Redesign for Rising Tides

Let's require all home insurers to include the height of the lowest level of human use or utility equipment, whichever is lower in their premium calculations. Also include low limits in zoning regulations.

Perhaps add to uniform building codes some requirements for making buildings easy to raise in height to mitigate flooding problems.

We have wonderful maps available to us in the San Francisco Bay area showing levels of earthquake danger and wildland fire danger. We should have that for the hazards of future sea level rise.

Institutions with the highest credibility (e.g. several of the premier universities in my area or possibly the COE in conjunction with NOAA if they'll talk to each other.) could initiate studies to predict the level of inundation of populated areas based on the best case and the worst case as well as intermediary cases (and the probability of each) of sea level rise each year for the next 20-50 years. Other factors could be melded into the database. These include soil conditions, type of urban development and the effects of mitigation projects such as levees, seawalls, port improvements and results from tests of scale hydraulic models like the COE SF Bay Hydraulic model.

This study should result in a database accessible to the general public. The resolution should be at least down to 10 meter squares and should be available as a database with wide access to allow users to download any desired plot of a given area, event probability and year. Additionally institutional and corporate users should have access to the entire database as appropriate to their missions and needs at reasonable cost.

We as engineers know the importance of having good data to base our work on. While an officially sanctioned set of numbers may not be perfect it is a source to go by in the absence of anything better. This is the kind of stuff you hang your hat on when you ask someone to fund your project.

Ed Weldon

Not a foreign idea to raise buildings. On some sections of our New England coast, new construction or even modifications to existing structures near the water, require that the lowest floor be 11 feet above the mean high tide line. Keeps us from improving our cottage which is 5 feet above.

Mr. Weldon, you and those in support of elevating houses and restaurants, offices, churches, schools, retail stores, and so on, to "solution" floodwater levels, definitely are a "pest" to those of us with physical challenges!!

You want to make us climb up and down more stairs? Are you serious? A major chunk of the U.S. population is over the age of 50, lots of us are carrying nagging back problems, bad knees/feet, or are obese, on canes, wheelchairs, prosthetics, a/o with a chronic medical condition/disease, and so on, and you want us to "have a happy" by climbing more stairs!!? How Rude!

I vote for waterproofing the building exterior walls!! It's easier, cheaper, very "Techno-Cool" and "Green-Tech", and saves more lives and properties!! I believe that equates to higher Profits for the Builders and Communities!! Definitely more and higher Respect and Pride!! Solves two "birds" with one "stone", so to speak!!

FYI: Elevating buildings to address flood water possibilities and levels did not come from the Construction Industry!! We are not that stupid!! We are not even that MEAN!! (It came out of Katrina, by the Civil Corps of Engineers and FEMA, who did not consider the Occupants' ERGONOMICS, when suggesting raising/elevating houses!!)

Picture this: A hurricane Cat-3 hits an elevated house on stilts with 150mph winds. What happens? The house topples over, slams into the floodwaters. If (and that is a big if) the house frame somehow remains intact, it floats downriver. The Occupants don't have any way of escaping or being rescued!! I truly respect those helicopter rescue Pilots and Crews, but I seriously doubt that even they would recommend chasing floating houses while trying to lower rescue Personnel!!

The path of solution to wind, seismic, and water dangers is to improve the structural Assemblages of the buildings, has always been, will always be!!

To see some cutting edge technologies in improving the building and structure frames, so that water-proofing, fire-proofing, etc; can be added to the building/structure exteriors in an affordable and profitable ways, go to my profile page and look up my website. I strongly urge you to make this cutting edge technology a part of yours and all Engineers, Building Codes, Community Services, etc; data bases.

God Bless and Speed; Randy.

G'day,

According to the CSIRO and many other scientists, the earth is actually cooling and has been since 1998. There is NO measurable increase in the sea level. All this Carbon business is utter crap as there is strong evidence that an increase in C02 actually FOLLOWS a warming event by 800 to 1000 years.

What evidence is there that CO2 (in the small quantities that it exists in) causes a "greenhouse" effect. That is also misinformation. In fact, all the rain forests in the world could be burnt and the amount of CO2 emitted would still NOT affect temperatures. In fact, CO2 actually helps flora to boom. It is like airborne fertiliser.

