Coastal Erosion

Culchie

Today, I had a very interesting meeting with a customer, and seen something I couldn't quite believe.

It was at the walkway to Rosses Point beach .... the walkway that goes straight on from the car park and round the back of sheds, down a hill to the beach.

The guy I met showed me a pathway that had been built last year by the county council. When built the pathway was constructed right up against the sand dunes...the coastline.

Today (one year later) that coastline is is a good 20 metres away from the path.....I couldn't believe it.

Global warming or wha'?

brianthebard

lolz coastal erosion isn't caused by global warming.

Culchie

brianthebard wrote: »

lolz coastal erosion isn't caused by global warming.

Something abnormal is happening, when 20 metres of the coast disappears in a year.

starbelgrade

Has there been a big increase recently in the number of speedboats & jet skis used out there? They can have a big impact on coastal erosion.

brianthebard

Culchie wrote: »

Something abnormal is happening, when 20 metres of the coast disappears in a year.

Not really, it depends on how soft the land that was eroded was, how many high tides or storms there were in the last year, how exposed the piece of land is, etc, etc. Lots of things, except gw.

starbelgrade

Unless the temperatures in Sligo have increased with Global Warming - then this would increase the number of people taking walks out there, thus causing erosion by foot traffic. I think the term for that is "thinking outside the box" (in w**ker speak).

il gatto

Coastal erosion is a constant along soft sandy beaches like Rosses Point. Often alot of that sand will be redeposited in late spring. Some days in spring at Strandhill you can see the sand washing back in the waves. The water is brown with it. I don't think global warming would have anything to do with it. That is, if there is such a thing as global warming. This year, the earth is cooler than recent years. Time for band wagon "environmentalists" to start proclaiming the next ice-age, methinks.

Xiney

Actually, "global warming" (now called climate change amongst the scientific community) can cause an increase in coastal erosion, through more frequent and severe storms.

Culchie

il gatto wrote: »

Coastal erosion is a constant along soft sandy beaches like Rosses Point. Often alot of that sand will be redeposited in late spring. Some days in spring at Strandhill you can see the sand washing back in the waves. The water is brown with it. I don't think global warming would have anything to do with it. That is, if there is such a thing as global warming. This year, the earth is cooler than recent years. Time for band wagon "enviromentalists" to start proclaiming the next ice-age, methinks.

Folks, we're talking 20 metres of land, approx 7 metres in height, over a stretch of about a mile, not a bit of sand washed away.
We're talking hundreds/thousands of cubic tonnes.


And it's not foot traffic that is causing it, it's the sea.

il gatto

Xiney wrote: »

Actually, "global warming" (now called climate change amongst the scientific community) can cause an increase in coastal erosion, through more frequent and severe storms.

But we in Sligo have had less frequent and less severe storms in the last few years than we usually had. They've dropped "global warming" as a phrase as it was found to be an inaccurate an insubstanciated claim (witness this years "global cooling"!). They've adopted "climate change" as it's undisputable fact. Whether the causes cited for it, or the forecasted outcomes have any real basis is another point entirely.
As far as the coastline in Rosses, I've spent all my life beside the sea and it's never been any different. 20 odd years ago there were big sand dunes to the north of Strandhill (towards the airport). 15 years ago it was pretty much as it is today. 200 years ago a village at Strandhill was covered by sand and vanished. It's just the nature of a dune based coastline. Sand shifts in both water and wind, so it comes and goes.

Basq

Culchie, there's someone on the phone for you:












.. it's Al Gore.

Gillie

basquille wrote: »

.. it's Al Gore.

I wonder if you left the name out would anyone not have recognised him?:)

tuppence

Gillie wrote: »

I wonder if you left the name out would anyone not have recognised him?:)

Now now gillie!
But whos yer man behind thats the real question?! Or should we (the royal we) know him.:o:D

muffler

tuppence wrote: »

Now now gillie!
But whos yer man behind thats the real question?! Or should we (the royal we) know him.:o:D

Its me actually. basquille asked to borrow the pic.

Gillie

The guy behind him is a miserable looking f*cker muffler!
Can't be you

starbelgrade

"Hello. Can you hear me?"

"Yes, I'm sitting beside you, you tw*t."

Radharc na Sleibhte

That'd be a high tide.

Xiney

il gatto wrote: »

But we in Sligo have had less frequent and less severe storms in the last few years than we usually had. They've dropped "global warming" as a phrase as it was found to be an inaccurate an insubstanciated claim (witness this years "global cooling"!). They've adopted "climate change" as it's undisputable fact. Whether the causes cited for it, or the forecasted outcomes have any real basis is another point entirely.
As far as the coastline in Rosses, I've spent all my life beside the sea and it's never been any different. 20 odd years ago there were big sand dunes to the north of Strandhill (towards the airport). 15 years ago it was pretty much as it is today. 200 years ago a village at Strandhill was covered by sand and vanished. It's just the nature of a dune based coastline. Sand shifts in both water and wind, so it comes and goes.

