Study: global warming related sea level rise poses big threat to Washington, D.C.

Jan 17, 2012 Read more: The Washington Post 61

Considering the city's history, it should come as no surprise to learn that Washington, D.C. is vulnerable to sea level rise.

Read more
First Prev
of 4
Next Last
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#1 Jan 17, 2012
Sobering concerns are expressed in this article based on a new risk study. "The study makes clear that even modest amounts of sea level rise would have negative impacts on the city."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-w...

Since: Apr 10

Milwaukee, WI USA

#2 Jan 17, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
Sobering concerns are expressed in this article based on a new risk study. "The study makes clear that even modest amounts of sea level rise would have negative impacts on the city."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-w...
The rate of sea level rise hasn't accelerated since 1985 and the big acceleration, at least as shown by the graphs in those Church and White paper occurred in 1925. And that was probably more an artifact of their editing job more than anything else.

Here's an elevation map of Washington D.C.

http://maps.risingsea.net/CCSP/F.12_DC50cm_Ti...

It shows that it's been built on a swamp. Buildings in Washington come and go. The one's built on a swamp certainly do, the one I worked at in 1969-1970

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/u02...

has been torn down. It's where you see that pond between Constitution Avenue and the reflecting pool. The view was probably taken from about where that interstate 65 symbol is. My point? Even if it floods, which it won't, it won't be a disaster.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#3 Jan 18, 2012
Steve Case wrote:
<quoted text>
The rate of sea level rise hasn't accelerated since 1985 and the big acceleration, at least as shown by the graphs in those Church and White paper occurred in 1925. And that was probably more an artifact of their editing job more than anything else.
Here's an elevation map of Washington D.C.
http://maps.risingsea.net/CCSP/F.12_DC50cm_Ti...
It shows that it's been built on a swamp. Buildings in Washington come and go. The one's built on a swamp certainly do, the one I worked at in 1969-1970
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/u02...
has been torn down. It's where you see that pond between Constitution Avenue and the reflecting pool. The view was probably taken from about where that interstate 65 symbol is. My point? Even if it floods, which it won't, it won't be a disaster.
This report is based on current rates of sea level rise.
The study, led by Bilal Ayyub of the University of Maryland, found that even if sea level rise turns out to be at the very low end of projections, it would still cause significant damage in Washington. For example, if the local sea level were to rise by just 0.1 meter, or about 4 inches, by 2043, nearly 68,000 people would be affected, and property damage would total upwards of $2 billion - without including damage to military bases and government property.
The people who have to take decisions are not listening to the foolish old ideologues who say it's nothing to worry about, because unlike the foolish old ideologues, they'll be around in 20-30 years to take responsibility.
The study helps localize a problem that is more typically discussed at the global level, and makes clear that public officials must make decisions in the near-term in order to minimize future losses.
The real risk is that we will see an acceleration of sea level rise mid century.
The study is based on an unrealistically optimistic scenario in which the local sea level rises in a straight line, at the same rate it has been during recent years.
Who are you going to listen to on this? Who are you going to trust the climate your grandchildren inherit to?

The foolish and arrogant old ideologues who know nothing of science and who won't be around to take responsibility?

Or the scientists who say that there's a big risk of rapid sea level rise if we continue emitting CO2?

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#4 Jan 18, 2012
"The National Mall and Foggy Bottom were originally marshland, and the area between the Anacostia River and I-295 used to be open water."
-
Just imagine a country as vast as the USA, where much of it is way above sea level, but ever ingenious man decided to build on marshland and a major city on low lying islands.
So when Nature decides it's time to do what she does, man starts crying and looks for a scapegoat to blame for his forefather's mistakes.
Don't cry, learn from mistakes and adapt.
Election 2012

Washington, DC

#5 Jan 18, 2012
ROTFLMAO.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#6 Jan 18, 2012
Steve Case wrote:
<quoted text>
The rate of sea level rise hasn't accelerated since 1985 and ..
NO. Not true. First, what the heck is "rate of sea level rise hasn't accelerated?"

As to the acceleration of the global mean sea level rise, yes, it has accelerated since 1985 as seen in this graph:

http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/SeaLevel/SL.1...
Election 2012

Washington, DC

#7 Jan 18, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>NO. Not true. First, what the heck is "rate of sea level rise hasn't accelerated?"
As to the acceleration of the global mean sea level rise, yes, it has accelerated since 1985 as seen in this graph:
http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/SeaLevel/SL.1...
Did the leprechauns do it or Bigfoot?

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#9 Jan 18, 2012
IPCC Third Assessment Report - Climate Change 2001 - Complete online versions
Climate Change 2001:
Working Group I: The Scientific Basis
-
There is no evidence for any acceleration of sea level rise in data from the 20th century data alone (Woodworth, 1990; Gornitz and Solow, 1991; Douglas, 1992).
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_t...
CONSERVATIVE

Demorest, GA

#10 Jan 18, 2012
More BS from the propaganda machine. These clowns will stop at nothing to get the world to believe humans are responsible for climate change. News flash a$$holes! The earth has been in a CONSTANT state of change, since day one! It will continue to be in a constant state of change until GOD decides different, and there is NOTHING we can do to change that. The sooner we come to terms with that, the better off we'll all be! Tea Party 2012!
Wake Up

Plainfield, IL

#11 Jan 18, 2012
Well if that is the case Obama can part the Sea, so no problem LOL!
SpaceBlues wrote:
Sobering concerns are expressed in this article based on a new risk study. "The study makes clear that even modest amounts of sea level rise would have negative impacts on the city."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-w...
Northie

Spokane, WA

#12 Jan 18, 2012
CONSERVATIVE wrote:
More BS from the propaganda machine. These clowns will stop at nothing to get the world to believe humans are responsible for climate change. News flash a$$holes! The earth has been in a CONSTANT state of change, since day one! It will continue to be in a constant state of change until GOD decides different, and there is NOTHING we can do to change that. The sooner we come to terms with that, the better off we'll all be! Tea Party 2012!
News flash, teabagger. This isn't about politics or how much you like your truck. Every national scientific academy, every relevant scientific society and 98% of publishing climatologists say we're warming the climate, it's dangerous, and we must stop now or risk catastrophe.

Your political views and mine don't matter a damn.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#13 Jan 18, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
Don't cry, learn from mistakes and adapt.
Adapt? You mean pay...and pay...and make our grandkids pay even more.

Adapting to rising sea levels means moving half of the world's great port cities and losing most of the world's fertile delta farmland, and that's just a fraction of the problem. No problem to you, however; the next ten generations get to clean up your mess.
Gord

Calgary, Canada

#14 Jan 18, 2012
<5111> Pollack:

But it will be very difficult to make the MWP go away in Greenland.

<1682> Wils:

[2007] What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural
fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably [...]

<5315> Jenkins/MetO:

would you agree that there is no convincing evidence for kilimanjaro glacier
melt being due to recent warming (let alone man-made warming)?

<4944> Haimberger:

It is interesting to see the lower tropospheric warming minimum in the tropics in all three plots, which I cannot explain. I believe it is spurious but it is remarkably robust against my adjustment efforts.

<2733> Crowley:

Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open.

http://thepointman.wordpress.com/readme-of-fo...
Wake Up

Plainfield, IL

#15 Jan 18, 2012
Really now what of those pesky Climategate emails...it is as if they don't exist... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdeling...
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
News flash, teabagger. This isn't about politics or how much you like your truck. Every national scientific academy, every relevant scientific society and 98% of publishing climatologists say we're warming the climate, it's dangerous, and we must stop now or risk catastrophe.
Your political views and mine don't matter a damn.
Wake Up

Plainfield, IL

#16 Jan 18, 2012
Don't worry our children and future grandchildren will be paying dearly for the debt Obama recently rang up on national debt clock to the tune of 4 trillion more. That is the mess the next generation will not be able to clean up... the national debt that is...
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Adapt? You mean pay...and pay...and make our grandkids pay even more.
Adapting to rising sea levels means moving half of the world's great port cities and losing most of the world's fertile delta farmland, and that's just a fraction of the problem. No problem to you, however; the next ten generations get to clean up your mess.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#17 Jan 19, 2012
Nauseous wrote:
Adapt? You mean pay...and pay...and make our grandkids pay even more.
Yes, just check back to see how much more you pay than your grandparents did.
Nauseous wrote:
Adapting to rising sea levels means moving half of the world's great port cities
When?
Nauseous wrote:
and losing most of the world's fertile delta farmland
When?
Nauseous wrote:
and that's just a fraction of the problem.
Tell me all about the other fractions?
Nauseous wrote:
No problem to you, however; the next ten generations get to clean up your mess.
Why do you have to make it personal by passing the buck and using others as scapegoats for your own sins?
Why not tell everyone what makes you whiter than white, my nauseous little friend?
-
NB: I didn't personally make much "mess" as I went through life, I hardly make any "mess" now and I won't be making my little "mess" for very much longer.
Ö¿Ö

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#18 Jan 19, 2012
Wake Up wrote:
Really now what of those pesky Climategate emails...it is as if they don't exist... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdeling... <quoted text>
Scientists write emails?