Additionally, Mars is warming and Virus Humanis has not screwed it up ... yet!

If you want to blame something, try the Earths natural temperature cycles, probably caused by Sun spot activity as well as the Earth tilting on its axis.

But Al Gore etc can't make a fortune out of sun spots and "gubbermints " can't tax a tilt, can they? Sun spots and axis tilt cannot be used to change the world economic system or usher in a new world order.

But of course, there is a rabid religious movement that refuse to hear anything that questions "climate change" and brands such enlightened people as "climate change skeptics". Next they will be getting the dunking stools out and building the pyres, including stakes. Are we who actually seek the truth the new Illuminati"?

Wake up all you so called thinking people and peel the wool from your eyes. There ain't nuttin' we can do to stop the next cooling (predicted in the early 1970's, followed by another warming. Adapt.

RRV

rrvau -- First off what is CSIRO? I googled into their website and found that they are the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. In a short look at their site I saw little indication that any more than a handful of the 2000 scientists involved in their activities support your position. Their home page position statements seem to say just the opposite. But I do get the impression that they like most responsible scientific organizations tolerate very diverging views on any scientific subject and this particular one is no exception.

British television producer Mr Martin Durkin, (The Great Global Warming Swindle) likely had little trouble fishing in that pool of 2000 scientists for a few with PhD after their names that would state their positions in front of his camera. This, then, seems to be the essence of the scientific support for your position.

But just ignore my criticism. Go visit the CSIRO website and see what they actually have to say on the subject of global warming.

Ed Weldon

Please don't take this personally, I actually respect your right to disagree on ANY given topic. However, when the Arctic sea ice doesn't form up and the formerly nonexistant "northwest passage" is clear sailing, when chunks of ice the size of the state of Delaware break off the Antarctic shelf, and when continental glaciers in widely separate areas disappear at a rate of meters per year (and some of them are quite massive), then I have to think it indicates a warming trend, not an ice age approaching. All of these phenomena are fairly well documented scientifically, not the ravings of power-mad politicians. Is it too much to expect that when you hear the sound of hoofbeats and you are not in Africa, that you do not think first of zebras?

Hi,

I think it is all cyclical. The Earth warms and the Earth cools. As far as the polar ice is concerned, what if tis has more to do with the Earth tilting on its axis. Apparently the Antarctic ice is thickening. Maybe that is something to check.

RRV

It may well be a natural cycle having nothing to do with us or our actions. It may be influenced to some degree by what we have done. I don't claim to know, nobody actually does know for sure. But I DO know the results are real, you can read the reports, view satellite photographs, and see that the polar ice as well as many continental glaciers are rapidly diminishing. I hold that we need to plan now for how to react, not wait until it is too late to make a difference. The three rules of planning:

1. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.

2. The PLAN is nothing - PLANNING is everything.

3. Plan 'B' MUST be in place BEFORE Plan 'A' fails.

I haven't noticed sea levels rising beyond "normal" cycles. Even the Maldives, who have experienced higher tides etc. can only blame their mining of their coral reefs for building materials, NOT global warming.

I haven't noticed any changes in datum levels used in surveying or changes in altimeter settings at various aerodromes.

Let's see some evidence, please.

RRV

G'Day,

If you wish to include Mr Martin Durkin, maybe you'll allow me to cite David Bellamy?

I will also ask, what evidence is there that the sea-level is rising to any degree "outside" normal cycles.

RRV

BACK TO THE BASICS, San Francisco BC & CDC are looking for some exciting ways to deal with the predicted rising of the Pacific Ocean. The correct answer is "MOVE AWAY FROM THE WATER' to higher elevations. The population can only tread water for so long, and then they will be gone.

TMF

The only problem with common sense is that not very many folks have any of it.

Stay put with the buildings right where they are.

If the eventuality ever comes to pass that the ocean REALLY and TRUELY does rise then convert the streets to canals as in Venice, abandon the basements of the buildings and move the water heater above water. Now it will be VERY high dollar property (can't get much more water front than that) and it will become a tourist destination.

In the event the oceans do not rise, think of the money and hystaria they will have been saved by waiting to see what actually does happen.

