As I noted in another thread, there was a LOt of political talk (ie hot air) after the 1974 flood about the council buying out flood affected properties. Needless to say virtually nothing eventuated & I expect exactly the same will happen this time. In reality, all councils & governments are addicted to ever increasing revenue, so any reduction in the number of rate-paying properties is unacceptable. Sure we'll see CanDo, GoAnna et al crapping on in forthcoming weeks about buyouts, but as we've seen previosly, NOTHING of consequence will result.

Yes, what we have not heard mentioned much so far in the crisis is how it has been made worse by years of rapid population growth that puts on pressure on councils to allow building on areas that would previously have been seen as unattractive due to their flood-prone nature. All that additional paved surface can't have helped reduce water runoff either. The bigger the population, the bigger the task of coping with extreme events. Listen to the cries for help as the supermarket shelves stand empty....

You can't make the people go away, but there are solutions to make the
problem by-pass the people. Solutions have been practiced in the US in flash-flood areas for the past eighty years. I'm sure if we looked at their solutions we can apply what's appropriate to our problem areas. Dams in flood prone areas should never be kept at full capacity
and allowances should be made for maximum rainfall which cause floods.
Engineered huge concrete-lined canals should start upstream and by-pass critical flood areas spilling water into the sea or inland dry dam or flood-control basins. Action needs to be taken immediately instead of creating task-forces, writing reports, shelving them, and
forgetting about them which seems to be the practice to date.

The call for dams, does not imply that dams are being proposed as the only solution. With events such as have just been, the dams won't stop the flooding, but will significantly reduce the peak level.

This peak level that often exists for a short time is responsible for a major portion of the damage, and at this point there is major environmental damage from the flooding.

Considering that many residences were not insured, and that premiums are likely to rise, most of the billions of damage will be shouldered by home owners and farmers. A few billion to mitigate this damage is well warranted.

It would seem appropriate to move dwellings and other buildings from the flood plains of Rockhampton, and other more flood prone areas. that may involve the govts just buying land and properties and moving people regardless of the cost.

The Brisbane floods will bring in to question the management of Wivenhoe Dam in light of the medium term forecasts, especially in a "La Nina" year.

Climate change means more frequent and more severe events. Victoria is having tropical weather.
The only real solution is higher ground. Dams will dictate who gets flooded and who don't

The thing is, if global warning/cooling.... is worth its pinch of salt, there's a greater danger of the affected zones being wiped right off the map.

This century will be interesting indeed.

I think Australians just love putting their loved one's in danger:)

or why else would you stay knowing what can happen?

NO money or job is worth that much, is it?

BLUE

Housing 'development' has never been particularly intelligent in Australia. We have no shortage of tenth rate land in relatively 'safe' locations, but rather than use these sites, we destroy the best farming land in the country, line the riverbanks and sea-shores with so-called 'elite' housing, then when the brown stuff hits the fan we wonder why. Hmmmmmm. I don't suppose the pursuit of riches has anything to do with it.

Victoria at present is being rained upon by a moonsoonal trough. Which is a quite common Australian weather event.

Mind explaining why Victoria's temps are currently only in the high 20's ...which is quite cold for Victorian summers and nowhere near the temps felt in tropical and subtropical Australia in the summer.

I Guess global warming causes temps to fall just as it did in the blizzards in the northern hemisphere.

Could someone explain why Victoria had such a moderately warm winter.

One possible explanation could be - the hot air provided by the pollies in the recent state election. (Joking).

Buy outs do happen.

My folks built their first house on the flood plain in Bathurst, in the early 50s. What a job, with the post war shortages. When you got weather boards, you couldn't get any nails to put them up with.

We had been living in it for 5 months, with very few internal walls clad, before we got our first water tank. I was under strict instructions not to tell my mother that there were frogs in the well our water came from.

A flood went through a couple of year after we built, putting a foot or two through about 100 homes. Dad had built ours on about 4 ft stumps so we were one of the few who did not get it over the floor.

