Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
the estimated 5 - 6 meters of catastrophic sea-level rise has become a little more nuanced.

Is 3.3 metres of sea level rise still not pretty catastrophic?

The brainless should not be in banking. — Willem Buitler

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat May 23rd, 2009 at 09:51:31 AM EST
And that is from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.  What is the likelihood that it will melt without the Greenland Ice Sheet also melting?

When I was involved in advocating for seismic safety in public schools in California, back in the late '80s, I sought a map that would show those areas within Los Angeles Unified that were vulnerable to liquefaction.  The only map I could find that showed these data dated from before the construction of the Interstate Freeway System, 1959 IIRC.  My geologist contact at the Office of the State Architect deplored the situation, but coule offer no help.  My estimate then and now is that these professionals risked their jobs if they became too forth -coming on such a topic.  It was seen as being bad for the real estate business.

When I introduced a resolution to improve seismic standards at the State PTA meeting, opponents from San Diego made a quick counter argument and called a snap vote that defeated the proposal before I could even get to a microphone to speak.  As I had voted for the resolution, I could not call for a reconsideration.  Fortunately, the President of our local association had, or claimed she had, voted against it and called for a re-vote.  After my sobering presentation it passed and became the State PTA's official position.  It was, after the Northridge and Oakland quakes, eventually made law.

Never underestimate the resistance to bad news.  Only "renagades" and outsiders can deliver such news.  Doing so from within the system can be career suicide.  

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat May 23rd, 2009 at 12:13:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It will depend on the rate whether it will be catastrophic. And of those rates I can't seem to find very decisive estimates.
by Nomad (Bjinse) on Sat May 23rd, 2009 at 05:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Expected sea level rise is still a shady area. I'm wondering about the 'important regional variations', perhaps there is some connection with an article from last year that was (as far as I know) the first to emphasise how long it would take for the sea level rise from Greenland and the Antarctic to spread (see Cascio here and here).

Otherwise: Berlin is going to be 32 degrees tomorrow. Doom!

by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Mon May 25th, 2009 at 06:15:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
due to rise of Antarctica, from what I gather by looking at one of the pictures in Science...

Patrice Ayme Patriceayme.com Patriceayme.wordpress.com http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/
by Patrice Ayme on Tue May 26th, 2009 at 07:43:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
shows it's actually 3.8 meters, according to them (they restrict themselves to "negative" slope, a useless, somewhat lunatic restriction).

Moreover I dont't like their emotional tone, which takes for granted it would take millennia for the WAIS to go, whereas the real problem is whether it would take 45 minutes, like in the Hollywood movies (as happened with some shelves).


Patrice Ayme Patriceayme.com Patriceayme.wordpress.com http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/

by Patrice Ayme on Sat May 23rd, 2009 at 07:48:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series