Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 25 Jun 2018, 17:50:09

Subjectivist wrote:
Newfie wrote:FWIW Tanada I also do not like money spent on these foolish projects.

But also I don’t want to see NYC et al being moved inland. I’d prefer to just let them die.


I am pretty sure the people of those cities will bject to jst dropping dead as the waters rise. Doesn't it make more sense to move them early in a non disruptie manner?


I said I’d rather the cities die, not the people within them.

To your point about moving early what would be the first steps? Perhaps banning all development in the at risk zones? If you don’t build it you don’t have to move it.

If you control your population you don’t have to build it in the first place.

So, where do we start?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby baha » Mon 25 Jun 2018, 19:08:39

That is the 64 million dollar question...you start by acknowledging SLR is a reality. And agreeing to subsidize the adaptations.

Take New Orleans for example. Baton Rouge is on the first high ground you come to on the Mississippi river. You build industry and housing in BR and then incentivize the NO residents to move. Buy their house, or transfer title to a new fully paid house in BR.

I didn't invent capitalism but I can work it. Money talks. I know...where does it come from? We can just print it right? Never-mind all the energy needed to make it happen. The other choice is to let them die in a hurricane. :twisted:

But NO, They are building movable flood walls and raising the levees. What did I say about short sighted?
A Solar fuel spill is otherwise known as a sunny day!
The energy density of a tank of FF's doesn't matter if it's empty.
I will see your google and raise you an infinity!

https://monitoringpublic.solaredge.com/solaredge-web/p/kiosk?guid=19844186-d749-40d6-b848-191e899b37db
User avatar
baha
Solar Advocate
Solar Advocate
 
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Subjectivist » Mon 25 Jun 2018, 19:17:41

Newfie wrote:
Subjectivist wrote:
Newfie wrote:FWIW Tanada I also do not like money spent on these foolish projects.

But also I don’t want to see NYC et al being moved inland. I’d prefer to just let them die.


I am pretty sure the people of those cities will bject to jst dropping dead as the waters rise. Doesn't it make more sense to move them early in a non disruptie manner?


I said I’d rather the cities die, not the people within them.

To your point about moving early what would be the first steps? Perhaps banning all development in the at risk zones? If you don’t build it you don’t have to move it.

If you control your population you don’t have to build it in the first place.

So, where do we start?


IMO the place to start is banning all new construction in the 500 year flood plain. Work your way up from there by doing new flood maps once a decade as sea levels rise. No grandfathering in, if your beach house gets destroyed in a storm you do not get to build a replacement.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4296
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 25 Jun 2018, 19:45:31

I don’t think 500 year flood plains will cut it. Just my gut but if you are looking at end of century SLR on the order of 10 meters then that’s way above the 500 year flood plain. Maybe the 500 year flood plain PPUS 10 meters. But even then you are looking at structures being at risk in 80 years.

Tunnels into NYC and some subways are well over 100 years old with no intention of replacement.

And as to incentives, we need to start by removing incentives to stay put. Make it clear they are on their own. If you want to incentiveize tell them no more flood insurance in 5 years. But give them free or reduced insurance in new approved areas.

Yes, hard assed approach. But this effort ain’t gonna be cheap. We have to make it clear to everyone there are consequences for short sighted thinking.

Like I said, a few years ago working on the new rail tunnel into NYC, they raised the portals by 10 feet for SLR. I don’t know the design life if the tunnel, not sure it was even contemplated, but it’s well over 100 years. What’s a safe SLR estimate for 2220? Better yet, what’s the chances Manhattan will be viable by 2220?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 26 Jun 2018, 07:59:37

Good points, Newf.

And to get back to Florida's issues with slr:

'Florida is about to be wiped off the map'

Sea level rises are not some distant threat; for many Americans they are very real. In an extract from her chilling new book, Rising, Elizabeth Rush details how the US coastline will be radically transformed in the coming years

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... abeth-rush

...But Hal says it doesn’t matter whether you live six feet above sea level or sixty-five, because he, like James Hansen, believes that all of these predictions are, to put it mildly, very, very low.

“The rate of sea level rise is currently doubling every seven years, and if it were to continue in this manner, Ponzi scheme style, we would have 205 feet of sea level rise by 2095,” he says.

“And while I don’t think we are going to get that much water by the end of the century, I do think we have to take seriously the possibility that we could have something like 15 feet by then.”

...Dig into geologic history and you discover this: when sea levels have risen in the past, they have usually not done so gradually, but rather in rapid surges, jumping as much as 50 feet over a short three centuries. Scientists call these events “meltwater pulses”...
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17431
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby baha » Tue 26 Jun 2018, 09:10:45

Newfie wrote:I don’t think 500 year flood plains will cut it.


That's interesting. Just like Rockman, I looked at the flood maps (on-line) before I bought my house. There are two creeks nearby. The one in the side yard is seasonal, it only has water in the spring. In a 500 year flood it is 20 feet wide. The creek way out back always has water and it gets 50 yards wide in a 500 year flood.

I have lived here 7 years and already seen those conditions twice. Once during Hurricane Matthew. I think the map drawers were paid off by the land developers :)

I had pics but I lost them in a phone incident :)
A Solar fuel spill is otherwise known as a sunny day!
The energy density of a tank of FF's doesn't matter if it's empty.
I will see your google and raise you an infinity!

https://monitoringpublic.solaredge.com/solaredge-web/p/kiosk?guid=19844186-d749-40d6-b848-191e899b37db
User avatar
baha
Solar Advocate
Solar Advocate
 
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 06 Jul 2018, 07:52:43

User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 08 Jul 2018, 09:21:15

Pacific Northwest waves were getting bigger. Based on sophisticated statistical analysis of deepwater buoy data now spanning 30 years, the new 100-year event estimate is 14 meters. Ruggiero even suggests the possibility of one towering higher than a five-story building.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... northwest/
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 10523
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Sun 08 Jul 2018, 12:22:58

Great catch, Newf.

This is the kind of thing that people trying to downplay slr tend to miss. It's not just slr, but all the add on effects of stronger storms and higher waves.

The sea isn't going to just be incrementally creeping up the shore at rate of a millimeter or a few per year. On top of that 'rising floor' will be more and more storms and waves that are more and more likely to be well beyond anything in the historical record.

Add to that the likelihood that these events will be accompanied by beyond-Biblical rainfall events, and you have a perfect prescription for lots and lots of misery as people are taken mostly unawares by deadly catastrophes.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17431
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Previous

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests