Sea level rise: It's worse than we th...

Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought

There are 3768 comments on the New Scientist story from Jul 2, 2009, titled Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought. In it, New Scientist reports that:

FOR a few minutes David Holland forgets about his work and screams like a kid on a roller coaster.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at New Scientist.

PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2572 Jan 31, 2013
Not true if so do show your peer reviewed published work.As regards to your last statement if true do tell all what your next move would be to correct the History books.
Arrogant

Akron, OH

#2573 Jan 31, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
"...going to create another mass extinction..."
"Going to"?
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but we're already in the middle of the 6th (at least) great mass extinction of life on earth, & this time we're the cause. We're aware of some the large animals that are threatened with extinction, but for every large animal there are countless smaller ones - not to mention the plants & bacteria.
We've already emitted enough CO2 into the atmosphere to be disastrous after equilibration. If we magically stabilized CO2 at ~400 PPB like it is now, we still could get ~2 C rise in temps (over pre-industrial levels), with sea level eventually rising ~5 meters. And we're hardly going to stop at 400.
The problem with the prices of fossil fuels is that we, & our governments, suffer from a common shared hallucinatory delusion: that it is "free" to emit carbon into the atmosphere. It most assuredly is NOT free. It will cost almost unimaginable amounts of money in the future if we keep emitting CO2 & CH4 in ever-increasing amounts.
As it is now, fossil fuel makers & users don't have to pay to dispose of their waste carbon appropriately. They get to dump it into the atmosphere for free. We all (or most of us) have to pay for garbage, recycling & sewage, don't we? Not the FFs. Such a deal.
This government policy is grossly distorting the energy market, making it impossible to have a truly free energy market that actually reflects reality. Until we get the cost of carbon disposal into the cost of FFs, we'll never have a truly free market for energy.
The best way to mitigate this problem would be a truly revenue-neutral carbon tax. It wouldn't add a thing to the size & cost of government & wouldn't take a single dollar out of the economy. It would simply take money from high carbon emitters & give it to low carbon emitters.
This would allow us to FINALLY have a truly free market for energy, & would allow renewable sources of energy to finally have a chance to compete on a level playing field. Of course we'd also have to stop the billions we give away to the oil companies (the richest industry in the world) every year, not to mention the trillions we spend on wars for oil (let's be honest with ourselves for ONCE; both Iraq wars were about oil) in the Middle East.
I agree 100% with you. And what about that damn continent of trash in the ocean, WTF! My issue with the carbon tax is that carbon emissions aren't just caused by the United States. Now we have China and India wanting their share of the global power pie, which is only making things more difficult. Fossil fuels will need to become economically impractical.

Since: Apr 10

Milwaukee, WI USA

#2574 Jan 31, 2013
Arrogant wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree 100% with you. And what about that damn continent of trash in the ocean, WTF! My issue with the carbon tax is that carbon emissions aren't just caused by the United States. Now we have China and India wanting their share of the global power pie, which is only making things more difficult. Fossil fuels will need to become economically impractical.
"Fossil fuels will need to become economically impractical."

What kind of car do you drive?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#2575 Jan 31, 2013
Arrogant wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree 100% with you. And what about that damn continent of trash in the ocean, WTF! My issue with the carbon tax is that carbon emissions aren't just caused by the United States. Now we have China and India wanting their share of the global power pie, which is only making things more difficult. Fossil fuels will need to become economically impractical.
Of course China, India & other rising powers are becoming more important, & China is now the #1 emitter of CO2. But Chinese leaders also have to breathe the air in Beijing, so they know the have to change.

They also don't want Shanghai to be underwater or for ShanDong (birthplace of Confucius) to be an island. They have been pushing green energy & lead the world in installing it (with the US #2).

The Chinese WILL act to mitigate AGW/CC because it's in their self-interest.

We should take the leadership, though, because we are most responsible for current warming. We are also very high in emissions per capita, & we have set a standard for lifestyle that other countries around the world want to emulate. The earth won't tolerate everyone on earth living like we do now. It can't even take it now.

Note that some calculations suggest that the #2 country responsible for current warming is... the UK! They don't emit much CO2 now, but the Industrial Revolution started there, & the CO2 they emitted centuries ago is still there, contributing to warming.

If we set up a stiff, revenue-neutral carbon tax, other countries around the world would follow.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2576 Feb 1, 2013
If we set up a stiff, revenue-neutral carbon tax, other countries around the world would follow.

Oh my if you click your heels together you can make another wish.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2578 Feb 1, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course China, India & other rising powers are becoming more important, & China is now the #1 emitter of CO2. But Chinese leaders also have to breathe the air in Beijing, so they know the have to change.
They also don't want Shanghai to be underwater or for ShanDong (birthplace of Confucius) to be an island. They have been pushing green energy & lead the world in installing it (with the US #2).
The Chinese WILL act to mitigate AGW/CC because it's in their self-interest.
We should take the leadership, though, because we are most responsible for current warming. We are also very high in emissions per capita, & we have set a standard for lifestyle that other countries around the world want to emulate. The earth won't tolerate everyone on earth living like we do now. It can't even take it now.
Note that some calculations suggest that the #2 country responsible for current warming is... the UK! They don't emit much CO2 now, but the Industrial Revolution started there, & the CO2 they emitted centuries ago is still there, contributing to warming.
If we set up a stiff, revenue-neutral carbon tax, other countries around the world would follow.
CORRECT, my goodness.

Yeah, we would need [what?] three or four additional Earths to satisfy the US type consumption.

The UK did all that to conquer the world. Alas!
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2579 Feb 1, 2013
The USA consumption is dropping each year and will continue to drop with the green power tech improves. Ever wonder why prices go up?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#2580 Feb 1, 2013
PHD wrote:
If we set up a stiff, revenue-neutral carbon tax, other countries around the world would follow.
Oh my if you click your heels together you can make another wish.
Yeah, right, just ignore my logical arguments & leave only the last sentence.

You think the Chinese won't act? Then cite something from them. Learn something about the country & their leadership. Or is that too much work?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2581 Feb 1, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, right, just ignore my logical arguments & leave only the last sentence.
You think the Chinese won't act? Then cite something from them. Learn something about the country & their leadership. Or is that too much work?
Wrong I never ignored what you call a logical argument I just disagree with what you cal logical. Wrong again the Chinese are acting have you been in a shell. Actually they are now acquiring a 48% interest in a fracking company in Texas. So you are wrong by making an ASSumption of yourself.Which country and which leadreship. Us or them, or is that too much work for you?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#2583 Feb 1, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong I never ignored what you call a logical argument I just disagree with what you cal logical. Wrong again the Chinese are acting have you been in a shell. Actually they are now acquiring a 48% interest in a fracking company in Texas. So you are wrong by making an ASSumption of yourself.Which country and which leadreship. Us or them, or is that too much work for you?
Yes, China has looked at fracking, but they also get 17% of their energy from alternative sources. They have the largest wind resources in the world. They use the most hydropower in the world. They are, wisely, also looking at nuclear power.

Natural gas would indeed be a step forward for them, given the coal they use now. They are also able to use carbon-capture technology on their new plants, which this technology has been fought tooth & nail by the FF industries here in the US.

They will act to mitigate climate change because it's in their own interests. Shanghai is very close to sea level, as are large parts of northern China. The land north of Beijing has been desertifying for decades, beginning even before our current in temps began in ~1975.

They'll act. But given our situation, we should lead. If we make progress, it'll be easier for them to make progress.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#2584 Feb 1, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong I never ignored what you call a logical argument I just disagree with what you cal logical. Wrong again the Chinese are acting have you been in a shell. Actually they are now acquiring a 48% interest in a fracking company in Texas. So you are wrong by making an ASSumption of yourself.Which country and which leadreship. Us or them, or is that too much work for you?
And oh yeah, I forgot. China is going to the Moon, & they have openly said they will be looking at Helium-3 there to see if it would be possible to mine it. We desperately need that.

