Even a 20 Foot Rise in Sea Levels May Not Be As Bad As It Seems

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Who’s Afraid of Climate Change?

Consider, for example, the findings of climate scientists Robert J. Nicholls, Richard S.J. Tol, and Athanasios T. Vafeidis. In research funded by the European Union, they studied what the global economic impact would be if global warming were to result in a collapse of the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet. An event of this magnitude would likely cause the oceans to rise by perhaps 20 feet over the next hundred years – precisely the sort of thing that environmental activists have in mind when they warn about potential end-of-the-world calamities. But would it really be all that calamitous?

Not according to Nicholls, Tol, and Vafeidis. Here are the facts. A 20-foot rise in sea levels (which, not incidentally, is about ten times more than the United Nations climate panel’s worst-case expectations) would inundate about 16,000 square miles of coastline, where more than 400 million people currently live. That’s a lot of people, to be sure, but hardly all of mankind. In fact, it amounts to less than 6% of the world’s population – which is to say that 94% of the population would not be inundated. And most of those who do live in the flood areas would never even get their feet wet.

That’s because the vast majority of those 400 million people reside within cities, where they could be protected relatively easily, as in Tokyo. As a result, only about 15 million people would have to be relocated. And that is over the course of a century. In all, according to Nicholls, Tol, and Vafeidis, the total cost of managing this “catastrophe” – if politicians do not dither and pursue smart, coordinated policies – would be about $600 billion a year, or less than 1% of global GDP.

This figure may seem surprisingly low, but that is only because so many of us have accepted the widespread view that we lack the capacity to adapt to large rises in sea levels. Not only do we have this capacity, but we have demonstrated it many times in the past.

Like it or not, global warming is real, it is man-made [in part], and we need to do something about it. But we are not facing the end of the world.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/lomborg63/English

[^_^ 5,021]

Well, that's a relief.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Well, that's a relief.

Like you were worried!

[^_^ 5,021]

Like you were worried!

I was. I actually moved my couch from the eastern side of my living room to the western side, just to give me a few extra seconds when the seas move in. There might be an esurance commercial on when it happens, I may need the time.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

sure is safe here in kansas.

[^_^ 5,021]

sure is safe here in kansas.

how far are you from the caldera, anyway?

[mawilson 2,133]

I was. I actually moved my couch from the eastern side of my living room to the western side, just to give me a few extra seconds when the seas move in. There might be an esurance commercial on when it happens, I may need the time.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

sure is safe here in kansas.

Yeah, but it is still Kansas.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

how far are you from the caldera, anyway?

about as far as you can get in kansas and not be in missouri.

Yeah, but it is still Kansas.

shouldn't you be building an ark?

[^_^ 5,021]

Yeah, but it is still Kansas.

Touché.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

how far are you from the caldera, anyway?

Just far enough, evidently.

[^_^ 5,021]

What is the shaded area supposed to signify?

[mawilson 2,133]

What is the shaded area supposed to signify?

Yellowstone destruction zone? Just guessing.

[alienlovechild 75]

how far are you from the caldera, anyway?

You're believe you're thinking of Wyoming and Yellowstone.

[^_^ 5,021]

Why is it a perfect circle?

You're believe you're thinking of Wyoming and Yellowstone.

I know it's in Yellowstone but I believe I heard/read that the impact of an eruption would be felt as far south as texas.