Besides, I have it on good authority that come January 20 (or is it the 21st?) that the skies will open, the gods will smile and the oceans will receed as soon as that sob Bush is gone and we have Lord Barac Oboma, the Most Merciful, praise be to ACORN and the ACLU.

Not long ago the only drum beat was global warming. Then the second choris was climate change (when it was seen that global warming was not the catch all they needed). The goal none the less remains the same - capitalist economic destruction, social control and that oft talked about new world order.

Never once will those who are telling us that the climate is changing may be caused by natural and cosmic forces beyond the control of human endevor. When the sole focus is on human activity (speciffically industrial and capitalism) they show their hand and true motive. Sadly, too many have drank the koolaid.

Riddle me this, if we humans were around when the glaciers melted at the end of the last ice age, what could we have done to prevent it? Once the middle of the US (now the USSA) was covered with water and now it isn't. If humans were around then, what could we have done to prevent the retreat of the oceans? (Hint, exactly the same thing we can do if the oceans rise - NOTHING.)

Travis

"...Riddle me this, if we humans were around when the glaciers melted at the end of the last ice age, what could we have done to prevent it?..."

Obviously nothing. However, that would not stop us from responding appropriately to the disatrous consequences. I know you are not advocating a head-in-the-sand approach. We really should at least be prepared for the worst case scenario, not wait for it to pounce on us.

There is a difference between preparing for what may or may not come to pass and with those who push the notion that all of the change we think we are experiencing now is caused by human activity (and there for reversible by human input).

I do not think that human activity has contributed any measurable amount to global warming, cooling or any other change. I think that the earth is going to do what it's going to do with our without us.

Now coastal cities are planing ahead (an unspecified period of time) based on models, projections and assumptions. The leader of Malta (I believe it was) is considering relocating the entire country.

Has there been any sea level rise in the last decade? Has mean tide changed (mean tide is different in different locations - some coastal communities on the West coast (thinking Westport, WA in particular) can see 8 to 10 ft tides regularly while other cities along the coast do not see as large of a tide.

Nope, my head is not in the sand. I am sitting back watching all of the hystaria unfold around me.

Travis

I think it's about time Virus Humanis gets killed of and give something else a chance. We've totally stuffed up and do not deserve to continue to dominate this planet.

We cannot control sun spots, the tilting of the Earths axis or anything to do with the natural climate cycle and the sooner we get over our arrogance and roll with nature, the better off we will be.

If there is a God, It must have been pissed as a fart (drunk) by the time it got around to humans. About time it tried again.

RRV

I think it's about time Virus Humanis gets killed of and give something else a chance. We've totally stuffed up and do not deserve to continue to dominate this planet.

With such strong beliefs I assume that you are going to lead by example and be the first to go?

Travis

I have no problems with that.

RRV

I'm no expert in climate but I thought I'd share some observations.

Back in the early 70's I worked in the Arctic for two years. Crisp, cold, clear. On any given day (or twilight) one could 'feel' the clarity.

A couple of years ago I flew to Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk. From the aeroplane window the first thing that struck me was the mistiness of the entire Arctic region. This I had never seen before nor do I remember seeing the vast amounts of newly formed lakes and ponds. There were no ice floes on the ocean. Since thirty three years had passed the place was virtually unrecognizable.

So what happens when the Greenland glaciers melt asks I of the climate guy stationed in Tuk.

"Evolve gills" sez he.

Don't the ice floes displace the same volume regardless of their state, i.e.solid or a liquid?

RRV

The ice floes displace more. The theory is that if the northern polar sea ice melts ocean levels will drop. Not so if the ice packs on Greenland or Antarctica melt.

Ice floes displace the same weight in liquid and solid form. Ice has lower density than water which is why part of the floating ice is visible above sea level. As floes melt they will not change the water level, but ice on land will as it melts and flows into the sea.

Thank you, however, if so much land based ice is melting and no one wants to talk about the ice in Antarctica actually thickening, why has the sea levels risen beyond normal cyclic parameters.

I live within 200 metres of the shore and my property's natural levels are 2400mm above sea level and has been since the datum was installed. This level has not changed since December 2000. The high tide levels haven't increased to any great extent either. The underground water levels are the same and the brackishness is unaltered. The island communities in Moreton Bay, Queensland are not drowning nor is the Brisbane River rising. To my knowledge, Sydney Harbour and Port Phillip Bay remain stable. Even King Island, a cold, windswept, storm ravages place in Bass Straight is till above the water.

