Netherlands*, Boston, New York, Bangladesh: first hit by Global warming
In the BBC news today:
Scientists say rising temperatures are warming the polar regions faster than the rest of the planet.
One of the key questions that scientists will hope the research effort will shed new light on is the potential rise in sea level caused by melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica.
The southern polar ice sheet holds 90% of the world’s fresh water.
If it all melted, global sea levels would rise by 200m (650 feet).
Politically, 31 Jan ‘07:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal scientists have been pressured by the White House to play down global warming, advocacy groups testified Tuesday at the Democrats’ first investigative hearing since taking control of Congress.
The hearing focused on allegations White House officials for years have micromanaged the government’s climate programs and have closely controlled what scientists have been allowed to tell the public.
“It appears there may have been an orchestrated campaign to mislead the public about climate change,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California. Waxman is chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee and a critic of the Bush administration’s environmental policies, including its views on climate. — CNN.com
So, who should be most vocal about Global Warming? According to the University of Arizona, Washington DC and New York should be among the most concerned!
This Vanity Fair photo illustrates a dramatized eventual effect on Manhattan:
In sum, here’s North America under threat:
In Europe, Denmark* Netherlands has everymost reason to worry:
In Asia, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, and Singapore are under threat.
For the rest of the maps, see http://www.Geo.arizona.edu/dgesl/research/other/climate_change_and_sea_level/sea_level_rise/sea_level_rise_old.htm#images
March 1st, 2007 at 9:07 am
In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen
“Hansen has said that the tipping point (also known as the runaway effect) is upon us, and that if in 10 years the human population is unable to reduce greenhouse gases, that the oceans might rise as much as 10 feet by 2100.”
That 10ft = 3m, which although nothing like Vanity Fair’s dramatisation still encroaches on the coastal regions marked above.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:20 pm
yes, but even a 10 ft build up can create big problems for cities like Calcultta, Mumbai, Rio etc.. these are the big citites that literally have millions of people !!
March 2nd, 2007 at 9:06 am
In http://phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag
“Sea level is rising,†Giegengack agrees, switching off the sound. But, he explains, it’s been rising ever since warming set in 18,000 years ago. The rate of rise has been pretty slow — only about 400 feet so far. And recently — meaning in the thousands of years — the rate has slowed even more. The Earth’s global ocean level is only going up 1.8 millimeters per year. That’s less than the thickness of one nickel. For the catastrophe of flooded cities and millions of refugees that Gore envisions, sea levels would have to rise about 20 feet.
“At the present rate of sea-level rise,†Gieg says, “it’s going to take 3,500 years to get up there. So if for some reason this warming process that melts ice is cutting loose and accelerating, sea level doesn’t know it. And sea level, we think, is the best indicator of global warming.â€
March 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 pm
In same article that David Janes pointed to,
“[Gieg] points out that within his lifetime, there was a three-decade period of unusually low temperatures that culminated in the popular consciousness with the awful winter of 1976-77. Back then, scientists started sounding the alarm about a new ice age.”
Nevertheless, one could question why Washington muted the scientists rather than coming back with the three-decade low trend response.
March 2nd, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Henriette Weber Andersen pointed out that I misread the map when I said Denmark. The country most at risk is The Netherlands.
March 2nd, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Which scientists were muted? I’m not saying it hasn’t happened, but it’s hard to verify unsourced claims.
If anything right now, there’s been a massive amplification of one particular view point; anything that differs from that view is rarely or incompletely reported. I assume you’re aware of the hockey stick issue — the center piece of the previous IPCC report and almost all AGW reporting up till two years ago that has mysteriously disappeared without a trace.
There has been political interference and bullying, of course. Here’s a few names: George Taylor, David Legates, Patrick Michaels…
March 12th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
I watched Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” this evening - David have you seen it? What did you make of it?