Computer model trumps observation – Brisbane flood was largely man-made?

[birdie1971]

Very interesting story about the recent devastating floods in Brisbane, Australia.

http://www.theaustral...6frg6nf-1226028379093

In a nutshell, it looks like the dam operator (SEQWater) released far too much water into the downstream system as a result of what a computer model was telling them, rather than look at actual, real-world data. In order to cover up this massive error costing billions of dollars, SEQWater claimed that the rain fall was a 1 in 2000 year event – a claim that is not backed up be any actual real-world data.

From the above article, “... the claim was manufactured by SEQWater after it modelled the rapid rise of levels in the dam, repositioned rainfall data to an area immediately upstream of the dam, and then doubled it... A panel of hydrologists and engineers has categorised the Brisbane River flood as a "dam-release flood", meaning it was largely the result of massive releases.”

Computer models eh?

[Gromit]

Apparently, it was a mistake, but nothing to do with computer modelling. Before the rain, which was not an extraordinary event as was claimed, the dam up stream of Brisbane was full to the brim. Normally it could catch any large rainfall, but being full, it was u able to.

// The major dam above Brisbane, the Wivenhoe, may have missed the opportunity to release serious quantities of water in the week or two leading up to the major flood peak. Because the Wivenhoe was almost completely full, when the big danger-day came  they could do very little but eek out a small amount of water into what was a rising flood, with little capacity to absorb the massive flows. There are hard questions to be asked about water management. //

[birdie1971]

Thanks Gromit, for taking the time to answer. I don't agree with your conclusions. If you fail to see the significance (or even the existence) of computer models that lay at the heart of this disaster then I think it's fair to say that you don't understand (or chose to ignore) the current situation.

The lack of response to this question (from other ABers) seems to imply that they are completely ambivalent on this issue.

I find that very worrying. It's an abuse of measurement and an over-reliance on 'what the computers are saying' that has lead to real loss of life.