I repeat, this appears to be cyclical. The warm weather Southern Australia is experiencing also happened 30 to 40 years ago. I can actually remember (between dunks of my digestive biscuit) heat waves in Melbourne where the temperature would be over 100 deg F for weeks.

I can also postulate the the weather is simply reverting to "normal". After all, the Murray-Darling River system, before it had weirs and locks installed for irrigation, used to dry up to the extent that the mightiest river in Australia would be nothing but pools of water. Prior to irrigation, the land that surrounds the Darling river would struggle to support a sheep per acre, until it flooded of course.

Look to history, investigate the "greenhouse gas" claims, question what you are told, then make up your own minds. I have spoken to many people who who espouse the principals of "climate change" or "global warming" but when questioned as to why these "accepted" postulations are true, they often reveal that they "Saw-It-On-TV" or it was "On-The-News". It just appears to be accepted. Says a lot for the great unwashed, doesn't it?

The is a lot of funny data out there and strangely, data contrary to the global warming cause is often suppressed. I have even "read and heard" that the data used to support "climate change" was doctored by political people, but I have no proof.

As my Grandfather used to say, "believe half of what you see, a quarter of what you read and none of what you hear". A wise man!

RRV

Just do not ask ME to pay for it!

RRV

Why not? According to your "I don't have a problem with that" you won't need money where you're going.

OK.....Hmmmm, what was this thread about? Oh yeah, what can we do about rising ocean levels. Guest, Travis, mentioned a good one. Go the Venice route. Of course Venice is in trouble again because their solution involved hard to lift permanent structures on permanent foundations that were fine a century ago.

Permanent isn't necessary. The solutions already exist in many parts of the world. And there is nothing new about that. Archeologists have found remains of stone age lakeside stilt structures in Austria. People like that today in many third world locations. People live on sampans in Asian estuaries. People live on boats in west coast US estuaries with very low housing costs (to the consternation of neighboring wealthy yacht owners) We even live on houseboats in wealthy locations like Sausalito, CA.

Fast forward to 2050, sea levels are up by a meter, new levees are starting to get impossibly costly as are improvements to old levees. Residential areas are already being abandoned as old levees are too expensive to fix when breached by storm action or earthquakes. Once the useless structures are cleared the "real estate" begins to look increasingly attractive.

The trick here becomes how to make "water site" living practical for large numbers of people to live on. That issue has much to do with the provision of utilities and the prevention of environmental pollution. Questions about dredging for site improvement will have to be answered. Some clever solutions of how to handle waste and sewage disposal will be needed as well as inexpensive methods to shield homes from damage by wave caused wind action with minimal upset to the marine ecosystem.

Picture a tightly built 2 story houseboat with a flat roof for solar collectors, a rainwater collection system and an electric heat pump to extract energy from the salt water to provide heat during cold nights and overcast periods. Lacking sufficient water under the hull of the houseboat it could have a built in hydraulic jacking system to keep it level and immune to action of small waves.

You wouldn't have much of a back yard; but if the water were clean it would itself present numerous new forms of recreation right at your doorstep. And come moving day the house could move with virtually no packing required (as long as your new home was on the same water.).

Such a house could even have a built in garage for a small electric powered "urban" vehicle if access structures would be built to accommodate them, a desirable idea when you think about needed access for service and delivery vehicles. Perhaps we might even see the resurrection of the Amphicar with electric power instead of an IC engine.

Could this be the future for the coastal areas of many nations?

Ed Weldon

TMF would like to respond kindly to your 2 story house boat idea.

Consider, if you will, the sq ft of sail area of the side of a double decker barge converted or purposely constructed as a house boat. Then think of just how much anchoring will have to be placed in the water just to keep you in one place.

I once had an opportunity to put a marina in the Lahontan resivour in Nevada. I thought that it might be a good investment until I learned that the BLM would only permit a 5 yr lease on the site and thereafter all improvments would be leased to the highest bidder. Another wet footed stumbling toe stubber was the fact that the water level changed by as much as 18 ft anually when the snow melted in the High Sierra and the bottom of said body of aqua is all rocky and would be extremely difficult to build that kind of facility upon.

