Sea level rise viewer (U.S. only, sorry international plan fans): https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/
Sea level rise could submerge land currently home to up to 760 million people worldwide if global temperatures rise 4 degrees celsius by the year 2100. So what are cities and city planners going to do to minimize the potential devastation?
Resources on this topic:
Brecht, H., Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., Murray, S., & Wheeler, D. (2012). Sea-Level Rise and Storm Surges: High Stakes for a Small Number of Developing Countries. The Journal of Environment & Development, 21(1), 120–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496511433601
"Climate change crusade goes local" By Doug Struck
Hauer, M. E., Evans, J. M., & Mishra, D. R. (2016). Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nature Climate Change, 6(7), 691–695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2961
"9 Popular Cities Losing War with Rising Seas"
"Shanghai Struggles to Save Itself From the Sea" by Coco Liu
"From Miami to Shanghai: 3C of warming will leave world cities below sea level" by Jonathan Watts
"The three-degree world: the cities that will be drowned by global warming" by Josh Holder, Niko Kommenda, and Jonathan Watts
"Mapping Choices: Carbon, Climate, and Rising Seas, Our Global Legacy" by Climate Central
"The Rise of Resilience: Linking Resilience and Sustainability in City Planning" by Timon McPhearson
"Shanghai takes measures against rising sea levels"
- Wikimedia Commons
Produced in sunny Sacramento, California.
City Beautiful That was some great content sir. I can only imagine how much time it took you to gather the info. I did a brief on it and I had to give a whole day skimming through reports and papers to get the right words. And that's just something on paper. Visuals is another thing.
Can we interact on some related matters in some way?
The Paris Agreement isn't a binding treaty and has no means of enforcement. The US has reduced it's emissions more than any other individual country, as much as the EU has in it's entirety, and we've done it without Paris. Under The Paris Agreement China, already the single biggest contributor to global Co2 emissions, pledged to stop INCREASING their emissions by 2030. MIT concluded that the Paris Agreement would cause the global temperature to decrease by about 0.6 to 1.1 degrees Celsius by 2100, with only a 0.1 C change by 2050. No one really disputes that humans can and do effect the climate, what people dispute is how to most efficiently mitigate the damage. I suggest that if you don't like coal, oil, or natural gas then you should advocate for nuclear power, which actually pollutes less then solar and wind when you take into account the heavy metals used in their production and the lifespan of the systems. If the word "Nuclear" scares you, please educate yourself more thoroughly on the subject.
These coastal cities with very valuable land rebuild themselves every 50 years or so. Just build the new buildings higher up either by moving dirt or putting them on big stilts and make them better able to withstand storms. As for the less valuable but vulnerable land just buy it out and have the people move. Cutting CO2 ain't going to happen unless we invent a new carbon free or carbon light source of fuel (not just energy) that doesn't cost more, and is as easy to store as fossil fuels. Currently fossil fuel is just too useful and valuable to leave in the ground.
Hi City Beautiful. You'd enjoy this video about competing visions of Staten Island's post-industrial North Shore, from the city's and developer's vision of it as a place for giant private high rises that will block the view and connection of the public to the bay, to a vision of it as a place for athletic fields, maritime education complexes, and park amenities that will invite more people to connect near the water's edge, without increasing the risk to lives and property on the waterfront.
Most oxygen produced is not by land plants. above 70% of air is made by Marine plants like Seaweed, Seagrass, Kelp, Algea and Plankton!!! If we prepared these nearly above sea level lands or already under, for Green Sea farms, we'd bring our CO² down and Oxygen up. Benefits, more oxygen, bigger creatures. monster size human race.
Liberals invented global warming to get us to switch to vegan diets. So they are responsible for all these natural disasters. We would not be recycling and saving if liberals just kept the earth as it is.
Its funny how the dates when all this is going to happen keeps moving farther back.
Originally all this should have happened by now when they first started spreading these lies.
Then that date comes and goes and they just start claiming it will happen even farther in the future.
Meanwhile nobody ever talks about how the data was heavily exaggerated to make climate change look real.
Yes, depending on how high those Costal Cities are they might get flooded. I mean you could always build a city in a way that if Sea Level rises further the bits would just start Floating on the water instead but who would even dare to think that far am i right?
