10/31/24 – An extreme rainfall event near Valencia in southern Spain on Tuesday this week fueled a spate of hasty climate-change stories. But was that the cause of the flooding?
A year’s worth of rain fell in a day. The area has an average annual rainfall of 17.87 inches. October is their rainiest month with an average 2.91 inches. But according to Fox News, they got:
19.33 inches in 8 hours
13.55 inches in 4 hours
6.5 inches in 1 hour
Harvey Comparison
That’s pretty stout, even by Houston standards, which gets triple the average annual rainfall of Valencia’s mediterranean climate.
In fact, had that rain fallen in the Lake Houston Area during those same time periods, NOAA would have classified it between a 500- and a 1000-year storm on the Atlas 14 scale. See below.
NOAA’s Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Estimates for Lake Houston Area
So, you can imagine the impact of that much rain in an area built to engineering standards that anticipate far less.
The death toll has climbed steadily throughout the day as search-and-rescue efforts uncover more fatalities. By 5 PM Houston time, the count had climbed to 158, but dozens still remain missing.
To put that into perspective, Harris County reported 36 deaths from Hurricane Harvey. And Harvey dropped three times the rain, but spread out over four days (August 25-29, 2017).
The major factor contributing to the different death tolls: Valencia is mountainous, and Houston is flat. The steeper geography accelerated the speed of floodwaters that carried away vehicles, bridges and even whole buildings.
Reporting is predictably focused on the gore. As the old saying in the news business goes, “If it bleeds, it leads.”
Climate-Change Hysteria
But there’s another predictable subtext to the stories: climate change. Several factors fuel the climate-change thread:
Readers’ desires for explanations in a less-than-predictable world.
Editors’ desires to provide them.
Academicians’ trying to raise their media profiles and obtain more grants to fund future studies on existential threats.
Poor public understanding of statistics and complex weather models
Private interests pushing agendas by using editorial content as incognito advertising.
Everyone’s desire to capitalize on a crisis to push their individual agendas.
Of several dozen stories from major news organizations that I reviewed for this post, only one (Fox News) refrained from climate-change speculation. It focused mainly on the rainfall amounts. Below is a rundown on several others.
Al Jezeera
Al Jazeera claimed, “Scientists warn that extreme weather such as heatwaves and storms is becoming more intense as a result of climate change.”
New York Times
The New York Times said, “Estimating the influence of climate change on any single flood event requires further analysis, but scientists have said that global warming is making storms in many regions more intense. Warmer air holds, and releases, more water.”
Then the Times went on to disclaim what they just implied. “Scientists convened by the United Nations have found no consistent trend in the way global warming is affecting extreme rainfall in the Mediterranean region…”
Guardian
The Guardian said, “In recent years, scientists have warned that the waters of the Mediterranean are rapidly warming, climbing as much as 5C above normal.”
What was it when the event occurred, Guardian? And if the relationhip is so strong, why didn’t the rainfall happen when the sea-surface temps were higher?
Reuters
Reuters said, “While experts say it will take time to analyze all the data to determine if this particular [event] was caused by climate change, most agree that an increase in temperature of the Mediterranean and warmer and more humid atmospheric conditions contribute to producing more frequent extreme episodes.” What is the increase, Reuters?
Basically, they’re saying, “The Spanish rains may not be related to climate change, but they could be…if you don’t look at recent data.”
CNN
CNN said, “Figuring out the precise role climate change played in Spain’s devastating floods will require further analysis, but scientists are clear that global warming, driven by fossil fuel pollution, makes these types of extreme rainfall events more likely and more intense.”
It reads like boilerplate.
The Independent
But some publications were more apocalyptic than others. The Independent took the prize in that department. “Climate crisis ‘worsened all 10 deadliest weather events,” the publication trumpeted.
The Independent claims “The deadliest weather events since 2004 caused more than 570,000 deaths and the ‘fingerprints’ of climate change were present, scientists say.”
We Need a White-Coat Rule for Climate Claims
If this were an advertisement as opposed to a news story, it would probably be illegal in the U.S. I remember a time when television commercials trumpeted equally unsubstantiated claims.