TMF

The only problem with common sense is that not very many people have it, or know how or when to use it.

TMF - There are a number of 2 story houseboats in Sausalito. And San Francisco Bay is a notoriously windy place.

My suggestion/prediction/wild-assed dreaming relates to salt water areas that are connected to the oceans whose rising levels we are concerned with. Anybody's guess whether it'll turn out that way. I'm pretty certain it won't if we still have people endowing the environmental groups like we have today. Perhaps the final answer will be underground houses with big LCD screens in place of windows. Just tune in any view you want and take a pill if you want to feel a breeze.

Your comment about BLM fairly illustrates the sometimes illogical role of government entities. Lake Lahonton is a strange place. A windy man made oasis in the middle of an enomous rocky desert gradually being infested by a creeping vine we call progress. I couldn't seem to warm up th the place the couple of times I visited it. I much prefer the upper reaches of the Rye Patch Reservoir. Yeah....I'm weird.

Ed Weldon

Please believe me, Mr. Weldon, I am not picking on you personally, ok?

I am a Building Designer that has "degressed" into Product Design and Development. I got real tired real fast in that all buildings with isolated reinforcing connectors have no solutions for several building-destructable forces a/o conditions. No matter how well I could connect the building components and parts, there was still gaps in the asemblages and designs that wind, seismic, temperature extremes, water, fire, etc; forces could find and destroy the building with!! As I moved into building inspections and plans examining, I soon learned that I was not alone in not having any way of solving these Structural Assemblage failure locations.

You,Travis, and Guest bring up some fantastic counter-solutions to a real and growing problem, Global Warming and Rising Tides. Economically, especially in Real Estate Development and Sustainability, these problems, along with tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires, extreme cold and snow conditions, river and tidal flooding; De-credits both the Land Infrastructure & Power and Energy Grids, and the Buildings and Structures Developed for Residential, Commercial, and Public use (and any/all Persons involved). Hence we are in the midst of a Recession, Mortgage, Foreclosure, and Credit Crisis', higher unemployment, and so on. Innovations and Improvements are the current "Manifest Destiny" of our Country, since we are not only out of new lands to "conquer", but the Lands that we have, are melting/eroding away by Rising Oceans, Environmental Pollutions, and so forth!! Science and Technology Advancements and Innovations are our new future "Manifest Destiny" conquests, etc.

I agree that "Permanent isn't necessary.", but I strongly support "Absolute Improvement" new methods and techniques in addressing Global Warming, Rising Tides, and Natural Weather and Environmental Phenomenae. Absolute Improvement just means that a solutionary measure doesn't create additional or peripheral problems when switching to the new method or technique. For example; the cell-phone and blackberry are Absolute Improvements to/for the landline dial telephone and the desktop computer. These improvements are fully Green Technology, as the reduced sizes of the end-products requires less natural resource materials to assemble the end-products with, the lighter weights of the cell phones and blackberries require less power and energy to manufacture, distribute, store, and transport, saving some Greenhouse Gas Emissions and additional Pollutants, and reduces Energy/Fuel Consumption in Mining and Manufacturing Power Equipment, Delivery Trucks, and Personal Use Cars and Trucks. Absolute Improvement!! Great Template for additional Industries.

A recent product development that I am in support of, that I have no input in, is the Door and Window opening "Flood-Proof Temporary Gates', from a Norway-based Manufacturer. These have been shown on the Discovery and Science Channels, as well as PBS. One problem, though. Even though houses and most buildings can keep snow from entering through the exterior walls, water flows through the seams and cracks in the exterior walls/frames without too much trouble. These water-proof gates are made out of a strong, durable, extruded fiber-plastic composite material that can double up as a wind-block in hurricanes and tornados. Absolute Improvement, WHEN the building frames/exteriors are wind and water-proofed, also.

I've developed the wind/seismic-proof building and structure frames/bodies, with continuous steel strapping reinforcing. Many Absolute Improvements and new Innovations are possible with this new Technology and Method.

Happy New Year, God Bless and Speed; Randy Dube.

Very well put, my friend. Actually, "global warming" was deemed to create too much "worry" for the "great unwashed" and climate change was less threatening. So much for urgent action being required.

