The stormy conditions have plunged our road, rail and air networks into chaos. Given that extreme weather seems to be on the increase, this month’s 8 Questions looks at whether we should expect more of the same and what might be done to make our infrastructure more resilient. 758 readers responded

1. Do you think the Met Office does a good job of providing warning of extreme weather?

Yes: 96%  No: 3%  Don't know: 1%

There was pretty unequivocal support for the Met Office’s performance from our readership, who in the main felt that the accuracy of weather forecasting had improved vastly over the years. That said, the Met Office wasn’t totally immune from criticism. Several readers felt it was too worried about being castigated by the media for not flagging the approach of extreme weather, and that it subsequently shouted too loudly and hysterically at the slightest sign of inclemency. This meant many people were becoming ambivalent to adverse weather warnings.

2. Is it realistic to expect train and airport operators to be able to cope with unpredictable weather conditions without inconveniencing passengers?

Yes: 33%  No: 64%  Don't know: 3%

Train companies and airport operators take a hammering in the press for failing to deal with the consequences of bad weather. Perhaps surprisingly, our readers had some sympathy for the plight of transport firms in such circumstances. Sometimes, it was felt, wild weather would cause inconvenience and there was nothing that could be done about it.

3. Should the government increase public spending in an attempt to make infrastructure such as transport more resilient to weather events?

Yes: 64%  No: 28%  Don't know: 8%

Many readers said it was difficult to see how national infrastructure could be made immune to the weather without massively over-engineering everything that got built. Extreme weather would, by its nature, have an extreme effect. But engineers felt that more thought needed to be given to flood protection at the outset of new infrastructure projects, rather than trying to retrofit solutions when problems occurred. This, it was felt, would require extra government investment.

4. Is it acceptable for resources to be diverted from other areas, such as education and healthcare, to make infrastructure more resilient?

Yes: 23%  No: 66%  Don't know: 11%

In these austere times of widespread public spending cut-backs, it becomes difficult to pinpoint where any new money for infrastructure protection might come from. Indeed, while many engineers want to see further investment on resiliency, most would not want such spending to come at the expense of seemingly sacrosanct budgets in healthcare and education. This view presents this government, and any successor, with challenges in terms of financial management.

5. Should there be a widespread programme of river dredging to help the country to better cope with flooding, even if this means damage to wildlife habitats? 

Yes: 42%  No: 41%  Don't know: 17%

Dredging is, and probably always will be, a controversial activity. On the face of it, this age-old method of excavation can markedly improve water flow and reduce the chance of flooding along river banks. However, dredging is a mechanised and invasive process that can destroy wildlife. It was no surprise, then, to see readers split down the middle in their responses to this question. The high level of Don’t Knows here suggested that many mechanical engineers felt this topic lay outside their area of specialist knowledge.

6. Now that the recession is over, should the government make climate change a greater priority?

Yes: 53%  No: 39%  Don't know: 8%

The weather does seem more unpredictable these days, with greater incidence of drought in summer and floods in winter. While memory fades over time, lots of readers said they couldn’t recall as much disruption when they were growing up as there is now. So, with that said, a slim majority of our readers said the government should make climate change a greater priority – future generations wouldn’t thank us for sticking our heads in the sand and hoping that climate problems would just
go away. 

7. Do you think recent extreme weather is a direct consequence of climate change?

Yes: 37%  No: 35%  Don't know: 28%

We asked readers whether they thought the recent extremes were a direct consequence of climate change, as opposed to a natural cycle that would soon settle down. The answers delivered little clarity on the matter, with the Yes and No votes coming out neck-and-neck, and a high percentage sitting on the fence. Many No voters expressed variations on the same point: periods of bad weather happen from time to time.

8. Do you think climate change is caused by human activities?

Yes: 60%  No: 23%  Don't know: 17%

This is a controversial subject area, and one that has been debated on PE’s letters pages many times before. But attitudes change, so we thought it was worth revisiting. The question provoked a fairly strong Yes response, with almost two-thirds of engineers believing that climate change is being caused by human activities. Many readers qualified this by saying that the global population has risen so much, and we now exploit so many of the Earth’s natural resources, that we were bound to be having an impact on climate.