Global Warming To Put Prime Coastland Under Water This Century

[cieldumort]

The Observer:
Scientists to issue stark warning over dramatic new sea level figures
Rising sea levels pose a far bigger eco threat than previously thought.
This week's climate change conference in Copenhagen will sound an alarm
over new floodings - enough to swamp Bangladesh, Florida,
the Norfolk Broads and the Thames estuary.

..."It is now

Comments

[rainbowkiwi]

Back when I was a meteorology major, every teacher taught global warming like it was fact. Now as a biology major, all my teachers are still teaching global warming as fact. If it's true enough to be believed and taught by almost every science professor, then why are there so many people denying it? (actually don't answer that, the answer is ignorance and lazyness, because nobody wants to take the effort to change their lifestyle.) I swear, if I hear "what happened to global warming? It's colder than ever this winter!" one more time I'm going to have a mental breakdown.

[cieldumort]

ikr

[floundah]

Huh?

(perhaps I am a bit dense tonight)

[cieldumort]

(I know, right?)

:P

[brianthedog]

20 to 60 centimeters by 2100? Hmmm...20 centimers is about eight inches, and 60 centimeters is around two feet. Many, if not most, coastal locations already have a bigger tidal range than that; I doubt folks living around the Bay of Fundy would even notice the difference

[cieldumort]

Have you considered the impact of a one or two foot sea level rise on coastal communities that are mere inches above sea level?

And how about those under sea level?

I'm not arguing that some people aren't excelling at the Darwin Awards... but I am aware that over decades and even centuries or longer, modern man has built up livelihoods, even major thriving metropolises, right above sea level, and right along the coast.

[brianthedog]

The Netherlands has been dealing with its below-sea-level topography throughout its history. Whatever measures they will take will undoubtedly be similar to the ones they have used in the past that have helped them to thrive throughout the centuries. Ditto Bangladesh, but without the thriving. It's pathetic that something can't be done to keep hundreds of thousands of lives from being lost every time a cyclone hits, but the industrialized nations of the world would probably get bitch-slapped for interfering with the local culture and means of livelihood if they stopped. As for countries such as the Maldives, Kiribati, etc., I can't help but think that if the U.S. routinely commandeered such locales back in the 1940s and '50s, moving the entire populations off these islands just so they could blow them up with experimental nukes, they should be able to move them again if need be. The sea is going to rise anyway, even if our contribution to global warming somehow stopped tomorrow

[cieldumort]

I understand. But even if 91 years seems like "a whole lifetime" away (so not to worry) it is arguably very unfair to dump this problem on future generations, and other species. Imagine if they are right about 2100, how things are on track to be in 2200, 2300, and so forth. Kevin Costner starts to come to mind ;)