Sunday, August 13, 2017

How to Deal with Rising Oceans

I thought this was an interesting concept...
CNN Tech Dutch Test Floating Islands
Wiki Off Shore Wind Farms

And just think how easy it will be for rich people to set up their own exclusive island country with it's own laws...  They can just have it built in the future. 

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not electing Donald Trump might help. The fact is, we made an irrevocable decision in 2016. We decided in a way that we cannot go back on, that the Donald Trumps of this world, thug that he is, was correct on global warming. We just have to hope we were right.

--Hiram

John said...

Hiram,
As Jerry continually notes, the big decisions will not be made in the USA. We simply do not have enough of the world's population to make a huge difference, and we are well on our way to changing to cleaner power sources for many reasons. (ie political, economic, in fashion, etc)

The question is what will Asia, Africa and South America do? Will they get their runaway population growth under control and adopt cleaner energies, or will they stay on their current path.

John said...

World Population Density Map

jerrye92002 said...

What is a "cleaner power source"? The only reason we are on the path to "renewable energy" is because a bunch of doofuses with political power decided to subsidize a bunch of rich folks to produce it, and to mandate the rest of us pay for it, even though it doesn't even accomplish what they set out to do with it. If those same rich folks decide to set up their own country to escape such gross stupidity, they are to be congratulated for common sense.

jerrye92002 said...

Interestingly enough, they will probably use a renewable, CO2-free, technologically available energy source (see OTEC).

jerrye92002 said...

Also interesting, the rate of sea level rise is actual slowing, compared with hundreds or thousands of years ago.

John said...

My usual word at this time...

Sources?

jerrye92002 said...

historic sea levels

And let me say I am greatly surprised that you do not already know this.

John said...

Apparently we have differing sources...

Sea Level History

I there seems to be some significant differences of opinion on this.

John said...

Wiki Sea Level

jerrye92002 said...

Sorry, but anything Michael Mann is involved in is automatically suspect. The "hockey stick" appearance of that graph is also suspect since by "consensus," the temperature of the ocean and subsequent expansion of the water are responsible for sea level rise, along with melting ice (caused by warmer weather). Since the Medieval Warm Period doesn't appear on that graph, it must be in error. And what I was referencing was sea level history of thousands of years, not a few hundred.

"...there seems to be some significant differences of opinion on this." Oh, so science is a matter of opinion, now? Einstein said, "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me [i.e. the theory] wrong." One scientist armed with the facts should, by all rights, defeat the "97% consensus." Climate models are not facts.

And doctored history is not fact, either. Einstein also said, "If the data do not fit the theory, change the data."

John said...

I think we will both need to some more study.

When I was looking I found a lot of conflicting information. There are many ancient harbor cities that are now flooded. And then your source which rambles is painful to read. Maybe I'll try again later.

One would think it would be easy to look at the history of ancient cities to solve this but apparently it is not that simple due to shifting plate, erosion, tide changes, etc.

When I was in Glenwood Springs CO I went through a cave that had at one time been in the ocean. That does not mean the water was ever that high...

jerrye92002 said...

The way I look at it-- I've been to the site of the Bering land bridge that existed some 10,000 years ago. The water was about 400 feet lower back then. It hasn't risen nearly that much in the last few thousand years, so it must be slowing down. If you want to claim the rate of rise is unprecedented, you can't. If you want to claim it is unprecented because the rate of temperature rise causing it is unprecedented, you have a double problem. And if you want to claim that human CO2 is causing all of it, that's just crazy talk.

John said...

You made that same mistake of assuming that the bridge is at the same elevation...

jerrye92002 said...

note the first paragraph second column

jerrye92002 said...

Elsewhere on that site the 120m (400 ft) figure is prominently mentioned. Somehow a few millimeters per year doesn't seem that problematic.

John said...

Now we are looking at brochures for scientific fact... I think we will need to keep looking..

I do find it interesting how difficult it is to find clear long term historic ocean level summaries.

jerrye92002 said...

Keep in mind this is the official government website, and the "facts" are well known. The Bering Land Bridge did exist; it existed because all the water was locked up in the ice of the Ice Age, and when the "global warming" that ended the last ice age (no doubt due to primitive man's campfires :-/) came along the ice melted and the seas rose 400 feet. It's essentially common knowledge and accepted scientific fact, just like Pangea and continental drift. We don't need "clear long term historic ocean level" data to be precise down to the meter or to the century. If the seas only came up 110 meters and not 120, that's still less than 10% error and the remaining is still a huge number compared to the centimeters per century we now see, and in which even small annual errors create considerable uncertainty about the trend.

So, how to deal with rising oceans? If you are worried about it, don't put your new beach house so close to the ocean. Otherwise, take a risk and maybe pick one up on the cheap as the worriers run away. If you are /really/ worried, build your beach house in Nevada.

jerrye92002 said...

Oh, and it is easier to find long term ocean information (preservation of sediments, etc.) than it is long term temperature records. The only consistent method we have for that latter is the ice cores, and they show that global warming causes CO2, not the other way around.