Scandal!

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#19 Jan 19, 2012
/// The Medieval Warm Period ///

<5111> Pollack:

But it will be very difficult to make the MWP go away in Greenland.

<5039> Rahmstorf:

You chose to depict the one based on C14 solar data, which kind of stands out in Medieval times. It would be much nicer to show the version driven by Be10
solar forcing

<5096> Cook:

A growing body of evidence clearly shows [2008] that hydroclimatic variability during the putative MWP (more appropriately and inclusively called the
“Medieval Climate Anomaly” or MCA period) was more regionally extreme (mainly in terms of the frequency and duration of megadroughts) than anything we have
seen in the 20th century, except perhaps for the Sahel. So in certain ways the MCA period may have been more climatically extreme than in modern times.
CONSERVATIVE

Demorest, GA

#20 Jan 19, 2012
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
News flash, teabagger. This isn't about politics or how much you like your truck. Every national scientific academy, every relevant scientific society and 98% of publishing climatologists say we're warming the climate, it's dangerous, and we must stop now or risk catastrophe.
Your political views and mine don't matter a damn.
That's where you're dead wrong. This is all about politics, politics and $$$! WHO do you think provides the majority of these "scientist" them with their funding? If they don't give their benefactors the information they want to hear, they don't get funded. That is an unfortunate truth, but no less the truth. They have no one to blame for the situation but themselves, because they CHOSE to get in bed with gov't. Climate change is directly related to redistribution of wealth. Why do you think the UN is always talking penalizing the most successful industrialized countries based on their carbon emissions? So they can take the $$$ and give it to poor countries. Bottom line is, it doesn't matter one way or another. Our fate has been sealed since the beginning. The sooner you Godless idiots accept that, and make peace with the savior (not nobama), the better off we'll all be. You can call me a zealot, a religious fanatic, ever what makes you feel better, but that won't change the truth or the outcome. In the end we have no control over how or what will cause our destruction. The TRUTH can not be denied. All that aside Washington DC needs to be threatened by something! Because it damn sure doesn't seem to be threatened by us anymore! Us being the American people, the voters. The ones they are SUPPOSE to work for. The ones who are SUPPOSE to have all the power, but as of late do not. Tea Party 2012!

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#21 Jan 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
/// The Medieval Warm Period ///
<5111> Pollack:
But it will be very difficult to make the MWP go away in Greenland.
<5039> Rahmstorf:
You chose to depict the one based on C14 solar data, which kind of stands out in Medieval times. It would be much nicer to show the version driven by Be10
solar forcing
<5096> Cook:
A growing body of evidence clearly shows [2008] that hydroclimatic variability during the putative MWP (more appropriately and inclusively called the
“Medieval Climate Anomaly” or MCA period) was more regionally extreme (mainly in terms of the frequency and duration of megadroughts) than anything we have
seen in the 20th century, except perhaps for the Sahel. So in certain ways the MCA period may have been more climatically extreme than in modern times.
The ignorant don't have a clue what the emails mean, but would like to use them to drag down and trample on what they don't understand?

No surprise there.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

National Mall Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Prince Charles, Camilla get royal tour of Washi... Mar 20 Dana 1
News The immigration debate is about to come to a he... Nov '14 Foster 3
News iHeartMedia Teams Up With HBO To Broadcast The ... Nov '14 eventsrv 1
News Hastert Recalls Sept. 11, 2001 Evacuation of th... (Oct '14) Oct '14 cancer suxs 2
News 'Duck Dynasty' Relative Has a Tough Response to... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Chiclets 3
News D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier ordered her offi... (Jul '14) Jul '14 Drake_Burrwood 1
News Cruz, Palin join protesters at WWII Memorial (Oct '13) May '14 swedenforever 1,271
More from around the web