> 4 out of 5 people displaced are in Asia right now. Your link does not support this assertion. Instead, it says that 80% of Asian people would be displaced in

> 4 out of 5 people displaced are in Asia right now. Your link does not support this assertion. Instead, it says that 80% of Asian people would be displaced in the next eight decade given a 3ºC rise in global temperature. > Even right now, Miami is underwater, and we are pumping it back out. Miami was built on a sandbar. A good portion of the west side of the city is built atop the Everglades - it was never exactly a safe place to build. Also, Miami is not "under water". You article refers to "king tides" - caused by the alignment of Earth, Luna, and Sol - which are exactly the same as they were at any point in human history, as measured against the mean tide. They're astronomical events, and are unrelated to climate. Unless you can show that "king tides" are objectively higher today than they were in the past, I don't see what they have to do with anything whatsoever. Measuring the height of king tides is exactly equivalent to measuring the mean sea level. > Of course we could build new spare cities inland now, for much cheaper, but of course we will wait for destruction before people will move. This doesn't even make sense to me. Why would building spare cities be cheaper now than in twenty years, or fifty? Remember the time scale we're talking about here; your article is projecting out eighty years. If you built these cities today, they'd be fifty to eighty years old before people needed them. How many urban dwellers live in fifty to eighty year old houses, especially without updates? Further, if we take for granted that there will be a need for spare cities in the future, it would make much more sense to build them as needed. That would spur growth in the construction industry, which in turn would lead to economies of scale. Construction technology would have additional time to improve as well, which means fewer resources used in building and more sustainable design to boot. In short... if this is going to be an issue, from a public policy perspective reaction to it should be just that - reaction. Have resources on hand, sure, but trying to move the populations of entire cities two generations ahead of an anticipated issue is folly.