Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 May 2017, 04:56:27

All the doomer scenarios concerning Brisbane, rely on some hypothetical big melting action in Antarctica, related to huge temperature spikes, that also isn't happening. Brisbane is fine.

Do I get my 10 points now?
User avatar
Cog
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10873
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 16 May 2017, 07:40:57

Out of 1,000 possible?

You don't even get a participation ribbon.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 11095
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 May 2017, 08:28:25

Everyone gets a participation ribbon nowadays. Where is my safe space? I'm feeling triggered.
User avatar
Cog
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10873
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 16 May 2017, 09:29:19

OK Cog. Contribute or stand aside. At this point you are clearly trolling.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 11095
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby pstarr » Tue 16 May 2017, 10:02:56

Newfie wrote:OK Cog. Contribute or stand aside. At this point you are clearly trolling.

As a moderator you have responsibility to call out Cog's behaviour wherever it happens. He and his cohorts makes any serious discussion re peak oil vitually impossibe. Tnx
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27461
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby pstarr » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:16:22

I have to say, Tanada you live in a dream land
All of these cities will have to make some very hard choices about how to get through SLR, either by migrating the city wholesale up slope, or attempting to build defenses like New Orleans which is about 75% below sea level already.


Where will the energy come from for such a massive change. Fusion? Our cities are rusted messes. We don't repair/replace our rotting infrastructure. Been inside a real city in the United States lately? Not those little 'revitalized' Starbuck/millennial tourist zones. Have you been in the real giant worn-out sprawl that incircles every cute restaurant district. It is all crumbling. Potholes are not repaired, building are old, tired, energy leaks. Bridges, sewer systems, water supply all old, tired, ready to be fixed.

And you see a new city up on the hill? Reading your Reagan? lol Or replace and build new dykes. Never in a million years
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27461
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:24:38

Cog wrote:...the doomer scenarios concerning Brisbane, rely on some hypothetical big melting action in Antarctica, related to huge temperature spikes, that also isn't happening.


I'm going to give you a 2 out 10 on that question---.

"Melting action" in Antarctica is not hypothetical. Surface melt is occurring in many areas, and multiple ice shelves have collapsed.

Most sea level rise comes from melting in Greenland--not Antarctica.

You don't need "huge temperature spikes" for melting to occur....just more gradual warming.

At this point the consensus scientific scenario is for things to continue along the same path as now.

The planet has already warmed---it continues to get warmer.

We've already burned FF and put CO2 into the air and we keep doing it.

Sea level is already rising and it continues to rise.

----------------------------------

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21592
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:42:02

At either less than 2mm per year or slightly above 3mm per year, depending on your definition. I think I'll have a Coke.
User avatar
Cog
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10873
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:45:34

pstarr wrote:
Newfie wrote:OK Cog. Contribute or stand aside. At this point you are clearly trolling.

As a moderator you have responsibility to call out Cog's behaviour wherever it happens. He and his cohorts makes any serious discussion re peak oil vitually impossibe. Tnx


I have cohorts? I'm no tribune. A centurion maybe.
User avatar
Cog
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10873
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby pstarr » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:52:04

Yeah Cog, that's you: ribunus cohortis urbanae

very urbane very sophisticated for a Trumpster lol
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27461
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 May 2017, 12:03:28

pstarr wrote:I have to say, Tanada you live in a dream land
All of these cities will have to make some very hard choices about how to get through SLR, either by migrating the city wholesale up slope, or attempting to build defenses like New Orleans which is about 75% below sea level already.


Where will the energy come from for such a massive change. Fusion? Our cities are rusted messes. We don't repair/replace our rotting infrastructure. Been inside a real city in the United States lately? Not those little 'revitalized' Starbuck/millennial tourist zones. Have you been in the real giant worn-out sprawl that incircles every cute restaurant district. It is all crumbling. Potholes are not repaired, building are old, tired, energy leaks. Bridges, sewer systems, water supply all old, tired, ready to be fixed.