They stopped using "Global Warming" because it didn't describe the full extent of the effect. The global temperature is rising every year, however that has different effects based on where you live.

Sand dunes are dynamic pieces of land. I wasn't saying that this particular coastal erosion was due to global climate change, as someone pointed out it could be a cyclical thing. I was simply saying that climate change is having an effect on the rate of erosion, if you look at it on an average, world wide basis, as opposed to case by case.

il gatto

Climate change may affect some coastlines. I just didn't agree with the asscribing of Rosses Point's situation to climate change (in itself cyclical, rather than the Tommy Tiernan "THE WORLD IS F@CKED" gag scenario National Geographic puts forward in every issue).

Xiney

National Geographic is one of the most fair and balanced magazines that exists. Tommy Tiernan is not.

il gatto

Although I read it most months, fair and balanced it is not. In any sense. It's an interesting, occassionally informative read with stunning photography. It's also presumptive, occasionally patronising and often portrays things with a slightly bizarre quaintness. I was referring to a specific joke which has resonance with alot of people predicting our impending doom stemming from climate change. Tommy Tiernan is a comedian. I'm not sure if you meant he's not a magazine, or that he's not fair and balanced. Either way that's not his job.

Culchie

I wasn't forcasting impending doom in my OP ..... however when you see 20 metres of land mass not there, over a half mile stretch..... and it was there 1 year ago, you can't help but be impressed/surprised/awed by the change in landscape.

I'll be there again next week, will take a couple of photos so that you can have a look yourself.

brianthebard

Xiney wrote: »

National Geographic is one of the most fair and balanced magazines that exists.

It used to be, I'm less sure after the new editor took over there was a bit of a swing to sensationalism methinks.

Xiney

ah well I haven't read it in about 18 month's time as I was too busy in my last year of University - though I used my first tesco rewards vouchers to get a subscription and it should be arriving any day now....

il gatto

There's a good piece onbiometrics and a fantastic photo of a mouse on it's hind legs. And apparently, the Artic won't exist in 2013:eek::rolleyes:

Big_Mac

il gatto wrote: »

There's a good piece onbiometrics and a fantastic photo of a mouse on it's hind legs. And apparently, the Artic won't exist in 2013:eek::rolleyes:

Surely global warming..... oops I meant climate change isn't have that profound an effect?

According to someone on the radio who made sense (can't remember specifics but it was the Ray D'arcy show,) Ice ages are a cyclical thing. They come around about every 10,000 years, and since it's been about 12,000 years since our last one, its overdue. although I could be wrong...............

starbelgrade

mcgowan.b wrote: »

Surely global warming..... oops I meant climate change isn't have that profound an effect?

According to someone on the radio who made sense (can't remember specifics but it was the Ray D'arcy show,) Ice ages are a cyclical thing. They come around about every 10,000 years, and since it's been about 12,000 years since our last one, its overdue. although I could be wrong...............

I seriously doubt that there was anybody on the Ray Darcy show that made any sense.

Big_Mac

starbelgrade wrote: »

I seriously doubt that there was anybody on the Ray Darcy show that made any sense.

Damn. Can't argue with that.:)

Xiney

mcgowan.b wrote: »

Ice ages are a cyclical thing. They come around about every 10,000 years, and since it's been about 12,000 years since our last one, its overdue. although I could be wrong...............

So... if we're overdue for an ICE age... and the planet is WARMING overall...


Surely it's worse than we thought?


Honestly the attitude towards climate change in Ireland is surprising. It's accepted fact everywhere but the States, I thought. (And the States doesn't put much stock into Science, as we all know...)

il gatto

Accepted by sections of the scientific community, rejected by others. Same with the general populace. Sure hasn't Ireland clamped down on lightbulbs? We've done our part:D Don't get me wrong. Pollution is bad. That's a given. But until climate change is proven, and I mean properly, to be affected by human activity, then I don't care to waste my time worrying about it. the proof is scanty, misleadingly reported and involves endless "models", guesswork and unsubstantiated predictions of doom. Just the way I read it.

Xiney

il gatto wrote: »

Accepted by sections of the scientific community, rejected by others. Same with the general populace. Sure hasn't Ireland clamped down on lightbulbs? We've done our part:D Don't get me wrong. Pollution is bad. That's a given. But until climate change is proven, and I mean properly, to be affected by human activity, then I don't care to waste my time worrying about it. the proof is scanty, misleadingly reported and involves endless "models", guesswork and unsubstantiated predictions of doom. Just the way I read it.

Climate Change is an accepted fact amongst 99% of Climatologists - ie the people who'd know what they're talking about.

However, prediction of the future is an inaccurate science which is why you've been given the wrong impression that "models" aren't accurate. We don't know HOW BAD it's going to get. We just know it's bad and getting worse.

Gillie

I'd agree with ilgatto on this one.

Big_Mac

il gatto wrote: »

Accepted by sections of the scientific community, rejected by others. Same with the general populace. Sure hasn't Ireland clamped down on lightbulbs? We've done our part:D Don't get me wrong. Pollution is bad. That's a given. But until climate change is proven, and I mean properly, to be affected by human activity, then I don't care to waste my time worrying about it. the proof is scanty, misleadingly reported and involves endless "models", guesswork and unsubstantiated predictions of doom. Just the way I read it.

I have to say, I agree with this too

il gatto

Xiney wrote: »

Climate Change is an accepted fact amongst 99% of Climatologists - ie the people who'd know what they're talking about.

However, prediction of the future is an inaccurate science which is why you've been given the wrong impression that "models" aren't accurate. We don't know HOW BAD it's going to get. We just know it's bad and getting worse.

I would expect climate change is accepted by 100% of climatologists, if they do know what they're talking about. However, I would like to know how many believe human activity is responsible, and then the percentage who can present unassailable evidence of such. That's the issue. The climate is changing, but is that a natural cyclical process rather than resulting from anything people can change?

dardevle

is there any scientific evidence that human activity is NOT responsible for climate change

il gatto

That's a rhetorical question, surely?

Big_Mac

dardevle wrote: »

is there any scientific evidence that human activity is NOT responsible for climate change

I can't see the relevance of the above

There's no evidence to prove that I didn't shoot JFK, but that doesnt mean I'm gulity?:D

brianthebard

il gatto wrote: »

I would expect climate change is accepted by 100% of climatologists, if they do know what they're talking about.

Once a certain amount of them agree on climate change someone will have to start trying to refute it in order to get funding and to stand out from the crowd.

donegalman1

But in Ireland we are being penalised big time and always told we should be leading the way all the time...

The main culprits the USA and China are not only getting off scot free but snubbing their noses at us.

In reality, even if everyone in the NW does everything, how much are we going to offset against the big two's problems. We need to be seeing our government lecturing others rather than always lecturing us so they look good at these treaties and summits.

I have no problem doing my bit and we all should but we are lets face it facing a lost cause worldwide, but paying the penalities both financially and environmentally.

Culchie

Photos as promised.

Oh, I do like to be beside the seaside.

Anyways, you see the path, well that was put in by the council last year, and it was right up against the dunes.

Big change in a year.

brianthebard

donegalman1 wrote: »

But in Ireland we are being penalised big time and always told we should be leading the way all the time...

The main culprits the USA and China are not only getting off scot free but snubbing their noses at us.

In reality, even if everyone in the NW does everything, how much are we going to offset against the big two's problems. We need to be seeing our government lecturing others rather than always lecturing us so they look good at these treaties and summits.

I have no problem doing my bit and we all should but we are lets face it facing a lost cause worldwide, but paying the penalities both financially and environmentally.

Ireland and Britain (and possibly other countries) are exporting a massive amount of waste to China...so we really can't tell them to clean up their act until we've cleaned ours...

dardevle

to the left of the path there is 150 meters of rock armour that was placed in front of the dunes during the winter,seems the golf club are a little worried by coastal erosion too!

Culchie

dardevle wrote: »

to the left of the path there is 150 meters of rock armour that was placed in front of the dunes during the winter,seems the golf club are a little worried by coastal erosion too!

Yes, it was in connection with this, that I was there and saw it for my own eyes.

Big_Mac

Culchie wrote: »

Yes, it was in connection with this, that I was there and saw it for my own eyes.

Tommy Tiernan's first stand up show springs to mind........ THE WORLD IS F*CKED! THE WORLD IS F*CKED!!!!!!!!:D

dardevle

Tommy T must be lovin this thread;)

carl-sagan

Xiney wrote: »

So... if we're overdue for an ICE age... and the planet is WARMING overall...


Surely it's worse than we thought?


Honestly the attitude towards climate change in Ireland is surprising. It's accepted fact everywhere but the States, I thought. (And the States doesn't put much stock into Science, as we all know...)

Narrow unenlightened European chauvinism...

justcallmetex

basquille wrote: »

Culchie, there's someone on the phone for you:












.. it's Al Gore.

I hate that F**ker!

justcallmetex

Xiney wrote: »

Climate Change is an accepted fact amongst 99% of Climatologists - ie the people who'd know what they're talking about.

99% Prove it?

Xiney

Prove that it's not.

brianthebard

You weren't listening to the last word yesterday evening by any chance?

Xiney

me? nope - I haven't really gotten the hang of Irish radio.