Take a look at a topographic height map of new Orleans. The whole city is built in a bowl with the top edge of the bowl right on the gulf and actually lower than sea level. If ANY PLACE is going to get destroyed by sea level rise first its going to be new Orleans. If youre not in new Orleans and new Orleans is still around I wouldn't ever start to worry yet about sea level rise.
Venice should raise the city farther up on it's foundations honestly. There will always be the risk of there means to hold back the tide failing. like this little city you might know called New Orleans. They also trust in holding back the sea. But they learned that they are better off with bringing up the foundations and making it so they are above water normally. Venice did this in the first place. It is better to work with nature to solve a issue then fight it. Venice should raise by two meters so as to avoid making the same costly mistake as New Orleans did. Stopgaps are not something to be leaned on.
OMG really? well then lets pump as much carbon dioxide as we can into the air!, we're just feeding plants.... And let's also deforestate millions of square kilometers yo build stuff wich produces more carbon dioxide!!! yes that's a great idea!!!
Gammareign Agreed with that first part. Nuclear power at a glance seems to be a perfect temporary solution to completely eliminate carbon emissions from electricity. Plants can only absorb so much CO2, though. We are pumping more of it than plants can take in. NASA actually made a video demonstrating this.
Here it is: https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04
Some have said that another thing that exacerbates the effect of sea level rise is land subsidence. You have mentioned about that in the video, but in some areas with underlying clay soils, subsidence can play a larger factor. Most of Tokyo's bay area is now undersea, not due to the sea level rising, but due to subsidence. So another way to prevent being drown by the sea is by stopping subsidence, usually by stopping groundwater pumping. Though then we'd still need to deal with the sea level rise itself again, albeit that happens at a somewhat "slower" rate.
Nuclear power plants have shown to be some of the most resilient power sources we have. During Harvy, the nuclear plant down in Huston was supplying power to critical infrastructure like hospitals while the other plants were shut down. Even the reactor failure at the Daiichi plant in Fukushima could have easily been prevented by leaving the reactors on so them could power their cooling systems.
kokofan50 If Nuclear power is so great, then why isn't it utilized far more than every other source? If Nuclear Power provided most of the world's power, CO2 emissions from electricity would be almost non-existent. You would think it's the perfect transitional power source, unlike the pathetic, unscalable garbage that is wind and solar power.
For SF bay, we'll 'just' dam the Golden Gate. Put in enormous shipping locks and pumps to expel the river inflow and maintain the bay's salinity. At around 1.5 meters rise, the whole central valley would be prone to Pacific flooding.
I just found your channel and I'm enjoying your videos. I found this video interesting as I'm an engineer and I'm from a family of engineers. One of our vacations when I was a child was to Houston, Texas we hit the usual places like the Johnson Space Center, but we also drove out of our way to go see Galveston and their sea wall. I live in Sacramento now and I find all the flood control in our city very interesting. I took a machine shop class when I was in college at Sierra College and the instructor was a machinist who worked for the City of Sacramento. His day job was to machine parts for the city's pump system. Some of their pump are so old you can not buy replacement parts, they are built as needed in the city's machine shop. I work in the water and waste water industry and we do storm water pump stations. I would love to know more about what different cities have done to combat flooding. Maybe a few more videos could be made on this topic. Cheers on a great video I found it fascinating.
Sir Eddie That's completely different, and related to computers, not the global climate. Y2K was also real, but heavily exaggerated, a bit like Climate change/global warming is now. Unlike climate change however, Y2K was properly addressed by software developers and the like. No disaster happened partly because *people actually did something about it.*
So your saying by the time I am dead the sea level will rise by 1 to 2 meters? Yeah. Fuck that. Lets destroy our entire economies and plunge the world into poverty. Great plan.
Additionally, the great lakes are expected to DECREASE in sea level by 2.5 meters over the next 100 years. Why? Because as the temperature warms evaporation INCREASES. Most models predict that evaporation will increase faster than precipitation on the great lakes. Furthermore, the great lakes are cut off from ocean sea level rise by the International Joint Commission
P.S. I am a farmer who lives 10 miles away from the great lakes and 1,250 feet above sea level. I hope your cities drown.
