engineering standards urgently need an upgrade to accommodate this new reality.
This rise in heat has produced a new phenomenon that has attracted attention on a world wide basis. It is now delivering what is being called the " Flash Flood ". The intensity of those thunder storms concentrates the water delivered to a small section of the earth beneath to such an extent that there are landslides, intense flooding that sweeps away cars and houses - and people. This is the destruction that we view on our television screens when nature delivers one of these flash floods on an unprepared community.
That has always been an eventuality, but now it is becoming more common. We are living in a warmer world and there is the expectation that it will warm further still in the years ahead. We need to take this into account in the way we build houses and in the planning of new estates to ensure that wastewater systems can clear this water and avoid it becoming a major flood descending on those living at lower levels.
Unfortunately, the engineering standards we are using were calculated before world warming became a new threat. It has long been understood that the atmosphere contains about 6.5 percent more moisture per degree of temperature, but that is magnified by the storm intensity. The fury of the storms we are seeing is now dropping a greater degree of intense rain in concentration to a smaller area below.
The demand for new housing is seeing new estates established on flood plains and new housing standards needs to apply. Building a single level home on a slab almost guarantees a flood in the event of a flash flood event. That would be better served by the living quarters on the upper level and the grounds floor reserved for garage parking and play areas.
More attention needs to be given to waste water disposal. The damage from a flash flood can be mitigated if the drains are capable of quickly handling that excess water and limiting the damage. Even a small amount of water penetrating homes ruin carpet and destroy furniture, and usually this is not covered by insurance. Cleaning and repairing a flood damaged home is a miserable experience.
Global warming has been a divisive issue. There seems to be no doubt that the ferocity of thunder storms has increased and this flash flood phenomenon has become a reality. Due to its intensity, there is now no such thing as a " flood free area ". Our engineering standards urgently need an upgrade to accommodate this new reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)