Another year, another submerged part of England. This time the Lake District.
Fallout was quick. After 2009 suffered “once-in-100-yr” rains in the region, £38m got spent on new barriers.
They were even apparently over-engineered to withstand a water-level rise to 7.2m. Yet walls crumbled when faced with a “country mile” beyond that. This weekend saw a 7.9m peak.
Flaws of empiricism abound. You can never be certain past performance points accurately forward. For Climate Change, sub in unknown variable alterations where you can. Then there’s the general slating of meteorologists. Although noting the triumph for storm naming conventions now begun (it was Desmond this time).
Then I learn this fascinating government RoI calc;
for every £1 spent on flood defences,
there must be £8 of economic benefit.
That’s quite a number.
I’ve blogged on similar stipulations before (7 being another potentially arbitrary factor & Andersen’s 3.53 on training).
The facts are that some force of nature on your bid buyer-side is thinking hard about the proposed payback. Speed, weight and chance.
UK environmental planners expect an eight-fold Return.
Do you know where your buyer figure is set?
Knowing how high their walls stand, and why, and your sandbags are likely to be uniquely positioned to keep everything dry.