I wonder, will any of the "climate change zealots" remember people like us as they watch their testicles rolling down the ice floe?

RRV

The Dutch have been doing this for years:

http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/04/02/dutch-floating-homes-by-duravermeer/

I looked at your floating homes! I concluded that the statement

"There is a toilet seat that fits every Butt" was appropriate here.

I once owned a home on water front "Harbour" home in Florida. I was great until the taxes sky rocketed. Now I keep my boat on a trailer!

TMF

Bricktop -- Pretty clever those Dutch folks. Of course I should have known. I especially like the use of cement composites for the "hull" and what looks like steel for the structure and siding.

It's all reminiscent of cement hulls sailboats that were a small fad several decades ago. It's pretty easy to visualize how US modular factory built homes could be assembled on composite cement barges that would be towed into position in floating communities.

It's also easy to imagine the "hissyfit" that would arise out of the professional environmentalists and the city planning departments over the idea of floating communities.

Ed Weldon

This is gettin' boring now and gong nowhere, however check this site for the rest on our views http://jimball.com.au/Warming.htm

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H. L. Mencken

Keep clamouring folks but don't try to make me pay for it!

Regards,

RRV

UHHHH, I think that you are "Paying for it" now, rrvau!!

The high cost of food, clothing, housing, automobiles, medical and pharmeceuticals, movies, pro sports, etc; Growing unemployment, having to prove higher credit worthiness than the Lenders, having to rebuild after hurricanes, floods, and fires, having to donate to Charities for the same!! I share your pain.

I am just glad that we have Elected a President who believes in Positive Change, Science and Technology Advancements and Innovations, are a part of our Country's Basic Principles!!

Happy New Year, God Bless and Speed; Randy.

I hate to tell you but this Obama character is part of this world wide swindle. It is nothing but a transfer of wealth and you are buying it. The increases on commodities so far are nothing compared to what will happen with this Carbon Trading bullshit. I think Australia is the test case because Labor governments have, since 1983, been trying their best to destroy Aussie manufacturing and suck up to the Asians. Our new Prime Minister Mr. KRudd and his economic advisor Ross Guarno are both ex ambassadors to China as well as being bloody Queenslanders. They have turned a $b12 surplus into a deficit in 12 months. Follow what happens here and see how you folk in the U.S. will suffer. It will lead to a new world order.

RRV

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H. L. Mencken

In spite of my wife's contempt for the man I've always found his quotes to be refreshingly biting and well worthy of recording.

With respect to Jimball let's just say he hasn't convinced me that his position is the correct one.

Ed Weldon

Well, I don't think you'd listen to anything the doesn't agree with your "beliefs", sorry.

rrvau: On the contrary. We need skeptics. Sometimes I think I spend too much effort considering their positions especially when they are steeped in paranoia and hyperbole and short on verifiable facts and logic.

But press on. Sometimes folks like you are right and the rest of us are wrong. Gather your data to support your position; but please do not abandon objectivity or cast aside facts that don't support your position.

I remain in a position to accept the bulk of scientific data that supports the conclusion that global warming is real. I still believe that we don't have overwhelming data to support just how much human activity contributes to the current warming cycle. But I feel that I am wise to prepare myself for the inevitability of this climate change and risk erring on the side of overreaction rather than inaction in my own life's actions.

And, yes, I don't believe that global warming is just a nefarious plot by money grubbing environmentalists to take away our pickup trucks much as I'd like to. (although I am certainly capable of believing that they would do that if they could)

So in my personal life I'll keep working on my home to make it more energy efficient and less vulnerable to the weather extremes that have been predicted to be part of global warming. I will actively support the work of both my sons, one the engineer working in the solar power industry, the other working in the fascinating world of global commerce where he is already showing ability to influence events way beyond what a college dropout might be expected to.

And I will keep supporting my particular automotive interests in no small measure because they are a well-spring of creativity that can help us move in the direction of more efficient transportation methods.

Ed Weldon

As an aside, while the melting ice definitely indicates a warming trend (whether influenced by us or not), the effect of that could inject enough fresh water into the Gulf Stream to stop its flow. The result would be that warm water would no longer bathe the coast of northern Europe, and weather there would be more like Siberia and Canada than it is today. Not everywhere would warm at an equal rate!

