7 ms·

Rising seas will cut off many properties before they’re flooded

35 points by AiaAidan 4y ago

_3u10 4y ago
If only there was some kind of technology to allow roads to cross water, that would be highly convenient, I guess until that tech gets invented we'll just have to allow flooded roads to cut people off from the rest of the country. > The results make it clear that isolation will be a significant problem for the US. Even under the lowest sea level rise scenario (0.5 meters by 2100), Pretty sure we can deal with 1.5 feet of water, it seems somehow surmountable, like maybe add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again?
- kodyo 4y ago
  Hey now. We should probably implement some kind of centralized global authority before we get too hasty with "solving problems."
  - _3u10 4y ago
    Definitely, these anti-elite luddites think they can just put gravel on roads til it's above water without proper expertise and oversight. We definitely need a global authority to issue permits for people to put extra gravel, or move dirt from the above water part of the hill to the below water part.
    - rs999gti 4y ago
      > We definitely need a global authority No thanks
- creatonez 4y ago
  > Pretty sure we can deal with 1.5 feet of water, it seems somehow surmountable, like maybe add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again? This is an extremely simplistic view of sea level rise. Even a small amount of sea level rise can cause a ton of coastline erosion, because the water is now frequently flooding into areas not already weathered. It's not compatible with our infrastructure, unless we spent a lot to renovate it.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    People will adapt to change. Calm down.
    - creatonez 4y ago
      Yes, society will "adapt", by exacerbating inequality. Massive amounts of resources will be wasted on ideas like "add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again" to allow the super rich to keep their properties for a few years longer, and the only actual workable solution (building new sustainable homes and allowing people to relocate to them for free) will be ignored.
      - kodyo 4y ago
        There's the authoritarian collectivist power differential take! I knew you were coming, you little rascal! Massive amounts of resources are being wasted on bad climate ideas now. Poor people have bigger problems. That certain patches of land might be squishier in 100 years isn't in their top 10.
        sundaeofshock 4y ago
        Did you even bother to read the article? They are saying that these impacts will be felt as soon as 2030.
        kodyo 4y ago
        Yep. Been reading variations of the same article for decades. Captain Planet up there says building bridges and moving dirt around causes inequity, though, so I guess we have to live with it.
        creatonez 4y ago
        > says building bridges and moving dirt around causes inequity Infrastructure is one of the most expensive things people interact with on a regular basis. Choices in how we build infrastructure redirects society's resources on a massive scale. So yes, I do think it's plausible that huge investments in water-resistant infrastructure and wasteful attempts to build Dubai-style island suburbs will redirect resources away from more important issues, like the pressing need in the US to fix existing bridges and roads, build 1.5 million more houses, earthquake-proof the infrastructure in the pacific northwest, and figure out how to get 4800 GW more on the electrical grid cleanly.
rascul 4y ago
Time to buy a boat.
shrubble 4y ago
'End of the century' meaning 77 years from now? On models that are tissue-thin? This isn't news, just conjecture. We have no idea of what the Sun will do during that time, for instance...
- creatonez 4y ago
  > We have no idea of what the Sun will do during that time, for instance... This is a climate change denial talking point that holds no weight in terms of actual scientific literature, climate modelling, and historical climate record proxies. Very few natural events can reverse the temperature trajectory of the next hundred years, other than large volcanic eruptions.
  - shrubble 4y ago
    Good to know that the temperature stays the same in my south facing living room, whether it is night or daytime... thanks. We know very well, that the Sun goes through cycles, that it changes its level of radiation; and that even the most cursory glance at the stats of different planets, which are at different distances from the Sun, show the effects of solar radiation.
    - NoahKAndrews 4y ago
      They're not saying the sun doesn't have an effect, they're saying the sun's cycles aren't significant enough to have a chance at negating climate change.
dadjoker 4y ago
Is that like Al Gore's prophecies from at least a decade ago claiming that certain cities would be underwater by now? https://www.wsj.com/articles/al-gores-climate-sequel-misses-a-few-inconvenient-facts-1501193349 https://www.wsj.com/articles/al-gores-climate-sequel-misses-...
- creatonez 4y ago
  Al Gore does not represent the scientific community. If you're looking for up-to-date info, you should read the IPCC's recently finished AR6 report^1, which combines together 13,500 research citations to evaluate estimate ranges for impacts like sea level rise and coastal erosion. ^1: AR6 report: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ AR4 report (2018) has more info about sea level rise specifically: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg2-chapter6-1.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg2-chap... This is an important bit: https://i.imgur.com/inEZ1Lp.png https://i.imgur.com/inEZ1Lp.png
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

