As a crank, two focal points for my whining in recent months have been 1. the utter idiocy and lack of respect for science exhibited by the climate change denial squad and 2. the general short-sightedness of American policy in almost every area you can name, but especially public policy towards climate change. So i found it very different to read a little bit on msnbc (yes, those crazy media liberals) regarding the efforts of the Dutch government to plan for rising sea levels due to climate change. You see, two thirds of the Netherlands is low lying land that is very easily inundated by North Sea storm surges. This fact, plus the majority science opinion that sea level is going up at least a foot in the next century, and probably at least a couple feet in the next one, has got the Dutch scrambling for a plan. "We want to make sure that there's still a Netherlands a century from now" said Tineke huizinga, the country's top water official "We don't want to just let the water flow and all have to move to Germany".
Well, the beer is just as good in Germany, in my view, but sure nobody wants to be a climate refugee. The Dutch got a taste of what storm surge can do in a Katrina moment back in 1953 when a large storm breached their defenses and drowned 1800 citizens. The Dutch have approved a 20 billion dollar increase in spending on water defenses and water quality improvements over the next 20 years. Their estimate is that the next 50 years look pretty safe, but beyond that..... The problem is that it's not possible to be sure how much of a sea level rise they will experience. The IPCC estimate of one foot was probably conservative. The Dutch figure on a rise of 30 inches, much tougher to handle with existing technology. If the worst case scenario of a five foot rise happens, sheez kiss it goodbye. The problem then becomes nearly insurmountable, because where the Rhine River meets the sea, the water that is now released through sluices at low tide would no longer flow, since it would be going uphill. Some longterm ideas include altering the course of the Rhine (and that IS a big job) or creating breaker islands off the nation's coast to break up storm surges before they reach the true coast. That is also a high dollar item- you may notice that the USA has failed to make good on intentions to fix up our problems of the Mississippi delta region that contributed to the impact of Katrina, partly due to the high cost.
Which brings us to the USA. You may say, hey, no big deal, this country got mountains galore and very little land that is as low lying as the Netherlands. You'd be right, except for the lower 1/3 of Florida, which is flat as a pancake and only a few feet above the water. But since about a third of the USA population believes that global warming is imaginary, there is no willingness to deal with it from a public funding viewpoint. Climate Change denial squad, enjoy your vacation from reality. As Dylan said, it's a hard rain gonna fall.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 7
Not falling for it twice.
I'll be surprised if you read this response, because you already have your "sound byte" here. However, if you want to understand what the "global cooling" myth is really about, read on.
In the 70s, the science was more controversial, and there was general uncertainty about which would "win out," CO2 concentrations or CFCs from aerosols. The latter reflects heat from the sun, and so some scientists thought that the CFCs would dominate - ergo, "global cooling". But that was a few scientists, unlike the thousands today that are warning about global warming. And the scientists, who were betting on "global cooling" are now among the ones acknowledging warming.
But here's the rub. The scientists, who were touting "global cooling" were not all wrong. CFCs and other particulate matter (pollution) have had a cooling effect. This doesn't mean that the average global temperature has gone down. It means that the average global temperature hasn't risen as much as it otherwise would have. This phenomenon is called "global dimming," and there is strong evidence that it is responsible for changing rainfall patterns throughout the world.
So now, when you hear contrarians talk about the "ice age" that scientists were predicting back in the 70s, you know the facts - that is if you bothered to read this far.
More on global dimming:
http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/GlobalWarming/
globaldimming.asp#Whatisglobaldimming
always a pleasure! and yes, your exposition on global dimming is spot on. It's about the only good thing about pollution.
Good article. Sorry for the diversion above, but the old contrarian (what do you call them? the CCDS?) broken record is annoying.
Many nations around the world are taking the long view re: climate change. Many cities and state in the U.S., as well as corporations, are taking the long view - not the federal government, however. That will likely change after January, 2009, but too much time has been wasted.
BTW, when you hear that the U.S. shouldn't do anything until China does, you can respond that perhaps the U.S. should catch up with China:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/44127/story.htm
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=49879