7 ms·
The Dutch Have Solutions to Rising Seas
- LoSboccacc 9y agoAnyone know how much water is 1cm sea rise? Mars needs water and Musk is interested in footing the bill, even if a mass driver is probably more apt to the issue than rockets.
- curiousgal 9y agoThe surface of the earth is 510,082,000 sq. km. The oceans cover ~70.9% of that, so 510082000 * 0.709 * 0.00001 = 3616.48138 cubic km.?
- maxerickson 9y agoThat's what I got. And then 1 cubic km of water is ~1 trillion kg.
- mcv 9y agoSo rockets aren't going to work. Maybe instead of a space elevator, we need a space fountain. Pump water up until centrifugal force takes over. I bet it's going to be spectacular.
- robin_reala 9y agoThat already exists but with a different meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain
- johnlorry 9y agoInteresting shape...
- jacquesm 9y agoThat won't work. You'll need to accelerate each individual molecule of water to orbital velocity or you'll just be making a lot of rain. Water molecules are not connected tension wise the same way a space elevators' tether is. Even ice has a tensile strength that is way too low so the fact that it is going to be below zero still won't help (might turn your rain into hail or snow though).
- mcv 9y agoMy comment was in jest, but if you want to take it seriously, it's not the tensile strength of water that matters, but that of the tube it's being pumped through. That would need to be the magically stronger than nanotubes material that we also need for a space elevator. If you make the tube narrow enough, you might even take advantage of capillary action in some way.
- jacquesm 9y agoAh, I imagined you were going to run a pipe up the side of a mountain and shoot it out at very high velocity. (Never mind that most of it would flash to steam instantly on escaping the nozzle, and that the whole thing would have to be ridiculously strong.) Fun project though!
- striking 9y agoInstead of using the Hyperloop for transportation, let's point it at the sky and fire water from it.
- nealabq 9y agoCall it the Hyperloo. Say "have one on me!" with each flush.
- hibbelig 9y agoWhat happens to water in vacuum?
- 9y ago
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- zdkl 9y agoI'd like to start a "Don't bring water out of our gravity well" association.
- jlebrech 9y agoyes we probably shouldn't remove our own water, we could take only up to the amount the earth has gained over the last 1m years (let's say) through meteor showers, but I think that would be low. we could also start living in pods and tunnels on earth separate from the other animals, then we wouldn't need as much water and could spare some for when we do the same thing on mars.
- b3lvedere 9y agoThat somewhat reminded me of XKCD's https://what-if.xkcd.com/53 https://what-if.xkcd.com/53 and https://what-if.xkcd.com/54/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/54/ :)
- ceejayoz 9y agoThe waste heat from throwing the oceans into space would have to be dealt with.
- Aardwolf 9y agoCould we store it in a giant container instead?
- _ph_ 9y agoIt would be cheaper to build giant fridges to freeze the excess water and store it in the north. It would be even more cheaper not to let the ice melt, which still is in the north. Wind and Solar and others are now mature technologies which are price-competetive. The Model 3 shows, electrical cars are a thing. We have all the technology to slow down and eventually reverse climate change. In the great scheme of things it is not even very expensive, we just have to put all these technologies to use.
- apexalpha 9y agoIt's a good read but... I don't see the whole point about "From a Dutch mind-set, climate change is not a hypothetical or a drag on the economy, " is a bit weird. Climate doesn't matter here. 1/3rd of the country is already under sea level TODAY. The billions we spend on engineering and developing water defense structures have no relation to our believes about climate change. We are ALREADY beneath sea level! Look at this https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/5a/75/f8/5a75f8224f90bd258dd44037a90db43f.gif https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/5a/75/f8/5a75... Gives you a perspective. Hell, we even have our own little Trump, denying Climate change and blaming all our faults on Moroccans in stead of Mexicans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders Some more reading for those interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_control_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_control_in_the_Netherlan...
- yread 9y agoAnd about half of the country is less than 1m above sea level. The 1953 storm created a surge of 5.6m above mean sea level, about 3.6 above highest tide. Delta Works protects only to about 4m above highest tide. Katrina created a storm surge of up to 8.5m. Luckily tropical hurricanes don't get to the North Sea. Yet.
- tda 9y agoCurrent investments in the river and coastline protection ("Ruimte voor de Rivier" and "Zwakke Schakels") are done not only to protect for the current conditions, but also for the anticipated climate change. As an example, the second large expansion for the port of Rotterdam, Maasvlakte2, is at 6m above sea level. The previous one is at 5m. That added one meter has cost a few hundred million euro's extra, but money well spent in my opinion. The foundation of the Maasland Barrier is designed for a storm surge of 6m above mean sea level, even though the gate is currently at 5m above. Thats why it can easily be upgraded. So even though not much is changing in the general publics perspective, for large infrastructure that takes 10 years to prepare and design, and is built to work for 50-100 years, taking into account (expected) climate change has been a necessity for many decades now. On another note, here is a nice point cloud visualization of the entire country: http://ahn2.pointclouds.nl/ http://ahn2.pointclouds.nl/
- RickJWagner 9y agoI wonder when the rise will begin to affect ocean-side property prices?
- curiousgal 9y agoI think their value will increase at first as they will be closer to the water, right before plunging, no pun intended.
- tda 9y agoActually it won't, as there is relatively little ocean-side property to affect in the first place. With the exceptions of a few coastal towns like Scheveningen, property development is illegal along the coast as it would hinder future coastal protection. Consequently private ownership of coastal area is also unheard of here. Because there are no buildings on them, the most cost effective way of improving our coastal defences is relatively easy and low-tech: just add more sand to the dunes and beaches.
- vanderZwan 9y agoAnd as a side-benefit, we have a beautiful coastline for taking walks or bike rides. Michaël Dudok de Witt's Father and Daughter[0] shows this beautifully (and, incidentally, depicts a polder being reclaimed from the sea over the years) [0] https://vimeo.com/48076471 https://vimeo.com/48076471
- avar 9y agoWhenever flood control in The Netherlands is discussed, it's worth looking at this detailed elevation map: http://www.floodmap.net/Elevation/CountryElevationMap/?ct=NL http://www.floodmap.net/Elevation/CountryElevationMap/?ct=NL The elevation profile of the entire country is one where the coast is much higher than sealevel, and then gradually slopes downwards to bits of the interior that are entirely landlocked, but are say 1 meter below sealevel. In other words we have pockets of land that are below sealevel, but they're surrounded by and protected by land that's not. The facts on the ground are very different from claims being made by a sibling comment that "we are ALREADY beneath sea level!". This is why the NYT article is talking about "reservoirs for when the seas and rivers spill over" and "to let water in, where possible". Managing the water is largely about protecting these pockets that are below sealevel.
- krageon 9y agoActually looking at this map, I'm still seeing significant flooding without anything holding water back. When I read your comment I assumed you somehow provided evidence that worrying about the water/coast is nonsensical, reading the map I see the opposite.
- avar 9y agoWorrying about the water & coast is a very real concern in The Netherlands. I didn't mean to give the opposite impression. The intent of my comment is to explain that the mental image many have of The Netherlands (even some natives are guilty of this) that it's all effectively under sealevel held up by some above-sealevel walls facing the ocean is false. Most big population centers are above sealevel, those that aren't are usually "landlocked" below-sealevel areas, i.e. surrounded by land that's not below sealevel. Flooding's still a major concern, but it's as much about ensuring that these landlocked areas don't turn into big puddles whenever it rains as it is about holding storm surges from the ocean back. This is why the top comment in this thread stating that "we are ALREADY beneath sea level!" is BS. The nominal state of The Netherlands is not to be under sea level, but just barely above it. This means that it's vulnerable to heavy rains, storm surges etc. But it also means that it's no more prepared than most other countries if the ocean were to rapidly rise and start overflowing & eroding the above-sealevel costal areas that protect the under-sealevel inland areas from being permanently flooded.
- jlebrech 9y agotheir solution only makes the sea levels higher for everyone else. how about seasteading instead (sic)?
- miheermunjal 9y agoseparate from the content, can we all take a moment to appreciate the NYT visuals? Definitely a pro to non-paper journalism is the ability to use complex graphics. Not saying this is their best work but its subtlety great.
- awful 9y agoPrevention costs far less than remediation. But the future business opportunities; can no longer sell you big cars, big homes, large tracts of land, but we can sell you clean air, clean water, and keeping the water out of your domicile. Here's your air filtration/water desal/water pumping bill, so go to your job.
- curiousgeorgio 9y agoThe Netherlands has had to deal with flooding for many hundreds of years[1]; it's been a problem long before the industrial revolution that so many point to as a primary trigger of AGW, so acting like this is a matter of climate change is just politically-motivated BS, to be honest. The thing we should learn from this is the fact that whether or not you subscribe to AGW, the solutions are found in technologies that protect us from the harsh effects of climate (however they may be caused) rather than naive attempts to proactively change the course of the climate itself. Think about it: even the strongest proponents of AGW seem to agree that at this point, there's very little we can actually do in terms of suppressing or reversing the trends (people argue that any improvement or slowing is worthwhile, but that completely ignores economic principles like the law of diminishing [marginal] returns and opportunity cost). The truth is, we have fewer climate-related deaths per year now than ever before. Why is that? It's not a result of cutting down carbon emissions, that's for sure. Instead, we are simply more adept at living safely in a variety of climate conditions thanks to technology and industrialization. Developing countries have seen the greatest improvements as a result of technology, but we all benefit. Can we count on people to dramatically change their lifestyles in response to economically-inferior proposals based on politicized science? Absolutely not (how has that track record been globally?). What kinds of incentives can we rely on for changing people's behavior? Answer: clear economic interests[2]. If and when it makes economic sense to deal with climate-related challenges, the market will incentivize the most practical solutions via innovation. The Dutch have proven that point (and not just recently). If you don't believe we need technology to keep us safe from the climate, I encourage you to pick a random spot on earth and try living there on your own without any form of modern technology or any of the products of industrialization. Your struggle - and increased risk of death - would have been the same (at least in scale) at any point in the earth's history. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands#Floods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands#Floods [2] Referring to natural market-based incentives rather than artificial government-imposed incentives.
- skrebbel 9y agoThis headline is misleading. The Dutch don't have solutions, they have workarounds.
- thesimp 9y agoOne thing I'm thinking about is about much is how money the Dutch (and their southern neighbors, the Belgians) are going to make once the rise in sea levels will have a direct impact on wealthy regions. In the world top 5 of dredging firms 4 are either Dutch or Belgian firms. And once prime real estate, in for example Florida or the Hamptons, is in direct danger large amounts of money will change hands to reinforce the coastline. And those top 5 dredging firms have all the engineering expertise needed. Moving extremely large amounts of rock & sand like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Jumeirah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Jumeirah and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Suez_Canal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Suez_Canal are just warmup exercises for the amount of work that needs to be done in the next 50 years.
- vectorEQ 9y agobunch of nonsense. people dont cause climate change and they can certainly not stop it. This means, that you can either try to live under sea level like a stuborn fool, or relocate to a safer place once the danger increases too much. Building higher walls will just end up with higher and higher walls... just piling up shit on shit. a solution to a problem is something that makes it go away, not hide it behind a wall, wtf. On another note, all this awsome dutch flood control, totally destroyed the environment here for a lot of bird types (migratory ones mostly) and a lot of other animals, so its destroying nature by combating it, like ignorant people have been doing for centuries now. lets combat nature, good fucking idea. >.> work with nature ffs, cause you are nature. tl;dr: 1) a work around is not a solution 2) dont fight what you care about... take care of it and respect it!