It led to the passage of the “white-coat” rule by the FTC. It used to be common to dress actors up in white coats to make claims for medical products. “Four out of five doctors recommend…” They were implying that a scientific study actually existed that said 80% of doctors recommended something. But what was the sample size? Five? Which five? And which four?
CBS Cites Source, Then Pulls Story
The publications above rarely cited the name of a scientist. And I only found one news source that actually cited a scientific study. That was CBS, which has since taken their story down. Turns out, their story referred not to a study, but the transcript of a UN press conference about “climate crunch time.” No actual study was linked to the UN press conference story.
Reporting Fuels Skepticism
Climate change may be real. But the reporting around it sure makes me skeptical. If there’s substance to these claims, why such vague boilerplate? Why do so few cite sources, studies and professional credentials?
Last year, I published a story called “Hurricane Lee, Climatology, Data Truncation and the News.” It reviewed an Associated Press story about a hurricane that struck Maine in 2023. It created 1-2 feet of storm surge and dropped 1-4 inches of rain. But this was a climate change disaster according to AP.
The Rockefeller Foundation admits, “Our focus is on scaling renewable energy.”
We need a white-coat rule for climate claims. No quoting unnamed, uncounted “scientists”! And if they actually exist, give us their credentials. Provide links to their studies in peer-reviewed journals.
We need more facts. Not more fuel for climate hysteria.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/31/24
2620 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/SST-Valencia.jpg?fit=1100%2C648&ssl=16481100adminadmin2024-10-31 19:30:322024-11-01 18:07:37Rain in Spain and Sad, Sorry State of Climate-Change Speculation
10/28/24 – After posting about maintenance dollars per square mile in Harris County’s different watersheds, an astute reader suggested I look at maintenance dollars per stream mile.
Why? Stream miles don’t always vary proportionally with square miles and may be a more appropriate metric for maintenance. Certainly, when considering activities, such as channel mowing and clean outs, that makes sense. Especially when you consider “open stream miles,” as distinct from natural channels.
So I ran the numbers. Rankings varied slightly, but overall, maintenance money still goes disproportionately to watersheds with a high percentage of low-to-moderate (LMI) residents. Maybe more so.
Different Metric, Similar Results
Last week, at the start of early voting, I posted about the proposed 63% tax increase called Proposition A. Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) is pitching it as a tax increase dedicated to maintenance, even though the ballot language does not limit it to maintenance.
In last week’s post, I examined maintenance dollars spent per square mile in each watershed. To see what would happen with maintenance dollars per stream mile, I transferred stream miles from the HCFCD website into my spreadsheet and recomputed everything.
While some watersheds rose and others fell in the rankings, watersheds with a majority LMI-population still floated to the top. Even moreso.
Coincidentally, those with the highest concentrations of spending also tend to have Democratic precinct commissioners. And the eight lowest ranking watersheds (with one exception) all fall into the lone Republican-led precinct on Commissioners Court.
Here’s the new table. Gold colored watersheds have a majority of LMI residents.
HCFCD maintenance spending per stream mile since from Hurricane Harvey through 3Q24.Does not include County-wide spending.$89,471 is average in last column.
Will You See Any Benefit from Proposition A?
Why is this important? HCFCD’s proposed tax increase, Proposition A, would raise your flood control taxes by 63%.
Also, HCFCD is trying to increase the percentage of HUD dollars going to LMI-watersheds to 70%, even though HUD only requires 50%.
When looking at maintenanc data, it seems we may already have an Equity Prioritization Index for maintenance dollars – in practice if not in policy.
If you vote for the “maintenance-tax” increase, understand that you may not see as much benefit from it as other parts of the county…if you see any benefit at all. Nothing in the wording of the ballot item guarantees a fair share to each watershed. For instance…
The difference between Halls and Luce Bayous’ maintenance spending per stream mile since Harvey is 28:1!
Data obtained from HCFCD via FOIA request shown in table above.
