Britain as an island nation is particularly susceptible to coastal erosion. Several communities in one part of Britain, along the north coast of Norfolk, have already seen their homes and businesses washed into the sea.

So can anything be done to combat the action of oceans? And what will the coastlines of world look like in 2050? For One Planet, Mark Whittaker reports.

Listen to the programme on the BBC World Service website

Al Gore’s Oscar-winning environmental documentary exaggerated the likely effects of global warming on sea levels, a new study shows. (more…)

In an opinion piece by Orrin H. Pilkey, James B. Duke professor of earth science, emeritus, in Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences on newsobserver.com, it’s pointed out that dealing with the impact of potential sea level rise is not limited to the UK:

In the United Kingdom, a highly visible societal debate is going on about how the nation will respond to sea level rise. Environment officials recognize that, from the standpoints of engineering feasibility and costs, the entire coast cannot possibly be defended. So the question boils down to what can be preserved in the rising sea level and what will have to be abandoned. (more…)

The list of unanswered questions is a long one, but at least the debate about compensation has reached the highest level, where it was previously only spoken about in hushed tones. Ed Foss asks - what comes next?

The issue of compensation - often referred to as ’social justice’ - has been on the lips of campaigners and government officials for years, albeit the latter almost exclusively in private. But this is the first time someone in such a high-profile position has aired such views in the public arena.

Lord Smith’s words are to be welcomed in part. After all, his comments raise the issue of compensation higher up the scale than it has ever been.

But they are also difficult to interpret. If there is to be a scheme of compensation, when will it happen, will it be retrospective and who will qualify? And perhaps most importantly, what form will it take - will it meet campaigners’ demands of 100pc of market value, or will the figures be too great for the taxpayer to swallow? (more…)

People faced with losing their homes to coastal erosion or flooding by the North Sea last night welcomed a breakthrough in their fight for financial compensation.

A senior government adviser, the new chairman of the Environment Agency, Lord Smith of Finsbury, yesterday urged the government seriously to consider using taxpayers’ money to re-house those who lose out to the encroaching sea.

It is the first time anyone of such standing has responded to the pleas of homeowners not to be left empty-handed after the sea claims their homes. (more…)

Lord Smith of Finsbury’s comments have also been picked up by the Daily Mail who quote from the Independent article:

While promising to do his ‘level best’ to fund engineering solutions to the problem, Lord Smith warned that all coastal areas could not be saved.

He said: ‘We are almost certainly not going to be able to defend absolutely every bit of coast - it would simply be an impossible task both in financial terms and engineering terms.’

The agency, working with ministers, would have to identify ‘priority areas’ to defend, he said.

Lord Smith suggested that parts of north-east Norfolk and Suffolk faced the greatest threat, according to research by the Agency which will be released in 2009.

In an interview with The Independent, he went on: ‘We will publish next year details of the work that’s been done, where we think the particular threats are, where we think there is current defence in place.

‘We will begin to talk with communities where we think defence is not a viable option.’

He also warned that ministers could no longer rely on insurance companies to cover families who lost their homes , suggesting they would have to be rehoused at the taxpayer’s expense.

His comments will embarrass the government, which in May this year was forced to deny that areas of the Norfolk coastline would be surrendered.

Flooding Minister Phil Woolas said there was ‘no question’ of abandoning seaside villages from Eccles to Winterton if sea levels rise.

Read the full story by Tamara Cohen in the Daily Mail

The story is also picked up in the Guardian, and the Eastern Daily Press

In the Telegraph, Jon Swaine added comments from former Environment Minister, and MP for Suffolk Coastal John Gummer:

Mr Gummer, who has set up Suffolk Coast Against Retreat, a group campaigning for the preservation of vulnerable areas, said: “Chris Smith’s wide ranging speech must be taken seriously. The Government must listen to the concerns of the people of Suffolk and the rest of the East Coast. We want managed defence, not managed retreat. This must not be the first government in history to abandon Britain to the sea.

“Coastal erosion is perhaps the most serious issue that faces the Suffolk Coastal Constituency. We have 74 miles of coastline and all of it is vulnerable.”

A 15,000-name petition calling for the government to confirm a commitment to protect the Broads from being swamped by the sea will be handed in tomorrow before parliament shuts for the summer.

The bumper document follows a pledge to protect a vulnerable stretch of coast for at least 50 years, made by environment minister Phil Woolas during a recent visit to north east Norfolk.

He defused fears over a Natural England scenario which said one option in the face of coastal erosion was to surrender six villages and 25 square miles of Broads countryside to the sea, if defences were too expensive or difficult. (more…)

The sum of £100 million pledged by environment minister Phil Woolas to project the Norfolk Broads against the ever rising North Sea during the next 50 years, appears to fall far short of the realistic cost of conserving this important freshwater habitat.

That is the view of local anglers and indeed all conservationists who point out that to fulfil this promise the government has to sanction the building of a tidal barrage at Great Yarmouth as well as meeting head on the threat of the sea breaching the vulnerable coastal defences between Eccles and Winterton.

A tidal barrier scheme has been on and off the agenda since the 1950s, and it was rejected by government in the 1970s on the grounds that the estimated bill of £70 million did not meet the cost/benefit criteria.

It does not require a mathematic genius to calculate that building such a tidal barrage today, even if it was somehow incorporated into the Yarmouth outer harbour scheme, would swallow all of the £100 million and possibly require much more. (more…)

A GOVERNMENT minister has reassured villagers living on the coast they will not lose their homes, even though a government body has put forward a plan to allow the sea inland.

Instead, Floods Minister Phil Woolas said the government had called on the Environment Agency to provide a report on how the coastline can be protected from erosion over the next 100 years.

He also pledged £100m of government funding would be spent on bolstering defences over the next 50 years during a visit to some of the threatened villages where he met parish councillors and residents faced with the prospect of losing their homes under a Natural England option. (more…)

Villagers in Norfolk in fear of a scheme to flood their land to save the coast have been told that is not the government’s intention. - Piece on BBC Look East

“The minister also visited some of the sea defences and was told about places like Happisburgh where homes are falling into the sea. On that issue he could offer no hope. “We can’t stop coastal erosion” he said. But on the Broads, his message was clear - they will be protected.