Silbury Hill forum 180 room
Image by Paul C
Silbury Hill

Silbury Round One lock

close
more_vert
smallblueplanet S
smallblueplanet Nov 26, 2005 22:34:42
Replying to nigelswift

"Today, EH said that's not what they meant "in their wildest dreams" and they were aiming to go in on the basis of zero damage or a minimum amount. We look forward to seeing that in print and for the Risk Assessment to be amended to say that there will be no tunnel enlargement by 0.2m and no consequent loss of 166m3. Indeed, if they can do it we'll be the first to hail the miracle."

The Risk Assesment is there to provide a 'worse case' scenario - thats what its done for, it doesn't mean it will happen, but is the WORST that might happen.

"So, we were guilty of believing EH's Risk Assessment. "

No you were guilty of misunderstanding the nature of a Risk Assessment.

N nigelswift
nigelswift Nov 26, 2005 22:51:45
Replying to smallblueplanet

"No you were guilty of misunderstanding the nature of a Risk Assessment."

Not so.
The Risk Assessment provided two estimates of natural damage progression. One best, one worst. it was therefore not an expression of a worst case scenario. It ewas an assessment of the risk and cannot be explained away otherwise.

We deliberately chose the worst, not the best to arrive at our inference that it would take 107 years before the equivalent of the tunnelling damage happened naturally. Had we chosen the best, i.e. slowest, rate of void migration it would mean it would take a great deal longer than 107 years for the equivalent of the tunnelling damage to occur.

But it matters little. All of the figures have now been disclaimed.