
Flooding of US Coast, Caused by Global Warming, Has Begun - gyre007
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/science/flooding-of-coast-caused-by-global-warming-has-already-begun.html
======
kbutler
NY Times: "Caused by Global Warming"

USGS: "More than half caused by land subsidence"

"Land subsidence causes more than half the relative sea level rise in Norfolk,
largely explained by groundwater extraction."
[http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1392/pdf/circ1392.pdf](http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1392/pdf/circ1392.pdf)

The article at least mentions the subsidence issue by saying it will be "worse
than average" in areas where the land is "sinking at a brisk clip", but gives
a distorted view of the relative contribution.

~~~
NotSammyHagar
So you are saying there is some kind of scam to overestimate the rise in sea
levels caused by global warming?

------
spodek
As I wrote in HN's dialog about a New York Magazine article on global warming
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12471815](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12471815):

As usual, nothing about prevention.

Global temperatures and the sea level are rising because of human behavior. If
we want different results, we have to behave differently. Engineers and
scientists know engineering and science but not so much leading people to
change their behavior.

It's easy to blame others: "Listen to me! If you don't you'll be sorry!" isn't
effective. Also, what fraction of engineers and scientists have, say, flown in
a plane or something similarly polluting in the past twelve months?

If you want to change behavior, you need to learn and practice leadership
skills and apply them to yourself as well as others. The science is clear.
More is nice and I agree we should keep pursuing it, but the best way to
decrease the effects of global warming is to change our behavior. (This is why
I moved from science to leadership.)

This article's writing about flood-proof architecture and other rearranging-
deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic behavior is necessary since it's too late to stop a
lot of change, but it's not too late to stop the change that we -- you and I
-- are contributing to now. As much as I wish past generations had changed
their behaviors so we wouldn't see these problems today, future generations
will wish we had changed our behavior today. Even if you don't have kids or
grandkids, I would think caring about human society in general and empathy and
compassion for future generations would be enough to focus on changing our
behavior proactively, not just reactively fixing problems others bequeathed to
us.

~~~
mikeash
I don't understand the emphasis on air travel I frequently see in these
discussions.

Passenger planes are much more fuel efficient per passenger-mile than single-
occupancy cars. Most people drive far more miles alone each year than they
travel by plane. It makes no sense to me to criticize someone for flying a
couple thousand miles at ~100MPG when the average American drives 12,000 miles
per year at ~25MPG.

Beyond that, I don't see how refraining from individually polluting activities
will help to enact the laws and treaties we need to make a real difference.
It's a collective action problem, and those aren't solved by having
individuals with strong beliefs alter their own habits to match what they
want, they're solved by having individuals with strong beliefs convince
everybody to change their habits.

~~~
cleaver
The one that gets me is the suggestion that direct flights are more efficient.
Sure, if you go from New York to Los Angeles, but it wouldn't make sense if
you were headed to a smaller city away from a major centre.

With millions to be saved, I'm sure airlines do a decent job of working out
the most efficient combination of large direct flights and smaller commuter
planes. I don't think a 3/4 empty 767 to Fargo is the way to go.

If you want to take it to an extreme, imagine if the post office only
delivered your mail point-to-point in the interest of efficiency.

~~~
mikeash
I actually wrote a Mac screensaver with this theme:
[https://www.mikeash.com/software/chemicalburn/](https://www.mikeash.com/software/chemicalburn/)

It shows the transportation networks that arise if you assume that the link
between two points gets better as more traffic uses it. It has different
curves for the improvement which produce different patterns. Many of them
produce the familiar hub-and-spoke model, all without any such notion in the
underlying code.

------
finid
> Local governments, under pressure from annoyed citizens, are beginning to
> act. Elections are being won on promises to invest money to protect against
> flooding.

Interesting. I do recall that in 2012, North Carolina's House Bill 819
prohibited the state's Coastal Resources Commission from calculating sea-level
changes using recent data.

~~~
noobiemcfoob
It was a sad day to be a North Carolinian...

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
Their legislature gives them many such days.

------
blondie9x
We all know by now CO2 and CH4 leads to a warmer planet. We also know what's
driving greenhouse gas levels to rise across Earth. Contributors are
deforestation, intensive animal farming, and primarily the combustion of
carbon fossil fuels like coal, tar sands, oil, natural gas etc.

But here is the underlying problem, despite us knowing how bad things are,
(97+% of scientists who study this field agree we are causing the planet's
climate to shift away from the temperate climate we thrived in) not enough is
being done at present to truly solve the problem. What really is disheartening
and what no one in the media and government is talking about is how in 2015
CO2 levels rose by the largest amount in human recorded history. 3.05 PPM
[http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/gr.html](http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/gr.html)

We are being lied to, often mislead by our governments that uniform actions
are being performed to save the planet for the future of man. Vested interests
in the fossil fuel industry continue to drive climate change. Yes, solar and
wind energy are starting to become incredibly efficient and cheap but not
enough of it is coming online in proportion to fossil fuel burning that
persists and is also installed annually. If we do not rally against it, our
ability to live on this planet is at stake. The lives of our posterity are
also at risk because of the burning. Even if you chose not to have kids, it
still makes our work and lives meaningless if our species and other species on
this planet go extinct because we allow dumping in our atmosphere to go on
unfettered. It will not be until we take extreme actions not on a country
level but as humanity together that we will slow the burning and save
ourselves.

What are these actions you might ask that will actually be effective? These
can range from banning fossil fuels entirely, global carbon pricing system,
banning deforestation, changing human diets, extreme uniform investment in
renewable energy and potentially fourth generation nuclear reactors, more
funding for developing nations to install alternative energy sources, and to
shift the transportation grid towards sustainability.

