...To think for a minute at the scarier end of the spectrum. If we do end up four or five degrees warmer, within a relatively short period of time — that’s the IPCC’s RCP8.5 scenario, by the end of the century, and that’s not counting some of these dramatic feedback mechanisms, what would that do to the planet, in your mind?
I don’t think we’re going to get four or five degrees this century, because we get a cooling effect from the melting ice. But the biggest effect will be that melting ice. In my opinion that’s the big thing — sea-level rise. Because we have such a large fraction of people on coastlines — more than half of the large cities in the world are on coastlines.
The economic implications of that, and the migrations and the social effects of migrations — the planet could become practically ungovernable, it seems to me. But if you’re really talking about four or five degrees, that means the tropics and the subtropics are going to be practically uninhabitable. It’s already becoming uncomfortable in the summers in the subtropics — you can’t work outdoors. And agriculture — more than half of the jobs are outdoors.
The economic implications of that, and the migrations and the social effects of migrations — the planet could become practically ungovernable, it seems to me. But if you’re really talking about four or five degrees, that means the tropics and the subtropics are going to be practically uninhabitable. It’s already becoming uncomfortable in the summers in the subtropics — you can’t work outdoors. And agriculture — more than half of the jobs are outdoors.
Food production seems a real worry.
Population is a problem. That’s why you want to have energy that’s needed for people to eliminate poverty, because countries that have become wealthy have the population under control. But if you do begin to lose major cities then the planet becomes ungovernable.
And what level of sea-level rise would precipitate that? What worries you?
Once sea levels go up significantly, you won’t have stable shorelines. Just parts of the city will go under water, but then it doesn’t make sense to continue to build there. So, I don’t know. By the time you get to even one-meter rise, you’re going to be losing more land. We argue in our paper “Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise, and Superstorms,” which we published in 2016, that you could get multi-meter sea-level rise in 50 to 150 years...
Labels: Science
posted by Rob Anderson @ 2:18 PM
1 comments
1 Comments:
I'm always 50/50 on this. Co2 is a natural compound. War on cars or not it's not going anywhere. When he speaks of a "super storm" he kind of mixes in evidence of a polar shift (the movie day after tomorrow).But that would never happen with some sea level rise. A polar shift is completely different. Hurricane sandy was a super storm. We've had super storms many times over the years.
Another thing Ice always melts and comes back. In some parts of the world the top levels of seas freeze up during the winter then melt at the end of winter which is normal and happens every year.
Although see level always fluctuates goes up and down they only give you numbers of a rise in a certain area and never mentioning when sea level lowers. For example in the bay there are days the tide is in and some days tide is out. I'll just go measure when the tide is in and play with my computer model and come back and tell you sea level is rising.
When he speaks of "models" he's referring to computer models that makes predictions and not actual sea level measurements over the years. Not to mention the fact that same computer model predicts sea level will rise only 17 inches in 100 years. According to al gore sf should have been covered in water years ago.
There's a difference in computer models and actual field tests. Hence the sfmta and their bullshit numbers. You have all of these scientist that are receiving funding to follow the narrative. Not one of them is a "sea level specialist". Because according to many sea level specialists the sea hasn't risen in 50 years. They've been out in the field using special technology just to measure sea level.
You have countries all over the world developing their coastal cities as well as developing on the actual coastline as the state of California would like to do which also leads me to believe they are full of shit. If the pacific was to rise and reac the wall at pacific beach that would be way more than a 10 foot rise.
That being said if sea level was to rise I'll just sell my house. If not then I'll just move. The world is not going to end and stop trying to scare me with it. What I'd have to move 30min to an hour inland? Fuck it why not. the bycicle coalition can stay in sf and pedal on water.
Post a Comment
<< Home