Compare Watershed Map, Precinct Map and Spending
Most people don’t know the location of all of the watersheds in Harris County. Nor are they familiar with precinct boundaries. So I will reprint both maps below. Compare them, then look up the maintenance dollars for your watershed in the table above.
Harris County Watershed mapMany watersheds cut across precinct boundaries. But P3 is the only precinct with a Republican commissioner.
Past is Prologue
As Shakespeare said in The Tempest, “What’s past is prologue.” Before you vote on Prop A, understand where your money has gone until now. Maintenance dollars often follow capital improvement dollars. And capital improvement spending has also leaned heavily toward LMI areas, since Harvey. So the trend is unlikely to change anytime soon.
Is Harris County Misusing LMI?
All other things being equal, I believe that LMI should be used as a tie-breaker when allocating funds. But all other things are not equal. Some of the watersheds that receive the fewest maintenance dollars have the worst flooding.
Chart showing feet above flood stage of 33 gages of misc. bayous in Harris County during Harvey.
Politics has trumped public safety in Harris County for some time now. I urge you to use your vote to send a message to Commissioners Court if you want to see your fair share of HCFCD spending.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/28/24
2617 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 9 More days until Election Day
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Maintenance-per-Stream-Mile-e1730162628470.png?fit=1100%2C1212&ssl=112121100adminadmin2024-10-28 20:45:332024-10-29 17:49:04Another Way to Look at Prop A: Maintenance Dollars Per Stream Mile
10/27/24 – Meritage Homes of Texas LLC has placed an estimated 5 feet of fill above street level in Phase 1 of its new development in Atascocita. The height has raised concerns among surrounding residents, who fear that runoff from the Meritage site could flood them.
Meritage Site Phase 1 fill bordering Texas Laurel Trail.Height of curb and silt fence = 2 feet.Top of fill is minimum 2.5X higheror 5 feet.Most surrounding homes are elevated about knee high above street level.
It’s hard to see the interior of the site from street level. That has fueled residents’ fears. Virtually all surrounding homes are knee high above street level, not head high, as here.
In February, I received preliminary construction plans and a drainage analysis from Harris County Engineering. But they had numerous problems and were not approved.
So, I can’t say for certain whether the fill is needed or whether it will raise flood risk in surrounding neighborhoods. Similar disparities have flooded homes elsewhere, so residents have cause for worry.
However, it appears that the developer is sloping the land toward a detention basin on the far side of the property (out of sight behind the car and ridge above).
Aerial photos taken today show distinct tiers in the landscape leading down to the detention basin. (See below.) So, runoff should be channeled away from Kings Park Way, Texas Laurel Trail and parts of Pinehurst Trail Drive.
Photo with car above was taken from other side of pipe in background of this photo.
Why So Much Fill?
Meritage, based in Scottsdale, Arizona, began clearing and grading 40.2 acres between Kings River and Pinehurst of Atascocita in February this year. Shortly, thereafter, it began excavating the detention basin for Phase 1, shown below.
Land on left slopes toward detention basin.Photo taken 10/27/24.
Meritage exceeds the minimum. But calculation shows that the amount of fill excavated would have only raised the rest of Phase 1 (the area outside of the detention basin) by approximately 1-2 feet, not 5. Plus multiple residents independently reported seeing trucks bringing fill into the location.
I could find no reference justifying the depth of fill in the preliminary plans supplied by Harris County Engineering.
=
Conceptual plans that Meritage shared with surrounding communities earlier this year. They show one detention basin in Phase One and three in Phase 2.
I have requested the final, approved plans from Harris County Engineering, but still have not received them.
Building Codes Also Require 2 Feet Above 500-Year Floodplain
Post-Harvey building codes also require new structures to be built two feet above the 500-year water-surface elevation. But the Meritage development is not close to a mapped floodplain. So that’s not the likely cause for the all the fill.
From FEMA Flood Hazard Layer viewer. Meritage development is about a half mile from the current mapped 500-year floodplain (tan color).
Protecting Neighbors
What should the developer do to ensure surrounding properties are not flooded by runoff?