I posted links to journal articles and news reports in the video description. I guess I'm somewhat skeptical that anything would change your mind as your first comment makes me think you have pretty strong beliefs around this issue ("I hope your cities drown, etc.")
you actually respond to comments? I have massive respect for you. I don't mind global warming but I am not convinced that is catastrophic and preventable. If you link a scientific blog/report that supports your position I would wade through it.
I'm actually born and raised 10 miles from the Great Lakes too. My dad works in agriculture. Not sure why you have have to be so antagonistic. Sounds like you don't want global warming either -- we don't want to lose fresh water in the Great Lakes.
koji kabuto Yes, predicting something like that on a global scale is slightly absurd. That is why nobody knows what exactly will happen, but knows approximately what could happen. People have done a poor job at naming the phenomenon. It's real though, and you might be witnessing the effects of it on a daily basis, depending on where you live.
It’s not weather; it’s climate. The climate is the average of weather over time. While figuring out what’s going to happen on any given day is difficult, knowing what the average of an area isn’t that hard.
+Frank Such a reasonable comment! Thank you for that. But if we will prohibit to sell gasoline private cars, at least we will get fresh air to breath without air purifiers. Now it's impossible in half of Europe, many cities in USA and in Asia (China, India etc.).
Marcus Mercer It’s pretty much to late. We could completely switch to renewables and electric cars tomorrow we’d still be screwed. Climate change is a snowball rolling down a hill. It’s already to the point where the amount of energy we need to turn it around is gone. We’d have to develop a way to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere efficiently then on top of that make it economical. There is no such way. At this point we need to look into abandoning these areas and moving people into areas that won’t flood or else we’re going to lose trillions of dollars in flooding and many lives.
This just adds fuel to my dystopian view of Miami, in which the lower class who service the rich in their high rises will be living on floating favelas on the bay. People think I'm crazy when I mention this to them until I breakdown the my logic. That's when the look of despair encroaches onto their faces as this stark realization begins flood their minds.
Sorry for the puns :P Great vid!
nlpnt I've seen too many arguments regarding this debate over light rail or monorail discount another similar form of transportation: the automated guideway transit (or automated people mover, depending on whose terminology you prefer).
Why, except in Japan (where AGT was adapted as a lower-cost alternative to a full-scale subway in certain scenarios, namely the Ina Line in Saitama and the Nippori-Toneri Liner), are these systems confined to airports, when they have lower up-front and running costs?
Don't monorails basically have to be elevated?
Bus rapid transit is generally the cheapest way to get service up and running. But there are cultural issues around both - "monorails are toys for tourists, buses are for people who can't afford cars" sums it up.
Light rail is a compromise - it can (usually) run on a mix of existing and new infrastructure, and it's "for people who live here" without being "(only) for the poors".
Also, home owners in the US can freely enjoy building in flood areas without any own financial damages for repairs, as those are socialised into a plain stupid public insurance programm.
Insurances are supposed to be for risks you want to avoid. This programm alleviates not risks but socialises certainties.
how will "sea" level rise effect Chicago? Chicago is often framed as impervious to sea level rise, but lakes are still water, and thus will be affected by thermal expansion, so what will be the effect?
Chicago may sit on a lake, but the altitude of that lake's surface level, isn't at Sea Level.
You've heard of Niagara Falls?
Lake Michigan and the 3 other "upper" Great Lakes drain into the Niagara River, which then falls off the Niagara Escarpment creating Niagara Falls, which then drains into the lowest lake, Lake Ontario, which drains into the Sea via the St. Lawrence River.
For Sea Level rise to affect Chicago, the rising seas would first have to submerge Niagara Falls, which doesn't look likely even with the most severe predictions.
Water contracts as it warms, unless it is heated to steam. It actually, expands when it turns to ice. That's why roads and sidewalks crack during the winter because water under them freezes to ice and expands. It's the same reason pipes rupture during Winter.
I feel like investing in Chicago property will be a great idea. As others have said, it won't be affected by the sea level rise. It's economy will continue to thrive while other major US coastal cities struggle to stay afloat both literally and economically.
My area does have issues with heavy rain, all the nearby fields flood and all the ditches and creeks overflow very quickly. One of the main problems in my town is that a bridge that spans over the creek that runs adjacent to my house wasn't built properly, and after it rains, there's always about a foot or two of standing water.