~~~
pmyjavec
Deforestation is so serious, I visited Indonesia last year and all I could see
from the plane was smoke from illegal burning of forests for palm oil
plantations and cheap mass animal agriculture. It was the worst fire in known
history and a really, really sad thing to witness, the baron charred fields
left behind are really a terrible thing to see.

I wonder why on earth more wealthy Governments don't send in the "defense
forces" to help stop this illegal activity, instead of going to Syria, it's
such a no brainier. Countries like Brazil and Indonesia shouldn't be required
to protect everything on their own, nor should activists, murders of activists
are a reality because they're just getting in the way of business.

It would also be easy and relatively cheap to start replanting and re-
generating damage forests, I know it won't bounce back immediately, but it
does regenerate eventually if assisted (apparently).

For those that are unaware, palm oil is in pretty much in all packaged foods
sold in super markets, often hidden as _vegetable oil_ , the WWF has
information about identifying products that use it
[http://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/which-everyday-
products-c...](http://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/which-everyday-products-
contain-palm-oil)

After the destruction I saw, if one wants to continue living and has any loved
ones, I would cross it off your shopping list now, along with any imported
animal products.

Also, be highly skeptical about any "certified products", having spent time in
Indonesia and seeing corruption first hand, I doubt such things truly exist,
better to just get off the palm for good.

~~~
jcranmer
> I wonder why on earth more wealthy Governments don't send in the "defense
> forces" to help stop this illegal activity, instead of going to Syria, it's
> such a no brainier. Countries like Brazil and Indonesia shouldn't be
> required to protect everything on their own, nor should activists, murders
> of activists are a reality because they're just getting in the way of
> business.

Pardon me, but why the hell do you think that sending in the military,
_especially_ foreign military, would effect any changes on the ground? The
problem is corruption, a purely political problem, and as the Iraqi surge very
well demonstrated, a military solution cannot solve a political problem.

~~~
pmyjavec
As far as corruption goes, I don't think it has a lot to do with Indonesia and
Brazil. These are large places and it's hard to police every square inch of it
without pretty good technology and money, once someone gets away with burning
forest down, that's the end of it, why would there be a need for corruption in
that case?

If there is any serious corruption happening, it's in the west, imagine freely
being allowed to sell products that contain palm oil with no penalty's or
taxes attached. People in these countries are poor and desperate, they have
more of a reason for behaving that way, McDonalds et al doesn't.

I also never suggested sending in the cavalry or a repeat of shock and awe,
I'm suggesting policing _in co-operation_ with government of said countries to
_help protect_ a vital asset to not only humans but all species. Imagine using
satellites to help quickly identify fires for example?

When large parts of priceless Indonesian rain forest were burning to the
ground, and still are, there was very little international discussion and
assistance with:

\- Raising awareness, I doubt major western corporations wanted people to know
about it.

\- Putting the fire out.

\- Stopping additional fires being started.

\- Regeneration and repair.

Considering people starting fires aren't exactly friendly / educated people,
maybe military assisted protection of the forest is better than innocent
people just doing there best, I never suggested a war, I'm suggesting a peace
keeping / guarding force.

------
mhb
This problem can't be solved. No politician who advocates the sort of changes
required will be reelected. There is no way to enforce international
agreements.

Probably the best idea is to start thinking about risky geoengineering
remediation techniques.

~~~
vlehto
If U.S. leads the way, EU, Canada and Japan will follow. Then you have over
50% of world GDP behind ecological embargo. So the rest are not too much of a
problem.

If U.S. does nothing, then each individual EU country and Japan and Canada
will all be individually too small to do it. EU won't take orders from non-
NATO countries. And EU can't risk it's credibility on something that expensive
that's not backed by USA. It would fuel exit-populist propaganda too much.
Meanwhile USA is not breaking apart in similar fashion.

Looking from a Nordic country, this is the only reason why electing Trump
would be a sad mistake. Otherwise Trump is just funny.

------
tomohawk
For a more geologic view:

[http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/Courses/6140/ency/Chapter10/Ency...](http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/Courses/6140/ency/Chapter10/Ency_Oceans/Sea_Level_Variations.pdf)

------
greenleafjacob
Maybe after SF is underwater rents will come down.

------
throwaway1974
Will the US see large engineering works this century to prevent flooding?
Large stretches of Florida have quite alot of property right on the sea barely
above sea level, would these property owners demand protection?

~~~
DanBC
Florida is already seeing lots of sinkholes because of the geography - it's
build on porous limestone which erodes easily.

There's probably not much chance of saving florida.

~~~
marcusgarvey
>These tidal floods are often just a foot or two deep, but they can stop
traffic, swamp basements, damage cars, kill lawns and forests, and poison
wells with salt.

Is the wellwater seepage the biggest problem? Guessing the other things in the
list could be fixed with lots of money and infrastructure.

------
aswanson
Liberal propaganda. We still have snowballs:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3koOUFp4crU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3koOUFp4crU)