As a rule, the engineer who prepares civil plans for the development must include drainage area maps and account for all runoff generated by the subdivision. This would include everything up to extreme 100-yr storms.
So, Meritage’s drainage plan should account for all that fill and capture flows before they impact adjacent properties.
In general, the size of the detention basin is a positive thing. But the height of the fill it generated during excavation has the potential to flood surrounding homes – if not handled properly.
More news to follow when/if Harris County reveals the construction plans and drainage analysis.
Excess fill may smother tree roots around perimeter of site.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/27/24
2616 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/20241027-DSC_1085.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-10-27 22:25:402024-10-28 15:42:15Concerns About Fill Height in New Atascocita Development
Rain in Spain and Sad, Sorry State of Climate-Change Speculation
10/31/24 – An extreme rainfall event near Valencia in southern Spain on Tuesday this week fueled a spate of hasty climate-change stories. But was that the cause of the flooding?
A year’s worth of rain fell in a day. The area has an average annual rainfall of 17.87 inches. October is their rainiest month with an average 2.91 inches. But according to Fox News, they got:
Harvey Comparison
That’s pretty stout, even by Houston standards, which gets triple the average annual rainfall of Valencia’s mediterranean climate.
In fact, had that rain fallen in the Lake Houston Area during those same time periods, NOAA would have classified it between a 500- and a 1000-year storm on the Atlas 14 scale. See below.
So, you can imagine the impact of that much rain in an area built to engineering standards that anticipate far less.
The death toll has climbed steadily throughout the day as search-and-rescue efforts uncover more fatalities. By 5 PM Houston time, the count had climbed to 158, but dozens still remain missing.
To put that into perspective, Harris County reported 36 deaths from Hurricane Harvey. And Harvey dropped three times the rain, but spread out over four days (August 25-29, 2017).
The major factor contributing to the different death tolls: Valencia is mountainous, and Houston is flat. The steeper geography accelerated the speed of floodwaters that carried away vehicles, bridges and even whole buildings.
Reporting is predictably focused on the gore. As the old saying in the news business goes, “If it bleeds, it leads.”
Climate-Change Hysteria
But there’s another predictable subtext to the stories: climate change. Several factors fuel the climate-change thread:
Of several dozen stories from major news organizations that I reviewed for this post, only one (Fox News) refrained from climate-change speculation. It focused mainly on the rainfall amounts. Below is a rundown on several others.
Al Jezeera
Al Jazeera claimed, “Scientists warn that extreme weather such as heatwaves and storms is becoming more intense as a result of climate change.”
New York Times
The New York Times said, “Estimating the influence of climate change on any single flood event requires further analysis, but scientists have said that global warming is making storms in many regions more intense. Warmer air holds, and releases, more water.”
“The Mediterranean is also getting hotter, hitting its highest ever recorded temperature in August.” [Emphasis added.]
However, the Times forgot to mention that when this event occurred, the waters near Valencia were only about 1C above normal.
Then the Times went on to disclaim what they just implied. “Scientists convened by the United Nations have found no consistent trend in the way global warming is affecting extreme rainfall in the Mediterranean region…”
Guardian
The Guardian said, “In recent years, scientists have warned that the waters of the Mediterranean are rapidly warming, climbing as much as 5C above normal.”
What was it when the event occurred, Guardian? And if the relationhip is so strong, why didn’t the rainfall happen when the sea-surface temps were higher?
Reuters
Reuters said, “While experts say it will take time to analyze all the data to determine if this particular [event] was caused by climate change, most agree that an increase in temperature of the Mediterranean and warmer and more humid atmospheric conditions contribute to producing more frequent extreme episodes.” What is the increase, Reuters?
Basically, they’re saying, “The Spanish rains may not be related to climate change, but they could be…if you don’t look at recent data.”
CNN
CNN said, “Figuring out the precise role climate change played in Spain’s devastating floods will require further analysis, but scientists are clear that global warming, driven by fossil fuel pollution, makes these types of extreme rainfall events more likely and more intense.”
It reads like boilerplate.