If fusion can be harnessed without excess neutrons hitting the vessel (which is at least theoretically possible with He-3), it'll be easier to contain. The amount of energy available is staggering.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2585 Feb 2, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, China has looked at fracking, but they also get 17% of their energy from alternative sources. They have the largest wind resources in the world. They use the most hydropower in the world. They are, wisely, also looking at nuclear power.
Natural gas would indeed be a step forward for them, given the coal they use now. They are also able to use carbon-capture technology on their new plants, which this technology has been fought tooth & nail by the FF industries here in the US.
They will act to mitigate climate change because it's in their own interests. Shanghai is very close to sea level, as are large parts of northern China. The land north of Beijing has been desertifying for decades, beginning even before our current in temps began in ~1975.
They'll act. But given our situation, we should lead. If we make progress, it'll be easier for them to make progress.
No, they purchased not looked at fracking. No they are the largest spewers of carbon. They actually have the USA in second place.You can't mitigate scientific science fiction.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#2587 Feb 2, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>No, they purchased not looked at fracking. No they are the largest spewers of carbon. They actually have the USA in second place.You can't mitigate scientific science fiction.
DUH. EVERYONE knows China is the #1 emitter of CO2 now. The US is still much larger per capita, & the US is the country most responsible for current warming (the UK is #2).

China doesn't want Shanghai to be underwater, or for ShanDong (birthplace of Confucius) to be an island. They have millions of people living near sea level. Just north of Beijing, desertification is moving southward. They are vulnerable to tropical cyclones (called typhoons there). Their leaders have to breathe the air in Beijing just like everyone else.

The Chinese WILL act to mitigate AGW/CC based on their own interests. If we do something meaningful that'll give them the opening to act as well.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#2588 Feb 2, 2013
Seriously, now is a good time for a tropical vacation. Climate, deal with it.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#2589 Feb 2, 2013
brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver wrote:
...... now is a good time for a tropical vacation.
"brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" went on vacation for 10 years, instead of getting mathematics & science degrees. While on vacation, he became a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener & holds down a 2-bit oil can job.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2590 Feb 3, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
"brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" went on vacation for 10 years, instead of getting mathematics & science degrees. While on vacation, he became a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener & holds down a 2-bit oil can job.
In addition, you think topix does not know what you publish. Attacks on me will not delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2591 Feb 3, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
DUH. EVERYONE knows China is the #1 emitter of CO2 now. The US is still much larger per capita, & the US is the country most responsible for current warming (the UK is #2).
China doesn't want Shanghai to be underwater, or for ShanDong (birthplace of Confucius) to be an island. They have millions of people living near sea level. Just north of Beijing, desertification is moving southward. They are vulnerable to tropical cyclones (called typhoons there). Their leaders have to breathe the air in Beijing just like everyone else.
The Chinese WILL act to mitigate AGW/CC based on their own interests. If we do something meaningful that'll give them the opening to act as well.
As mentioned before good luck with that idea. DUH your idea to date has never worked.
SpaceBlues

United States

#2592 Feb 3, 2013
It's time to show the future sea-level rise graph for global temperature(s):

http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Projec...
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#2593 Feb 4, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
It's time to show the future sea-level rise graph for global temperature(s):
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Projec...
We already told you the sea level rise really really means nothing. Here is an out for you, do show your peer reviewed published work that will dispute sea level rise and the real effects.
Steve Case

Trevor, WI

#2594 Feb 4, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
It's time to show the future sea-level rise graph for global temperature(s):
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Projec...
And once again it's time to do the arithmetic. Here's that same graphic
http://oi49.tinypic.com/14id2yx.jpg
run on Excel with the addition of the final rate of sea level rise in 2100. Nearly 20 mm/yr. How likely do you think that is? realistically that's 10 times today's rate. All the rivers and glaciers in the world flowing at time times today's rate. All the rivers, not just the Amazon or the creek in your local park, everything.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Oceanography Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Poor Education Leads To Lost Dreams And Low Inc... Mar 31 The Real Karen 86
What is this formation called? Mar 26 STUDENT 1
News Volcano blows hole in global warming fight (Oct '10) Mar '17 Volcano 10
News Poor Education Leads To Lost Dreams And Low Inc... Mar '17 Jace 11
News Scientists Beg for Climate Action (Dec '07) Dec '16 Patriot 1,864
Lost in the sea (Sep '16) Sep '16 clement 1
News The world's clouds are in different places than... (Jul '16) Jul '16 Too Easy 14
More from around the web