35 points by AiaAidan 4y ago

If only there was some kind of technology to allow roads to cross water, that would be highly convenient, I guess until that tech gets invented we'll just have to allow flooded roads to cut people off from the rest of the country. > The results make it clear that isolation will be a significant problem for the US. Even under the lowest sea level rise scenario (0.5 meters by 2100), Pretty sure we can deal with 1.5 feet of water, it seems somehow surmountable, like maybe add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again?

kodyo 4y ago
Hey now. We should probably implement some kind of centralized global authority before we get too hasty with "solving problems."
- _3u10 4y ago
  Definitely, these anti-elite luddites think they can just put gravel on roads til it's above water without proper expertise and oversight. We definitely need a global authority to issue permits for people to put extra gravel, or move dirt from the above water part of the hill to the below water part.
  - rs999gti 4y ago
    > We definitely need a global authority No thanks
creatonez 4y ago
> Pretty sure we can deal with 1.5 feet of water, it seems somehow surmountable, like maybe add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again? This is an extremely simplistic view of sea level rise. Even a small amount of sea level rise can cause a ton of coastline erosion, because the water is now frequently flooding into areas not already weathered. It's not compatible with our infrastructure, unless we spent a lot to renovate it.
- kodyo 4y ago
  People will adapt to change. Calm down.
  - creatonez 4y ago
    Yes, society will "adapt", by exacerbating inequality. Massive amounts of resources will be wasted on ideas like "add 2 feet of gravel and pave it again" to allow the super rich to keep their properties for a few years longer, and the only actual workable solution (building new sustainable homes and allowing people to relocate to them for free) will be ignored.
    - kodyo 4y ago
      There's the authoritarian collectivist power differential take! I knew you were coming, you little rascal! Massive amounts of resources are being wasted on bad climate ideas now. Poor people have bigger problems. That certain patches of land might be squishier in 100 years isn't in their top 10.
      - sundaeofshock 4y ago
        Did you even bother to read the article? They are saying that these impacts will be felt as soon as 2030.
        kodyo 4y ago
        Yep. Been reading variations of the same article for decades. Captain Planet up there says building bridges and moving dirt around causes inequity, though, so I guess we have to live with it.
        creatonez 4y ago
        > says building bridges and moving dirt around causes inequity Infrastructure is one of the most expensive things people interact with on a regular basis. Choices in how we build infrastructure redirects society's resources on a massive scale. So yes, I do think it's plausible that huge investments in water-resistant infrastructure and wasteful attempts to build Dubai-style island suburbs will redirect resources away from more important issues, like the pressing need in the US to fix existing bridges and roads, build 1.5 million more houses, earthquake-proof the infrastructure in the pacific northwest, and figure out how to get 4800 GW more on the electrical grid cleanly.

rascul 4y ago

Time to buy a boat.

shrubble 4y ago

'End of the century' meaning 77 years from now? On models that are tissue-thin? This isn't news, just conjecture. We have no idea of what the Sun will do during that time, for instance...

creatonez 4y ago
> We have no idea of what the Sun will do during that time, for instance... This is a climate change denial talking point that holds no weight in terms of actual scientific literature, climate modelling, and historical climate record proxies. Very few natural events can reverse the temperature trajectory of the next hundred years, other than large volcanic eruptions.
- shrubble 4y ago
  Good to know that the temperature stays the same in my south facing living room, whether it is night or daytime... thanks. We know very well, that the Sun goes through cycles, that it changes its level of radiation; and that even the most cursory glance at the stats of different planets, which are at different distances from the Sun, show the effects of solar radiation.
  - NoahKAndrews 4y ago
    They're not saying the sun doesn't have an effect, they're saying the sun's cycles aren't significant enough to have a chance at negating climate change.

dadjoker 4y ago

Is that like Al Gore's prophecies from at least a decade ago claiming that certain cities would be underwater by now? https://www.wsj.com/articles/al-gores-climate-sequel-misses-a-few-inconvenient-facts-1501193349 https://www.wsj.com/articles/al-gores-climate-sequel-misses-...

creatonez 4y ago
Al Gore does not represent the scientific community. If you're looking for up-to-date info, you should read the IPCC's recently finished AR6 report^1, which combines together 13,500 research citations to evaluate estimate ranges for impacts like sea level rise and coastal erosion. ^1: AR6 report: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ AR4 report (2018) has more info about sea level rise specifically: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg2-chapter6-1.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg2-chap... This is an important bit: https://i.imgur.com/inEZ1Lp.png https://i.imgur.com/inEZ1Lp.png

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]