demosthenes
Member
If lakes are near the coast they could become part of the ocean. Internal lakes will not be effected.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sea levels may be rising faster than expected due to climate change (Slate)
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
- Status
If lakes are near the coast they could become part of the ocean. Internal lakes will not be effected.
Not unless they are directly fed by the ocean. Landlocked lakes will probably dry up if anything
My take as well. Humans are not good nor evil creatures, but rather "improvisation and avoiding catastrophe in the last minute by strapping chewing gum into a straw" type of creatures.
One friend of mine is a geologist and he also believes that climate change is happening but due to natural reasons (and no, he is far from being a crazy neocon). Thing is, whetever climate change is man made or no, that is a moot point. Human civilization needs a certain set of weather conditions in order to thrieve and be able to sustain agricultural output. We should employ whichever means to that end, full stop.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
I work in the coal industry so you can probably just discredit my opinion right off the top. That said, yes.
We should continue to research and transition towards renewable sources of energy but forcefully accelerating that timeline with overly-restrictive regulations does nothing but shoot us in the foot. Instead of killing off industries that provide thousands of good jobs to Americans we should find ways to burn coal and NG cleaner and more efficiently while this inevitable transition is taking place.
It didn't have to be like that. Much blame goes to the influential fossil fuel industry monopoly and daft politicians. Look at Germany actually training people for a renewable energy economy and making it work.
The picture kind of downplays the 100% genuine threat of global warming/climate change.
CadetMahoney
Member
I remember that story about an ice age coming:
Solar activity will fall by 60 per cent between 2030 and 2040 causing a "mini ice age".
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1079128
Solar activity will fall by 60 per cent between 2030 and 2040 causing a "mini ice age".
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1079128
entremet
Member
Look at capitalism in the modern age? No sense of long term planning whatsoever.
IISANDERII
Member
What about The Great Lakes? They are connected to the sea but i think the St Lawrence seaway flows out to the ocean.
Well, seeing as I'm talking about this proposed '10 foot rise' in the ocean, it's either our civilization or nobody as it's happening right now, unless you expect a brand new human civilization to arise in the next hundred years. And no, I don't think we'll be willing to stop it. I think we'll retreat a few meters from the coasts before we ditch our addiction to fossil fuels. When oil starts to run out in, what, 150 years, that's when we'll finally see some progress. A 10-foot rise in the ocean won't be a big enough threat for most of the world to change their ways over the next century, imo.
Of course, what we're all hoping for is some scientific deus ex machina whereby we absorb excess heat / greenhouse gases and fire them off into space or something, and frankly I think that is also more likely than humanity ditching it's addiction to fossil fuels, but I am no scientist.
demosthenes
Member
... what logic is this?
Baconsaurus Rex
Member
Well as someone living in the RhineMeuseScheldt delta it's been nice knowing you all.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Germany still burns a lot of coal. Also, they don't deal with the same demands and infrastructure issues we deal with in the massive, sprawling US.
43.2% coal (not sure why they break it into two groups).
Imagine a large group of physicists contemplating a particularly complex problem that they have all collectively been working on for decades, with lots of evidence, study and discussion. They believe they have a solution to the problem, but are still collecting evidence. Now imagine some guy going up to them and saying "Did you factor gravity in to your equations? That's probably why you haven't solved this problem yet."
That's basically what people proposing simple, obvious rebuttals to climate change look like to me. People suggesting incredibly obvious arguments like sunspots or volcanoes that would have been considered by a student in climate science 101, let alone someone with a doctorate who is a professional in the field, and even more so a consensus of scientific experts who have all dedicated their entire lives to researching this topic, many having done so for decades.
If climate scientists are wrong -- and of course they could be, anyone can be wrong, even as a collective group -- then it's very unlikely to be something so obvious that I could figure out with no training whatsoever.
That's basically what people proposing simple, obvious rebuttals to climate change look like to me. People suggesting incredibly obvious arguments like sunspots or volcanoes that would have been considered by a student in climate science 101, let alone someone with a doctorate who is a professional in the field, and even more so a consensus of scientific experts who have all dedicated their entire lives to researching this topic, many having done so for decades.
If climate scientists are wrong -- and of course they could be, anyone can be wrong, even as a collective group -- then it's very unlikely to be something so obvious that I could figure out with no training whatsoever.
demosthenes
Member
They're too far inland. They'll be fine.
They're all way above sea level, no?
Yeah I mistyped and phrased it poorly anyway. Ignore me!
IISANDERII
Member
Ok. But are you sure? I'm thinking the outflow into the ocean will be reduced due to increased resistance from the higher sea level.
evilromero
Member
I'm sorry to hear about your situation but isn't it an issue of supply and demand at this point?
Fenderputty
Banned
A 10' rise looks like it takes out a good chunk of Long Beach and a ton of Oakland and Bay area coast.
No. Just no. Firstly coal is already used in extremely efficient ways at power plants. It's insane the amount of engineering that's gone into coal power production. They even cool the super heated air after it's gone through the turbines to create negative space and suction. At every step of the way to becoming more efficient, coal and power have bitched about regulation. Secondly, the jobs we're talking about here pale in comparison to the amount of displaced people and labor that will occur if sea levels rise. I"m am so sick of hearing about overbearing regulation as though the industry hasn't had time to react. Fuck that noise. We've reached a point were we can't put stuff like this off anymore.
No. Just no. Firstly coal is already used in extremely efficient ways at power plants. It's insane the amount of engineering that's gone into coal power production. They even cool the super heated air after it's gone through the turbines to create negative space and suction. At every step of the way to becoming more efficient, coal and power have bitched about regulation. Secondly, the jobs we're talking about here pale in comparison to the amount of displaced people and labor that will occur if sea levels rise. I"m am so sick of hearing about overbearing regulation as though the industry hasn't had time to react. Fuck that noise. We've reached a point were we can't put stuff like this off anymore.
As the climate gets hotter and hotter, we'll likely start needing to use more and more fresh water to maintain our civilization, especially if people from the coasts start moving inland. Not to mention the droughts global warming will bring as well. I mean, it's already happening all over the world.
entremet
Member
We will survive. We're very adaptable. We did survive the Ice Age on primitive tech.
Worse comes worse, we'll have to start all over, civilization wise.
The issue is by not doing anything now, we've guaranteed the likely deaths of millions or more.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Don't worry about me, I've been planning on transitioning into another industry for a few years now. I don't really have any attachment to coal and frankly I'm sick of working in such a politically charged field.
There are a number of factors that have contributed to the difficulties the coal industry is facing in the US. The primary factors are cheap natural gas, crippling legislation regarding emissions, increased pressure from regulatory agencies, and thriving overseas markets. China, India, Australia, and many other countries are simply able to produce coal at much cheaper prices than we can. Even metallurgical coal (used primarily in the steel making process) is cheaper to buy and ship from China than to buy here in the US.
Some of the factors are outside of the US' control but others certainly aren't. By no means do I think corporations should be unlegislated or allowed to run freely with no regulations but I think we have gone too far too quickly.
If this means an entire civilization without japanese moe vita games then I'm not sure thats a civilization I want to live in.
Whats gonna happen to the caribbean islands? Or islands in general?
entremet
Member
When you're worried about shelter, water and food, media will be an afterthought.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Well...no.
Fenderputty
Banned
We haven't gone far enough quick enough.
EDIT: instead of complaining about regulation, the people in the coal industry should be bitching about the government not helping them transition into other fields of labor.
hydragonwarrior
Member
Canada appears to adopt processes towards sustainable mining: http://mining.ca/towards-sustainable-mining
However, from what I've seen from the bosses of said mining companies in the US, they often refuse to go the "cleaner" route because it is more expensive. If they are forced to, they can simply use that as an excuse to let people go. As with anything environmental, rightwing politics and greed are going to work against anything sustainable.
hydragonwarrior
Member
I thought this was debunked into a very, very minimal impact based on how warm we keep getting year over year.
Anyway, any city near the coast is in for a rude awakening. The bigger question is what we'll do with all the structures (basically houses) near the water - just abandon them?
The_Darkest_Red
Member
I agree with your edit. I honestly just hate seeing what has happened to this area of the country. So many hard working men who know nothing but coal mining and have no other options in the area for work. Any other industries coming to the area would be great, as would help in transitioning into them. That said, we still have the energy issue I brought up earlier. It has to come from somewhere while we get this new tech figured out.
Coal companies in the US are declaring bankruptcy regularly these days, it's not like they're swimming in cash. I am all for increased movement towards sustainability and efficiency but like I said there is a point where you have gone too far. Obviously many will disagree with me on where that point is but that's expected.
demosthenes
Member
That's different than just saying they'll dry up. Dry up to me sounds like natural causes.
Hari Seldon
Member
We are definitely at the point where we need to start looking into implementing a technological solution to this problem.
Probably destroy them and prohibit settlement there. Essentially create buffer zones from the water's edge.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Natural emissions, such as volcanoes, do produce a large amount of greenhouse gases which cause the greenhouse effect. However, the amount of greenhouse gas the earth produces is generally constant. The problem is is that we're adding onto the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and therefore increasing the temperature beyond what is normal for humans.
Source: My PhD Physicists friends.
Also:
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php
Nikodemos
Member
A lot of people have been warning about a runaway cascade effect, where climate change factors self-reinforce themselves via a positive feedback loop, especially since several past extinctions seem to have happened after such occurences.
The most frightful part about this is that it would happen very quickly, and by quickly I mean about a decade's span of time.
The most frightful part about this is that it would happen very quickly, and by quickly I mean about a decade's span of time.
Well, global warming isn't naturally caused either. Both are people disrupting the natural balance resulting in one extreme or another.
maquiladora
Member
Yes, there is evidence that the Younger Dryas period ended with a 13F degree warming within just a few years.
Huw_Dawson
Member
The thing I don't get about climate change denial is that it means that you say 'yes, I accept that more CO2 is being pumped into our atmosphere than at any point in human history and yes I accept that this will end up significantly altering the makeup of the atmosphere, but it won't actually affect the amount of heat stored by said atmosphere'.
Actions have consequences. :/
Actions have consequences. :/
neogaffer1
Banned
Those consequences mean that I'll be having beach front property though
Nikodemos
Member
Such a jump would be Fallout-level disastrous. Literally sudden-end-of-civilisation cataclysmic.
Even a 4 °C jump over the span of a decade would be immediately catastrophic.
maniac-kun
Member
Well thats bad news. Never thought I will live to see these changes. Just saw a documentary about Greenland and the melting ice there. Its in a pretty bad shape and that was 3 years ago. How much is the maximum raise of the oceans if all ice has melted?
BravesCountry
Banned
OP I think you mean rising seal levels
There's plenty we can do. The problem will progress to a new level of nightmare if we carry on as we are and just prepare for the consequences.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked