Will sea level rise drown our coastal cities?
video description
Date: 2019-09-12
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Money Mike
Honestly i live in Houston thats floods a lot and have connections to New Orleans. I feel no matter what certain areas are going to flood even with the gates and levees. The best solution is to rebuild flooded homes 10 feet high which is being done in areas where the numbers like land price and new build price make sense. Unfortunately some homes are not in a rich enough area to make buying a tear down flood and rebuilding new costs more than homes on that street are worth it. But when the numbers do work I see whole streets near one major bayou that keeps flooding due to all the new suburbs we build that caused that bayou to flood that 20 years ago never used to flood. I just wonder what happens to your car because the house is seriously 10 feet up but the garage is ground level so i guess your just supposedly to let your car flood and cars float in water so it might even start ramming into the garage walls lol. Hopefully that have a solution for that other than telling you to park elsewhere every time it rains usually once you realize its really going to flood its too late the street get several feet of water if they had to rebuild the houses 10 feet. Most houses i see raised or lifted are like 3-5 feet so 10 tells me the who area flood bad like need to be rescued by a boat bad lol. For 1 million I would pass on any area that floods every year so bad houses are now standard 10 feet high lol thats twice as high as I see anywhere else they are lifting old homes or building new so it must flood like 8 feet if they are building 10 feet. All yours for only about 1 million Im guessing. I would never buy a house that flooded obviously it will happen again if they just repaired the house but the city did noting about the bayous, storm ponds, etc.
reply
Honestly i live in Houston thats floods a lot and have connections to New Orleans. I feel no matter what certain areas are going to flood even with the gates and levees. The best solution is to rebuild flooded homes 10 feet high which is being done in areas where the numbers like land price and new build price make sense. Unfortunately some homes are not in a rich enough area to make buying a tear down flood and rebuilding new costs more than homes on that street are worth it. But when the numbers do work I see whole streets near one major bayou that keeps flooding due to all the new suburbs we build that caused that bayou to flood that 20 years ago never used to flood. I just wonder what happens to your car because the house is seriously 10 feet up but the garage is ground level so i guess your just supposedly to let your car flood and cars float in water so it might even start ramming into the garage walls lol. Hopefully that have a solution for that other than telling you to park elsewhere every time it rains usually once you realize its really going to flood its too late the street get several feet of water if they had to rebuild the houses 10 feet. Most houses i see raised or lifted are like 3-5 feet so 10 tells me the who area flood bad like need to be rescued by a boat bad lol. For 1 million I would pass on any area that floods every year so bad houses are now standard 10 feet high lol thats twice as high as I see anywhere else they are lifting old homes or building new so it must flood like 8 feet if they are building 10 feet. All yours for only about 1 million Im guessing. I would never buy a house that flooded obviously it will happen again if they just repaired the house but the city did noting about the bayous, storm ponds, etc.
reply
kasa
It's so weird that so much of US as 1st world western country is so susceptible to misinformation and outright universal lies. Though as someone not from US I think large part of this is two party system. It ties so many different ideals to just two parties that voters have to either make potentially massive compromises or totally buy into party line. Which unfortunately seems to be case many times. Only two parties also caters to us vs them mentality and divide in major way. It's just amazing that US gov and people don't have concrete stance on climate change that has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Unless ofc you are unreasonable person, then this term doesn't apply. It's not like other countries are totally immune to this ahembrexit But it seems to be constant thing in US. World of climate change is guaranteed future and present. But we can choose to take it as disaster with potential massive economic and geopolitical consequences. Or prepare accordingly while limiting effects and giving us long period to adapt.
reply
It's so weird that so much of US as 1st world western country is so susceptible to misinformation and outright universal lies. Though as someone not from US I think large part of this is two party system. It ties so many different ideals to just two parties that voters have to either make potentially massive compromises or totally buy into party line. Which unfortunately seems to be case many times. Only two parties also caters to us vs them mentality and divide in major way. It's just amazing that US gov and people don't have concrete stance on climate change that has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Unless ofc you are unreasonable person, then this term doesn't apply. It's not like other countries are totally immune to this ahembrexit But it seems to be constant thing in US. World of climate change is guaranteed future and present. But we can choose to take it as disaster with potential massive economic and geopolitical consequences. Or prepare accordingly while limiting effects and giving us long period to adapt.
reply
Tucker Gardner
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.
reply
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.
reply
Robert Smith
I think it's important to think that Global cooling due to soot from diesel and gasoline engines is also happening. And so the warming happening from green house gases and cooling happening could lead to a bigger range of temperatures. Scientists now think the entire Earth was frozen over 600 million years ago. Internal temperatures inside the Earth and volcanoes eventually broke through and warmed things up again. Maybe scientists will figure that Earth has been in a very warm climate (with a greenhouse condition like Venus) having happened in the past. A day on Venus is many many Earth days (I think. Perhaps if Venus was spun faster to like an Earth day it would become more habitable.
reply
I think it's important to think that Global cooling due to soot from diesel and gasoline engines is also happening. And so the warming happening from green house gases and cooling happening could lead to a bigger range of temperatures. Scientists now think the entire Earth was frozen over 600 million years ago. Internal temperatures inside the Earth and volcanoes eventually broke through and warmed things up again. Maybe scientists will figure that Earth has been in a very warm climate (with a greenhouse condition like Venus) having happened in the past. A day on Venus is many many Earth days (I think. Perhaps if Venus was spun faster to like an Earth day it would become more habitable.
reply
Hoystein
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.
reply
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.
reply
Peter Breedveld
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.
reply
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.
reply
Mochamad Fachri
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.
reply
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.
reply
Andy Kench
How come the average temperature of hte planet began rising before industrialization if 'carbon' is the cause? Have you heard of the medieval warm period? Would the Paris Climate Change Accord have made any difference to supposed climate change? Would China have had to do anything to reduce their emissions? Is the whole Climate Change thing actually about moving wealth from productive countries to less productive ones? Honest answers to these questions largely dispense with the nonsense in this video.
reply
How come the average temperature of hte planet began rising before industrialization if 'carbon' is the cause? Have you heard of the medieval warm period? Would the Paris Climate Change Accord have made any difference to supposed climate change? Would China have had to do anything to reduce their emissions? Is the whole Climate Change thing actually about moving wealth from productive countries to less productive ones? Honest answers to these questions largely dispense with the nonsense in this video.
reply
kokofan50
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.
reply
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.
reply
Blue06LT
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.
reply
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.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
