This was the first time that the prediction of the water level was above 300cm and made the computer to close it automatically. It closed once before due to water level in 2007 but that was because the threshold was lowered to 260cm during the 2007 storm season. It’s tested every year though. Quite nice to spectate even though it takes two hours and is too slow to really see with the eye.
On December 21, 2023 the Maeslantkering was closed automatically at the 300 cm threshold for the first time in history. During the day a forecast had been made that the water level in Rotterdam would reach critical height of 300 cm above NAP at around 23:30. There were discussions to close the Maeslantkering manually before that time, and the Port of Rotterdam started reducing traffic at 16:00. Around 18:00 the traffic across the Nieuwe Waterweg came to a complete standstill. Before the decision was actually made to manually close the Maeslantkering, the computer systems intervened and had begun the automatic closing procedure. Closing started at 20:15, a process which takes about 2 hours. The next day at 4:45 the gates were opened again.[8]
- It automatically closed in 2018, but the algorithm was adjusted to close at a lower water level, specifically to enforce a closing under storm conditions.
This was absolutely impossible to read. I was interested in the topic though as I have a Dutch spatial planning university degree and it's nice to see these systems working. The years of hard engineering projects for flood management did not go to waste especially for the mitigation of these events.
That said, NL is not focusing on these hard engineering solutions as much anymore as the focus has turned towards soft engineering, such as controlled floodplains. We'll probably see less and less of these kinds of solutions in the future and flood management becomes more boring in a sense.
Haha, never noticed it on my PC when submitting it. I could not find an English article anywhere, finally stumbled on this page.
The Wikipedia page has a short paragraph as of yesterday, so that might be a better source.
Wow, I think you are right. I noticed the text looked a bit weird. There is even the literal text "play button" underneath a video in the article. I thought maybe some Javascript hadn't loaded.
This is a rubbish submission from a low-effort spam website and should be replaced with the link you found.
With the present conslusion from climate change models on how the water
will rise due to increased temperature, is not parts of the Netherlands
no longer viable and people and business will have ot move to regions
with higher elevation?
Should such a drastic move be taking place now, before the model conclusion
say it will be underwater?
That based on the fact that the 1,5C goal has long since become untenable
without drastic action, which is presently not taking place. -
Interesting question.
While higher water (due to global warming) is a threat to the Netherlands, it feels like The Netherlands may be more ready for it than other countries. The Netherlands has already been dealing with high water for centuries, and as another comment mentioned: half of the country is already below sea level.
The danger from high water doesn't come from rising sea-level. Most of the country is already below sea level and our coastal defenses are ready to withstand the sea for the coming centuries.
What might become a problem though, is flooding of rivers. The Netherlands is a river delta for a large part of Europe. Melting snow in other countries gets transported to the North Sea by several large rivers. If (when) sea level rises it gets harder to get rid of al that water fast enough. Perhaps we have to dam up rivers until low tide and let it all out at once, for example.
Still, we are on top of it and there is still enough time to build higher dams and dikes. We'll survive.
While under threat, other parts of the world are much less prepared than my home country, which has a long history of just engineering its way around the issues. We already have parts of the country meters below see level that are perfectly fine. One or two meters extra poses a few technical challenges but nothing that can't be handled. Important to note is that you have to separate averages and extremes. This is the north sea we're talking about. Water levels vary by several meters between low tide and high tide. Averages are meaningless and not a problem. It's the extremes getting more extreme that need planning for. Upgrading dikes and other defenses for higher water levels is costly but doable.
The automated barrier closure was triggered by the combination of a winter storm and high tide pushing in a lot of extra water up the river. Add to that saturated rivers draining essentially most of Europe's rainfall and you get a picture of what is routinely dealt with there. The rivers are actually a bigger issue than the sea. Forested areas that used to absorb a lot of water are vastly reduced in size. More extreme rainfall now flows straight into the Rhine and Meusse rivers, which both exit where this barrier is. The solution for this is not more dikes but flood zones.
Other parts of the world are much less ready for higher water levels. Florida for example is particularly poorly prepared for even modest water level rises and has much less extreme tides; so the averages matter more. There just isn't a whole lot in terms of sea defenses and other infrastructure. Any storm is likely to push a lot of water in. Combined with even modest sea level rises that means there just is a lot of property at risk.
The intesting part:
The flood defense closes automatically at a water level of 3 meters above NAP (Amsterdam water level baseline) at Rotterdam or 2.9 meters above NAP at Dordrecht. The two doors, each 210 meters wide and 22 meters high, fill with water when the barrier closes. They then sink to the bottom in about two hours. A computer system automatically determines whether the barrier should be closed. However, a team from Rikswaterstaat is present to supervise.
27 comments
[ 13.5 ms ] story [ 40.5 ms ] threadIs it to relieve political pressure on the decision- makers, since closing the barrier prevents traffic in and out of Rotterdam?
Or is it because the algorithm is so complex and it has to anticipate water flow from the Rhine?
From the wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maeslantkering
- It was completed in 1997.
- It automatically closed in 2018, but the algorithm was adjusted to close at a lower water level, specifically to enforce a closing under storm conditions.
source: https://www.rijkswaterstaat.nl/water/waterbeheer/bescherming...
(that is the Dutch agency responsible for the barrier)
That said, NL is not focusing on these hard engineering solutions as much anymore as the focus has turned towards soft engineering, such as controlled floodplains. We'll probably see less and less of these kinds of solutions in the future and flood management becomes more boring in a sense.
This is a rubbish submission from a low-effort spam website and should be replaced with the link you found.
Should such a drastic move be taking place now, before the model conclusion say it will be underwater?
That based on the fact that the 1,5C goal has long since become untenable without drastic action, which is presently not taking place. -
A substantial part of the Netherlands is already below sea level, even without climate change. Half of the country is less than a meter above.
What might become a problem though, is flooding of rivers. The Netherlands is a river delta for a large part of Europe. Melting snow in other countries gets transported to the North Sea by several large rivers. If (when) sea level rises it gets harder to get rid of al that water fast enough. Perhaps we have to dam up rivers until low tide and let it all out at once, for example.
Still, we are on top of it and there is still enough time to build higher dams and dikes. We'll survive.
The automated barrier closure was triggered by the combination of a winter storm and high tide pushing in a lot of extra water up the river. Add to that saturated rivers draining essentially most of Europe's rainfall and you get a picture of what is routinely dealt with there. The rivers are actually a bigger issue than the sea. Forested areas that used to absorb a lot of water are vastly reduced in size. More extreme rainfall now flows straight into the Rhine and Meusse rivers, which both exit where this barrier is. The solution for this is not more dikes but flood zones.
Other parts of the world are much less ready for higher water levels. Florida for example is particularly poorly prepared for even modest water level rises and has much less extreme tides; so the averages matter more. There just isn't a whole lot in terms of sea defenses and other infrastructure. Any storm is likely to push a lot of water in. Combined with even modest sea level rises that means there just is a lot of property at risk.