5 ms·
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
by _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 agoHey now. We should probably implement some kind of centralized global authority before we get too hasty with "solving problems."
- _3u10 4y agoDefinitely, 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 agoPeople will adapt to change. Calm down.
- creatonez 4y agoYes, 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 agoThere'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 agoDid you even bother to read the article? They are saying that these impacts will be felt as soon as 2030.
- kodyo 4y agoYep. 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.