And you see a new city up on the hill? Reading your Reagan? lol Or replace and build new dykes. Never in a million years


There you go again making stuff up just so you can complain about it. As the leading complainer about infrastructure around these parts I am well aware of urban decay and have written extensive posts about it. Of course that is a red herring that has nothing at all to do with sea level rise. Unlike people around here who have their blinders firmly set in place I see quite a bit of construction going on around the periphery of existing cities. This makes my statement about cities moving up slope plainly simple to any but the most closed minds. The cities with access to land up slope already built suburbs on those adjoining lands and in some cases incorporated those suburbs into the 'city' proper as they grew from simple housing locations into functional urbanities in their own right.

As I stated, the vast majority of coastal communities will just keep building up hill and gradually migrate as need be. Only a few that are wealthy and stubborn, or that receive subsidies from taxpayers on the federal level, will be extensively defended because it simply isn't worth the cost.

As a rule of thumb solid well built structures are expected to have a 50-60 years useful life after which they are expected to be demolished and replaced. This has been the practice in large cities for over a century at least in the USA. Next time you go to the 'big city' Pete count how many structures other than sky scrapers there are that exceed 60 years of age in the down town area. Even skyscrapers are not 'forever' buildings, if the structure is not an icon like the Chrysler Building or the Empire State Building the odds are pretty good it will be torn down and replaced when it gets past its useful lifetime instead of expensively remodeled.

Why are you dedicated to the idea that city governments in the 2020's or even now will refuse to encourage skyscraper construction in their up slope territories? NYC is a special case because it is built on a set of islands with the bulk centered around Manhattan. Philadelphia on the other hand is a river mouth community where giving up the mile closest to the Atlantic and turning it all into vacant parkland while building new structures up river makes eminent amounts of sense. Will they do that before sea level rise forces them too? Probably not because nearly all of our elected officials world wide are very short sighted and see only the next election cycle and no further. In some ways I think our country would be much better off with greatly longer office terms so the politicians could spend time actually governing instead of constantly campaigning.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14959
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby baha » Tue 16 May 2017, 12:19:55

I was just watching a show about Miami and sea level rise. Sure you can build up and put in pumps but what they failed to mention is the beach. The whole reason Miami is there (and many other cities) is to be at the beach...Why would people still want to live there if the beach is gone? Moved 20 miles inland...
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: 1054
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby pstarr » Tue 16 May 2017, 12:20:12

Tanada wrote:Unlike people around here who have their blinders firmly set in place I see quite a bit of construction going on around the periphery of existing cities.
What you call periphery is what city planners call suburbia. Stealing new flat real estate (previously valuable farm land) and planting stick-frame houses down is not urban. Not the same as digging up, or replacing city sewers, underground electric. You are talking about new suburbia . . . the greatest misallocation of wealth in the history of mankind.

Tanada wrote:As I stated, the vast majority of coastal communities will just keep building up hill and gradually migrate as need be. Only a few that are wealthy and stubborn, or that receive subsidies from taxpayers on the federal level, will be extensively defended because it simply isn't worth the cost.

New sewer lines up hills? Skyscrapers on hills? It's even difficult to build 3 or 4 story apartment on hills. A few places in the US, not common. San Fran, Pittsburgh. How many others? We are not talking about trophy homes in the LA hills but millions of American lives in dense old urban apartment buildings.

A
Tanada wrote:s a rule of thumb solid well built structures are expected to have a 50-60 years useful life after which they are expected to be demolished and replaced. This has been the practice in large cities for over a century at least in the USA. Next time you go to the 'big city' Pete count how many structures other than sky scrapers there are that exceed 60 years of age in the down town area. Even skyscrapers are not 'forever' buildings, if the structure is not an icon like the Chrysler Building or the Empire State Building the odds are pretty good it will be torn down and replaced when it gets past its useful lifetime instead of expensively remodeled.
you apparently have never spent time in cities. You are a suburbanite. I could take you on a walking tour of San Franciscio or New York City (don't forget the Bronx, Staten Island, Brooklyn and Manhattan north of 57th street) and I challang you to find homes less than 75-100 years old
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27461
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 16 May 2017, 13:25:58

Speaking as one who stands to benefit from SLR, I'm ambivalent on the topic. I don't like seeing forced displacement of populations, but my Nantucket property is presently 3/4 mile from the beach and getting closer all the time.

Nantucket is suffering from both real SLR and a considerable amount of self-imposed land subsidence, caused by over-exploiting the underground fresh water aquifer and by simple erosion of soils exposed by mankind as part of construction. Two miles from my Nantucket home is the Old 'Sconsett Golf Course, constructed on former heather lands in 1894 in the town of Siasconsett, MA. The greens of this course are sinking, and average probably 8-10" lower than the heather around them. This is a topic of some considerable conversation, because this amount of subsidence has happened in only 123 years, and the rain from the raised heather drains onto the greens, and both the grass of the greens and the health of the heather are adversely affected. The course is dotted with water wells with submerged pumps used to irrigate the grass. It's a microcosm of the rest of the island, including a Nantucket Town road called "Old Beach Road", which is now flooded by sea water at every especially high tide.
Image
Realisticly, the subsidence and the SLR would both have to accelerate drastically for me to have a beachfront home. But my grandkids may enjoy such - and the 34-square mile island would have shrunk to (just a guess) about 25 square miles by then. About half of Nantucket Town would either be gone, or perched on raised foundation piers, with sea water canals replacing cobblestoned streets.

Nantucket is not a so-called "barrier island". Nantucket, the adjacent island of Martha's Vineyard, and Cape Cod itself are composed of sand pushed up by the advancing glaciers of the Pliestocene Ice Age, and they are relatively young in geological terms - and largely temporary IMHO.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 May 2017, 13:45:02

baha wrote:I was just watching a show about Miami and sea level rise. Sure you can build up and put in pumps but what they failed to mention is the beach. The whole reason Miami is there (and many other cities) is to be at the beach...Why would people still want to live there if the beach is gone? Moved 20 miles inland...


Miami sits on porous limestone that a few hundred thousand years ago was coral reefs and is backed by a massive swamp. I have no hope for Florida south of around Orlando remaining a viable dry land area for much longer because even at current sea level the storm sewers back sea water up on city streets during king tides and in every storm surge.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14959
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 16 May 2017, 15:02:06

"...even at current sea level the storm sewers back sea water up on city streets during king tides and in every storm surge."

Excellent point.

So here is ground zero for sea level rise affecting infrastructure. And is the state responding by rationally making a strategic withdrawal from the coast to places inland and north?

No, instead they have forbidden state employees from even mentioning global warming.

Even if T's gradual movement away from threatened coastal areas was technically and logistically possible, these kind of levels of extreme denial will keep them from actually being carried out, not just in Florida, but in many other places.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17652
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 May 2017, 15:21:29

dohboi wrote:"...even at current sea level the storm sewers back sea water up on city streets during king tides and in every storm surge."

Excellent point.

So here is ground zero for sea level rise affecting infrastructure. And is the state responding by rationally making a strategic withdrawal from the coast to places inland and north?

No, instead they have forbidden state employees from even mentioning global warming.

Even if T's gradual movement away from threatened coastal areas was technically and logistically possible, these kind of levels of extreme denial will keep them from actually being carried out, not just in Florida, but in many other places.


Denial of reality has an end date, no matter how stubborn or short sighted you are as an individual, politician or city sooner or later nature wins and you adapt or die.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14959
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Ibon » Tue 16 May 2017, 16:58:16

Tanada wrote:
Denial of reality has an end date, no matter how stubborn or short sighted you are as an individual, politician or city sooner or later nature wins and you adapt or die.


Tanada, well said.. You should use this as your new tagline. It will remain relevant for the next couple hundred years!
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6537
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 16 May 2017, 17:12:06

Tanada,
Sounds to me like some of the argument is over the theoretical ability to move vs the political ability.

I personally lived and worked in Philly for over 30 years. Our 1887 house stands at about 35' ASL. All city revitalization is taking place on the banks of the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers or in the existing downtown. I've seen old photos of our street flooded, back when there was much more riverside development which impeded the rivers ability to flow. Raise the river a few feet and we would once again be subject to flooding.

I agree much could be done to mitigate but very little IS being done. We have had 2 warning shots, Katrina and Sandy. The effects of the warning pass nearly as soon as the news cycle.

So while in the surface it sounds like we disagree I'm not so sure we really do. At least not so much. It sounds like we agree that many cities will have sever adverse effects.

Of course I also believe that those cities may well be ghost lands before SLR has a chance due to a general collapse of the global economic system, but that's just me. ;)
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 11095
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Sea Level Rise Pt. 2

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 16 May 2017, 21:34:21

What Newf said.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17652
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests