3 ms·
So the current sea level is the one that must be kept? forever? or should it rather be the level at the start of British Industrialization, let's say in 1760?
by mkempe 9y ago
So the current sea level is the one that must be kept? forever? or should it rather be the level at the start of British Industrialization, let's say in 1760?
What about sea level changes that are not caused by us? should we stop that, too? in either direction? forever?
- ctrl-j 9y ago> So the current sea level is the one that must be kept? For now, yes. There are millions of people who will be impacted if we don't. If there is a reason to maintain a different sea level, we can weigh it against the impact of those currently affected. The people in 1760 are long dead, their oceans and their levels are less relevant.
- mkempe 9y agoThanks, that makes sense as a goal, to evaluate and minimize impact on current coastal populations. I assume future coastal population centers would actively shift inland, over multiple decades, if they take into account predicted sea level changes over the next 200 to 2,000 years.
- ctrl-j 9y agoIn a capitalist society, I wouldn't expect that. What would be the market incentive to migrate? As it stands currently, coastal property is the most valuable. There would need to be a mechanism to drive that migration. Perhaps a system that adds the cost of maintaining the current sea level to owning beachfront property?
- mkempe 9y agoMarket insurance without government support, and absence of emergency funding after disasters...