Wait wait wait, you're telling me that building a wall is the answer to a unstoppable flow of unwanted matter?.... That sounds racist to me. Oh, and good thing we pulled out of the Climate Accord. It was just a massive wealth redistribution scheme.
NOAA's tide gauges don't sample carbonoxides, they measure the height of the water column in that particular zone via a modulated torque rheostat hooked to a cable thats anchored to the ocean floor, it's a mechanism most teenagers could build with a little knowledge... and that's all the T.R.E.O.S unit does.
NOAA's tidal gauges have only existed since 1988, so even if they did some how sample Co2 then there would only be 30 years of data while the industrial revolution and human desequestration of carbon oxides has been occurring throughout the world for several centuries.
yep if they go under water they request help (100B$) and we give (regrettably) to them then when we need help they dont give (not paying taxes stating they are to high and we need to fund the military more).
Well most of the world's greatest cities are *cough cough* liberal..so it'll be a tragedy if that day comes. Also, your laissez faire conservatism won't look so good when your economy doesn't have the money these cities generate.
there is 275 million cars in the u.s
the u.s accounts for 15% of all pollution is created by the U.S and china double that 30%
the U.S accounts for a large portion of pollution your claim is not necessarily true.
True, but the Inner Harbor is vulnerable to a rise of 2-3 meters (6-10 feet). In addition, a lot of Maryland's coastline along the lower Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Ocean will be inundated by just a couple feet of sea level rise. http://maps.risingsea.net/Maryland.html An exacerbating problem for Maryland is that land to the north is still rising in response to the ice sheet that vanished millennia ago after the last ice age. This will cause Maryland to sink by an additional several inches over the course of the 21st century. Thus, even conservative projections have Maryland experiencing a foot of sea level rise by mid century (2040 or 2050), with respect to the year 2000.
Although the US spews a ton of pollution, the main issue with world climate change is China. The Chinese don't give a flying poo about spewing emissions into the atmosphere and it affects the entire planet. The US withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement is bad, there's no question. However controlling what China puts into the air is what really needs to be done so they don't kill us all.
+Owen Major US is one of, if not the most developed country in the world and this is all because of the cheap energy it has. This has caused a lot of pollution. The developing countries also need cheap energy to develop. This is why, like US, other countries are using sources like coal and petroleum. But the major change now is that the developing countries are investing a lot in renewable energy sources. It should be US who should actually encourage other counties to go green and help other countries too. Not that US doesnt have any problems, but it is better to save the planet before saving only US as if the planet is doomed, well then US is doomed too
so someone who drives a truck for work wont be able to make a living? i drive 100-300 miles a day and need a truck for tools supplies and ladders. im an independent contractor and everything is out of pocket. no way a pissant electric vehicle could do my job. esp. if you are in texas country miles from anywhere.
And yes, we've been astonishing at the lack of flood prevention in New Orleans, Houston and NY. The costs of building a decent dike or artificial dune are wayyy lower than the costs of rebuilding the city (or parts of it) after a flood, let alone after multiple floods. It's just weird... The recent flood in Houston cost about 20 billion dollars. We could have installed a proper dune or dike for probably 1/4th of that.
LegendMeadow if someone asks for a source then you must provide it to be credible! that means no source = thin air also if someone dismisses it its likely from some nonsense website or book like fox news or some other media try wikipedia and look in there sources to find credible things!
that's not true at all the media likes to make it look like or seem like we do enough to control pollution but that is not the case the paris accord would have put in place controls and measures to reduce pollution and environmental destruction! get your facts straight!
there is 275 million cars in the u.s
the u.s accounts for 15% of all pollution is created by the U.S and china double that 30%
the U.S accounts for a large portion of pollution your claim is not necessarily true.
I think I should also mention that I do believe that climate change is an existent threat. I recognize that there are periods of warmer and cooler temperatures. My skepticism comes with the hypothesis that this climate change is man-made. I believe that to be a fallacy, because we didn't start to see heating and cooling periods only after the industrial revolution. We obviously had ice ages and great floods throughout all the periods of time before that.