The Independent
But some publications were more apocalyptic than others. The Independent took the prize in that department. “Climate crisis ‘worsened all 10 deadliest weather events,” the publication trumpeted.
The Independent claims “The deadliest weather events since 2004 caused more than 570,000 deaths and the ‘fingerprints’ of climate change were present, scientists say.”
We Need a White-Coat Rule for Climate Claims
If this were an advertisement as opposed to a news story, it would probably be illegal in the U.S. I remember a time when television commercials trumpeted equally unsubstantiated claims.
It led to the passage of the “white-coat” rule by the FTC. It used to be common to dress actors up in white coats to make claims for medical products. “Four out of five doctors recommend…” They were implying that a scientific study actually existed that said 80% of doctors recommended something. But what was the sample size? Five? Which five? And which four?
CBS Cites Source, Then Pulls Story
The publications above rarely cited the name of a scientist. And I only found one news source that actually cited a scientific study. That was CBS, which has since taken their story down. Turns out, their story referred not to a study, but the transcript of a UN press conference about “climate crunch time.” No actual study was linked to the UN press conference story.
Reporting Fuels Skepticism
Climate change may be real. But the reporting around it sure makes me skeptical. If there’s substance to these claims, why such vague boilerplate? Why do so few cite sources, studies and professional credentials?
Last year, I published a story called “Hurricane Lee, Climatology, Data Truncation and the News.” It reviewed an Associated Press story about a hurricane that struck Maine in 2023. It created 1-2 feet of storm surge and dropped 1-4 inches of rain. But this was a climate change disaster according to AP.
It turned out that the Rockefeller Foundation paid AP to hire 20 climate-change reporters to “infuse climate coverage in all aspects of the news.”
The Rockefeller Foundation admits, “Our focus is on scaling renewable energy.”
We need a white-coat rule for climate claims. No quoting unnamed, uncounted “scientists”! And if they actually exist, give us their credentials. Provide links to their studies in peer-reviewed journals.
We need more facts. Not more fuel for climate hysteria.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/31/24
2620 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
Another Way to Look at Prop A: Maintenance Dollars Per Stream Mile
10/28/24 – After posting about maintenance dollars per square mile in Harris County’s different watersheds, an astute reader suggested I look at maintenance dollars per stream mile.
Why? Stream miles don’t always vary proportionally with square miles and may be a more appropriate metric for maintenance. Certainly, when considering activities, such as channel mowing and clean outs, that makes sense. Especially when you consider “open stream miles,” as distinct from natural channels.
So I ran the numbers. Rankings varied slightly, but overall, maintenance money still goes disproportionately to watersheds with a high percentage of low-to-moderate (LMI) residents. Maybe more so.
Different Metric, Similar Results
Last week, at the start of early voting, I posted about the proposed 63% tax increase called Proposition A. Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) is pitching it as a tax increase dedicated to maintenance, even though the ballot language does not limit it to maintenance.
In last week’s post, I examined maintenance dollars spent per square mile in each watershed. To see what would happen with maintenance dollars per stream mile, I transferred stream miles from the HCFCD website into my spreadsheet and recomputed everything.
While some watersheds rose and others fell in the rankings, watersheds with a majority LMI-population still floated to the top. Even moreso.
Coincidentally, those with the highest concentrations of spending also tend to have Democratic precinct commissioners. And the eight lowest ranking watersheds (with one exception) all fall into the lone Republican-led precinct on Commissioners Court.
Here’s the new table. Gold colored watersheds have a majority of LMI residents.
Will You See Any Benefit from Proposition A?
Why is this important? HCFCD’s proposed tax increase, Proposition A, would raise your flood control taxes by 63%.
But curiously, the revenue-increase request comes at a time when overall spending is declining and approximately 60% of the dollars remain in the flood bond.
Also, HCFCD is trying to increase the percentage of HUD dollars going to LMI-watersheds to 70%, even though HUD only requires 50%.
When looking at maintenanc data, it seems we may already have an Equity Prioritization Index for maintenance dollars – in practice if not in policy.
If you vote for the “maintenance-tax” increase, understand that you may not see as much benefit from it as other parts of the county…if you see any benefit at all. Nothing in the wording of the ballot item guarantees a fair share to each watershed. For instance…
Compare Watershed Map, Precinct Map and Spending
Most people don’t know the location of all of the watersheds in Harris County. Nor are they familiar with precinct boundaries. So I will reprint both maps below. Compare them, then look up the maintenance dollars for your watershed in the table above.
Past is Prologue
As Shakespeare said in The Tempest, “What’s past is prologue.” Before you vote on Prop A, understand where your money has gone until now. Maintenance dollars often follow capital improvement dollars. And capital improvement spending has also leaned heavily toward LMI areas, since Harvey. So the trend is unlikely to change anytime soon.
Is Harris County Misusing LMI?
All other things being equal, I believe that LMI should be used as a tie-breaker when allocating funds. But all other things are not equal. Some of the watersheds that receive the fewest maintenance dollars have the worst flooding.
Politics has trumped public safety in Harris County for some time now. I urge you to use your vote to send a message to Commissioners Court if you want to see your fair share of HCFCD spending.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/28/24
2617 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 9 More days until Election Day
Concerns About Fill Height in New Atascocita Development
10/27/24 – Meritage Homes of Texas LLC has placed an estimated 5 feet of fill above street level in Phase 1 of its new development in Atascocita. The height has raised concerns among surrounding residents, who fear that runoff from the Meritage site could flood them.
It’s hard to see the interior of the site from street level. That has fueled residents’ fears. Virtually all surrounding homes are knee high above street level, not head high, as here.
In February, I received preliminary construction plans and a drainage analysis from Harris County Engineering. But they had numerous problems and were not approved.
So, I can’t say for certain whether the fill is needed or whether it will raise flood risk in surrounding neighborhoods. Similar disparities have flooded homes elsewhere, so residents have cause for worry.
However, it appears that the developer is sloping the land toward a detention basin on the far side of the property (out of sight behind the car and ridge above).
Aerial photos taken today show distinct tiers in the landscape leading down to the detention basin. (See below.) So, runoff should be channeled away from Kings Park Way, Texas Laurel Trail and parts of Pinehurst Trail Drive.
Why So Much Fill?
Meritage, based in Scottsdale, Arizona, began clearing and grading 40.2 acres between Kings River and Pinehurst of Atascocita in February this year. Shortly, thereafter, it began excavating the detention basin for Phase 1, shown below.
At first, I thought the fill might have come from the detention basin on the property. After Harvey, changes made to City and County building codes require a minimum .65 acre feet of stormwater detention per acre.
Meritage exceeds the minimum. But calculation shows that the amount of fill excavated would have only raised the rest of Phase 1 (the area outside of the detention basin) by approximately 1-2 feet, not 5. Plus multiple residents independently reported seeing trucks bringing fill into the location.
I could find no reference justifying the depth of fill in the preliminary plans supplied by Harris County Engineering.
=
I have requested the final, approved plans from Harris County Engineering, but still have not received them.
Building Codes Also Require 2 Feet Above 500-Year Floodplain
Post-Harvey building codes also require new structures to be built two feet above the 500-year water-surface elevation. But the Meritage development is not close to a mapped floodplain. So that’s not the likely cause for the all the fill.
Protecting Neighbors
What should the developer do to ensure surrounding properties are not flooded by runoff?
As a rule, the engineer who prepares civil plans for the development must include drainage area maps and account for all runoff generated by the subdivision. This would include everything up to extreme 100-yr storms.
So, Meritage’s drainage plan should account for all that fill and capture flows before they impact adjacent properties.
In general, the size of the detention basin is a positive thing. But the height of the fill it generated during excavation has the potential to flood surrounding homes – if not handled properly.
More news to follow when/if Harris County reveals the construction plans and drainage analysis.
On a sad note, many of those trees along the perimeter next to the fill may die. Putting too much soil over tree roots can suffocate them and cause tree damage or death.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/27/24
2616 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.