Lyell Collection
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help

Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, E. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology; 1984; v. 17; issue.2; p. 167;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1984.017.02.14
© 1984 Geological Society of London

Discussion

Discussion on ‘Towards the prediction of subsidence risk upon the chalk outcrop’ by C. N. Edmonds

E. J. Wilson

, 8 Brunswick Square, Gloucester GL1 1UG.

E. J. Wilson write: Figure 1 of Edmonds' paper suggests a geographical distribution of solution features which is highly distinctive yet apparently defies geological or climatological explanation. One is reluctant to accept such distribution as a starting point for the analysis of a problem, unless either it can be explained, or it can be shown that it is not due to any other spurious factor. It is immediately obvious that the lowest density of solution features recorded is for Salisbury Plain, a large proportion of which, as a military training ground, has a land use which would be expected to have a very low sensitivity to solution features. It is also obvious that most areas of high density lie within the Home Counties. This suggests the hypothesis that solution features are more likely to be discovered, and hence to become the subject of available data, in more highly-developed areas.

To put this hypothesis to the test, a comparison was made between population density as shown in the

Ordnance Survey Atlas of Great Britain, and the density of solution features as shown by Edmonds. A direct and reliable comparison would be difficult, however, without much more detailed analysis, since there is considerable overlap between areas from the two sources. Furthermore, there are many small areas of high population density, but these are mostly concentrated in valley bottoms, which Edmonds' Fig. 2 shows are not a preferred location for solution features; therefore they have been ignored on the basis that they would

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.


Related articles in Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology:

Towards the prediction of subsidence risk upon the Chalk outcrop
C. N. Edmonds
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 1983 16: 261-266. [Abstract]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special PublicationsHome page
C. N. Edmonds
Predicting natural cavities in chalk
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications, 2001; 18: 29 - 38.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and HydrogeologyHome page
M. C. Matthews, C. R. I. Clayton, and J. Rigby-Jones
Locating dissolution features in the Chalk
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 2000; 33: 125 - 140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special PublicationsHome page
C. N. Edmonds, C. P. Green, and I. E. Higginbottom
Subsidence hazard prediction for limestone terrains, as applied to the English Cretaceous Chalk
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications, 1987; 4: 283 - 293.
[Abstract] [PDF]