I do not think there really is any way we can 'solve' this issue. But I do think that we have to stop diverting so many of our resources to climate change prevention, because we have many issues aside from that particular one. Also, if we waste trillions of dollars on ineffective climate change prevention programs, we'll be left with no capital to save ourselves from for example floods, extreme weather, extreme temperatures etc... that could be caused by this climate change. I think if there is one climate issue we need to address it is the issue of how much we're destroying our planet directly. With all the stress of farmlands, the local pollution that we see in places like China and India, the depletion of our resources. Those things I believe have to be solved, and they can be solved in a variety of ways. I won't mention them right now.
it's a good theory and I think proven throughout history. I do think human nature will perpetually favor the majority opinion, but isn't that what democracy is about?
I do think he has some good points and climate change has to be dealt with in a long term way, as he proposes. However, global accords are not only a set of protocols, they're good way to send a message to other countries that the US is standing for something that many countries are worried about, hence putting the US in a good position for leverage in other areas that we would like change.
And yes, this would cost many trillions of dollars globally as you mentioned but we are also striving to put people to work in a sustainable workforce. Could creating jobs to help deflect not only climate change but the sea level rise associated with it be a long term solution?
At one time slavery was the status quo. Does that make slavery right?
Just because an opinion is held by just a few people out of the many doesn't mean that that opinion is wrong. Most scientists who are considered 'qualified' to say if climate change is right or wrong are in favor of man-made climate change. Don't you think that has anything to do with them wanting to not get fired, or wanting to get funding? Humans respond to incentives. Governments generally support man-made climate change as a fact. The reason for that most likely has to do with all the tax revenues they can gather from carbon taxes and such. Anyway, that's just my theory.
Todays Random Latinas Archives Porn List Jean Skirt Latina Teen Toys Outside This cute girl strips off skirt and panties to toy her pussy and ass. Lingerie Latina Strips Naked Out by the pool Leslie slips off her cute teddy to show us her figure. Huge Boobs Latin BBW Nice woman from Guatemala exposing her very plump breasts. South American Cutie Diddles Sofia has a sweet tight ass and little tits with tan lines on them. Tanlines Latin Girl Posing Stripping off lingerie to open up her fine pink pussy while still in stockings. Wicked Pussy Masturbation Sexy Latin flavour Shay uses a vibrator to get herself off in these masturbation videos. Brown Eyes South American Sucking Dick Latina chick from Miami taking cock in her mouth. Tan Lines Latin Babe In The Kitchen In heels she slips out of her striped dress to show us everything. Horny Latin Teens 2 Clip Sucking dick on the tennis court then fucking back at the house. Marisa Ramirez Naked From doing soaps early in her career to baring it all on Spartacus. Hot Latina Showing Small breasts and spicey pussy revealed on this delicious young babe.
Arousing Bella In Lingerie Lovely raven haired Latina in sexy blue lingerie on a web show. Curvy Bikini Latina Out By The Pool Tasty lady slowly removing her two piece swimsuit for us. Petite Teen Big Dildo Latin girl with a fat sex toy trying to squeeze it in her tight pussy. Fingered And Licked Latin Girl Laying back on the bed a man diddles her twat and asshole before tasting. Petite Latina Jinx Maze Lusty young babe gets naked in the bath tub and uses a big head vibrator. Hot Latina Sex With A Beauty Arousing gal sucks him hard so he can go balls deep in shaved pussy. Petite Latina Masturbation Video Laying back on the bed Camila lets her red painted nails diddle her twat. Tasty Star From Spain Amarna Miller teasing and flashing her bits while in an RV in California. Scene from Party In America NURU masseuse Sophia Leone takes care of Marcus real well. Hot Latina Babe Sexy bod that has big firm breasts and shaven taco box looking so damn tasty. Petite Latina Sex Hot babe Ria Rodriguez gets taken from behind before riding him good. Pigtails Latina Cheerleader Strips To Masturbate Petite sweetie outside stripping her uniform to please herself. Silvana And Claire Out in the backyard these two Latinas slowly start to get naked. Young Mexican Pussy 19 yr old sweetheart Maria is wearing boots while exposing tiny tits and part furry bush. Latina Pear From Miami In the bedroom slowly exposing her soft tits and belly in pics. Mexican Girl Pantie Teases Sweet young lady in her underwear showing off her ass and crotch. Larger Natural Breasts Latin Babe In her shorts Natalia pulls back her blouse releasing her lusty boobs.