There IS NO global warming. A new ice age is more of a threat. The sea hasn't risen. The bulk of scientific opinion is all based on flawed evidence, ie political bullshit and you lot are stupid enough to believe it. What a bunch of sheep (sotty Kiwis)

Belief is one thing. Observation, coupled with available evidence, is quite another. The two provide the basis of theories which can either be defended or not.

Having worked in the Canadian Arctic 30 years ago I recently had the opportunity to return. From my perspective of thirty years duration to what I saw today I can state that it has changed dramatically....if not to the point of being unrecognizable then certainly close to it..

What immediately struck me was that the clarity of the atmosphere was no more. It's misty up there now.

Someone once pointed out that the thermal equilibrium of the earth cannot change. That's a fine theory where absolutes are measured. Unfortunately that theory doesn't take into account the dynamics of atmospheric/meteorological fluctuation studies.

Simply put....the polar ice caps are melting

"...the thermal equilibrium of the earth cannot change..."

Somehow, that doesn't sound descriptive of reality. During the last major Ice Age, your neck of the woods was covered with, what, 5 Km or so of ice? Is the quoted theory supposed to mean that the equatorial tropics got much hotter to maintain a global equilibrium? I don't think that actually was the case, so how to reconcile? As I recall it, Lord Kelvin postulated the cooling of the Earth since its original formation could be used to date the planet. He was off by a couple of orders of magnitude on the age, but he was right about the cooling, so apparently it not only can change, it MUST change.

My bad choice of word. I think it was supposed to mean that there's little that can influence the physical forces already in play...ie...spin, gravity, heat, cooling...as if they are absolutes (which, fundamentally they are).

That kind of thinking based on the premise that nothing changes regardless of climatic events doesn't take into account the dynamics of cause and effect brought about by either the above influences or some chemical/biological event brought about as a result of any one of those forces. Any of which are part and parcel of what's bound to happen anyway and in its own way..

Thermal equilibrium is a moot point.

One other theory about where jimball is coming from. Perhaps a self fulfilling prophecy; the result of all the hot air emanating from his direction. It's having the effect of pushing the ocean waters from the Southern hemisphere down to the Northern hemisphere thereby creating the very conditions which those of us on both sides of the equator observe and therefore believe in. And of course the warming winds directed toward us will explain why Arctic ice is melting.

Ed Weldon

Thanks for the history lessons, fella's!! Outside of Continuous Reinforcing Technologies, I haven't found anything "On-Topic" of "Redesign for Rising Tides"!!

"Maybe the new year will spark new ideas for reshaping how we live in a climate-changing world."

Sound familiar?

Don't mind my teasing, fella's, this IS a hard topic of discussion.

Happy new Year, God Bless and Speed; Randy, the "eggster".

Have a look at:

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

http://sahultime.monash.edu.au/explore.html

Then tell me that the sea level rising forecasts are anything BUT scaremongering to bring in new taxes.

RRV

Last time I was down at the harbor the level of the water was going down, not up. Sho' 'nuff, rrvau; you're on to something there.

Ed Weldon

G'day, it seems as if all this rising sea level business could appear to be real in some areas if the Earth, but is off-set by a reduction in sea levels in other areas.

It has been reported that Houston is subsiding. I think that this is NOT due to development on unstable foundations but due to the shape of the Earth's surface constantly changing. Land masses rise and fall as do the ocean floors. According to Prof. Ian Plimer, Holland is sinking, as is East Anglia and to balance this, Scotland is rising as are other parts of Europe etc. In fact, the one ocean level monitoring station in South Australia, which shows a rise in sea levels, is actually sinking.

So, back to the original discussion, take lessons from the Dutch as well as investigate the possibility of sea walls etc. However, assuming an apparent sea level rise of 1.2metres, (a theoritical maximun) I cannot really see a great problem as any structure that will be affected by this new level will already be experiencing difficulties now.

By the way, the Environment Minister of Australia, and sometime crap pop singer, forecast a rise of 6.0 metres due to the melting of the Antarctic "sea ice". He obviously failed year 9 science.

He also hadn't heard the The ice caps are thickening, I suppose.

RRV