We left the district, but I used to check the place out when I went to Bathurst, it was extended, & had a lovely garden develop over the years.

I went back to Bathurst for the first time in 25 years, for a motor racing reunion in 2002. I went to see the old place, & it wasn't there. In fact about 95 houses weren't there.

It had been just one street across the plain, with houses either side for about a mile. It was now quite eerie. The domestic block fences were still there, & the remains of gardens, just no houses.

I was told that everyone was assisted in relocating. Houses were mostly on raised timber floors, so they were jacked up, loaded on low loaders, & moved. Simple really, but the hair on the back of my neck tingled, when I first saw a street with all the houses missing.

There are two possible solutions to prevention of flooding of properties and both are being done in other parts of the world.
The Dutch who have large parts of the country below sea level and are at risk with sea level rise have devised a method of building on hollow concrete pads that will float.
It takes the place of the traditional solid concrete pad and though it would be more expensive would give a lot of peace of mind and also would no doubt reduce insurance costs. Services are supplied via flexible cables and pipes and of course the pads are moored to large piles that will keep it in position in a flood situation.
Parts of the US also use this approach as well.
The other approach would be to build levy banks around a town to divert floodwater away.
It would be expensive again but will cut insurance costs and should raise the value of the properties that are protected

The Dutch idea of a floating raft floor is a brilliant idea for new dwellings (Sarnian). What becomes obvious to TV viewers through this disaster period (Qld) is the “infilling” under elevated houses: An illegal practice in NSW flood zoned areas I am acquainted with. Simply changing planning laws prohibiting this practice would make a huge saving in property losses and reduce engineering stresses on those properties by allowing free flow of water underneath.

Also in my experience in NSW, special grants were made available to owners of properties in flood zones enabling elevation of existing buildings to a specified height above previous major flood level events. (Lower floor infilling illegal)!
And here is an idea from left field; why not mandatory life jackets in all houses in flood zones, a very simple and inexpensive innovation that would save lives in a dire emergency

diver dan.....how about the world is changing, and your not smart enough to admit it:)

Hello....Ban-aid required here:)

I just love it, when Bull is for free:)

Please dismiss my everything,.....the world will be fine, just ask what ever you believe in.

Oh Dear!

BLUE

the Netherlands are in line for the next huge flood disaster.

Can you imagine the catastrophe as hundreds of cement pontoon mounted floating houses piled up against the bridges, both above, & just below the water?

hasbeen,
there are things called moorings which do quite a good job. they even use them to keep drilling rigs in the one place at sea in all weathers even in places like the North Sea and Bass Strait.
It would be obvious (to most people) that you would not attempt to use the floating house concept in an area where you are likely to get very strong flows. Some of the Brisbane suburbs would be an ideal place for this concept, the water came up quite placidly and then retreated the same way.
One size does not fit all

sarnian,
yes the pontoon boats would work as long as the tide is up. My friend sent me photos of those houses, they're either hydraulically or mechanically controlled. The problem there is for the government because should they charge boat registration or issue lift permits to get extra revenue ? Temporary water frontage land tax could also be charged. The possibilities for government to make money are endless.
I 'd say build a house on cement stumps so that the floor level is a metre above 1974 levels. That way the dwelling stays dry & the flow of water will be easier. Even better would be to gradually move new or expanding suburbs onto higher ground. Also, creating alternative catchment has to be created no matter what. Such catchment could be for industrial or recreational use.

Sarnian, do you think that the stuff I used to install a tourist facility, on the outer barrier reef, way back in the mid 70s would be those moorings you're talking about. It's still there, so those moorings must have been OK, & have been well maintained, or it wouldn't have survived cyclones.

Of course, that instillation did not have neighbours causing strange currents, or have to contend with other poorly installed units coming free & attacking it. Just imagine some dozens of those chunks of walkway coming down the river.

Individual has the right idea. Things on stilts don't offer too much resistance or restriction to flow. The more solid stuff in the way, the higher the flood is going to go before it gets away.

There were suggestions by some engineers while it was being built, that the pylons of the gateway bridge, would cause enough restriction to river flow, to make any future Brisbane floods up to a metre higher. It will be interesting to see if any such suggestions are made, after the fact of a flood to show any problems.

Why have Councils allowed new homes to be built in known flood areas?

From the TV footage it appears that a lot of the flooded homes are recently built. There have been maps showing flood areas available for years and councils have had the authority to prohibit building in flood areas, so why were they built.

In the case of Brisbane, where the last major flood was in 1974, it seems incredible that homes have been built below the 74 flood line.

This article suggests that council hid the information and approved housing subdivisions knowing they were below flood level.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/alarming-report-on-brisbane-river-risks-covered-up/story-fn7ik8u2-1225987231243

I feel so sorry for those people that bought blocks not knowing they were below flood level. One retired builder has suggested that 30%-40% of the flooded homes were built since 74.

A cynical person would think that there was graft and corruption between developers and councils.

Wonder if an inquiry will cover this aspect or will it be covered up?

For those talking about global warming. Just recall a few years ago the alarmists were warning that the drought would last forever and we would have to get used to having no or little rain. Guess the drought is now broken.

graft and corruption between developers and councils.
Banjo,
that & saturation incompetence. I see this everyday in my work. Because of stupid Government policy every construction by Council or Govt. Department has to be via approval of consulting engineers. I'm not saying that all engineering consultants are not worth their weight in sand but a great percentage are. I just had to witness a job which with the consultants' involvement cost some 115 percent more than the very same job last year without the consultants. Now that is taxpayers money which the Government insists to be wasted like this. Imagine how much more could be achieved if only a few ounces of common sense could be engaged.

Climate change - serpent change, this weather was predicted, but the troops were too infatuated with their own public image to worry about the detail... And please don't give me this, crisis on crisis green labor crap, any more.

One needs to address the issues facing Indigenous people who have lost everything in the floods.

Bundaberg and Cherbourg have the worst recovery centre workers in the country when it comes to their attitude towards Indigenous people.

I know some Indigenous families who have lost all the furniture and goods and was refused help in Bundaberg.

The recovery centre workers attitude towards Indigenous people is the same as one would expect from Centre-link staff, Councillors or members of the KKK.

Banjo,
Unfortunately the words “global warming “ have become the norm when applied to the change in climatic conditions cause by human intervention.
It would have been better to fix on the words “ climate change”.
The effects, apart from a slow increase in average ambient temperature, are also an increased amounts of “extreme weather events”.
These can be periods of increased temperatures, decreased temperatures, periods of increased rain as well as periods of drought. Snow, wind and all other extreme weather events are to be expected.
The denialist industry have seized on the “global warming description to refute AGW.
I have seen and heard many people saying “how can we have global warming, it’s so cold”.

At it again sarnian, you've got the latest dogma from the warmest right. You know the stuff, climate change/disruption, covering up the fact that their "global warming" forecasts of never ending drought for Oz, & pommy kids never again seeing snow again were so wrong its funny.

Trouble is you don't pick up on the genuine research when it doesn't suit your dogma.

The latest is that a warming planet would have "LESS" extreme weather events. It appears that the driver of extreme weather is not temperature, but the difference in temperature between the tropics, & the polls. You lot tell us the polls are heating up quicker reducing that difference, so that would seem to agree with the reduction in cyclones these last decade & a half.

Trouble is mate, if you want to accept one lot of peer review you've got to take the rest. What a bother.

But mate, you can't have it all ways. You can't all change from tree rings to thermometers half way through an argument, & still have any credibility.

That rock you stubbed your to on may have got there by global warming, dropped by some receding glacier, & it's sat in wait for you all these rears. Well, this coming cool phase has been laying in wait for you, ever since you hitched your wagon to the CO2 driven AGW myth. Enjoy.

Ngaragul,
For those of us who don't know what the flood damage is at Cherbourg could you please let us know ? What's the population there ? As is normal there was nothing on the news about that town.