Global Warming Alarmists Who Say End Is Near Reach Mental Tipping Point

Visbek said:

Uh, no.

That is not going to work.

If all you needed was a shovel, Hurricane Sandy would not have done billions of dollars in damage just to the Jersey Shore.

First, there are billions of dollars of real estate on barrier islands. Under normal circumstances, those islands would shift significantly over time, e.g. move east or west, lose sand or build up sand. Instead, we build homes on these islands, like idiots; we try to put tons of sand on these islands, like idiots, only to watch it wash away; and then when those homes get destroyed by 18" storm surges, we rebuild them. Like idiots.

Second, you can't keep out an 18" storm surge by piling sand on the beach.

Third, seawalls are incredibly expensive, and deteriorate over time. They need to be incredibly strong, to resist the constant pounding of ocean waves, which only increases as the wall gains in height; they can also be undermined by the waves, which crash against the wall and then come down, creating scour holes.

Seawalls can cost anywhere from $0.4 million to $2.75 million per kilometer.

In contrast, a brand-new traffic light system for a small town can run $0.3 million ($300k).

And that's just one effect. That doesn't include the costs of more extreme weather patterns -- more droughts, more heat waves, stronger storms, more floods, more snow (due to more moisture in the air, and snow removal can easily hit $75k per storm for a small town), agricultural failures,

So to answer your question. Even if it takes longer for the effects to hit than the most pessimistic projections: Yes, mitigating the harm of global warming costs more than traffic lights.

Click to expand...

Visbek said:

Uh, no.

That is not going to work.

If all you needed was a shovel, Hurricane Sandy would not have done billions of dollars in damage just to the Jersey Shore.

First, there are billions of dollars of real estate on barrier islands. Under normal circumstances, those islands would shift significantly over time, e.g. move east or west, lose sand or build up sand. Instead, we build homes on these islands, like idiots; we try to put tons of sand on these islands, like idiots, only to watch it wash away; and then when those homes get destroyed by 18" storm surges, we rebuild them. Like idiots.

Second, you can't keep out an 18" storm surge by piling sand on the beach.

Third, seawalls are incredibly expensive, and deteriorate over time. They need to be incredibly strong, to resist the constant pounding of ocean waves, which only increases as the wall gains in height; they can also be undermined by the waves, which crash against the wall and then come down, creating scour holes.

Seawalls can cost anywhere from $0.4 million to $2.75 million per kilometer.

In contrast, a brand-new traffic light system for a small town can run $0.3 million ($300k).

And that's just one effect. That doesn't include the costs of more extreme weather patterns -- more droughts, more heat waves, stronger storms, more floods, more snow (due to more moisture in the air, and snow removal can easily hit $75k per storm for a small town), agricultural failures,

So to answer your question. Even if it takes longer for the effects to hit than the most pessimistic projections: Yes, mitigating the harm of global warming costs more than traffic lights.

Click to expand...

Jack Hays said:

The Dutch seem to have figured out the whole sea wall thing, and there's no evidence for more extreme weather.

Click to expand...

Visbek said:

Uh, no.

That is not going to work.

If all you needed was a shovel, Hurricane Sandy would not have done billions of dollars in damage just to the Jersey Shore.

First, there are billions of dollars of real estate on barrier islands. Under normal circumstances, those islands would shift significantly over time, e.g. move east or west, lose sand or build up sand. Instead, we build homes on these islands, like idiots; we try to put tons of sand on these islands, like idiots, only to watch it wash away; and then when those homes get destroyed by 18" storm surges, we rebuild them. Like idiots.

Second, you can't keep out an 18" storm surge by piling sand on the beach.

Third, seawalls are incredibly expensive, and deteriorate over time. They need to be incredibly strong, to resist the constant pounding of ocean waves, which only increases as the wall gains in height; they can also be undermined by the waves, which crash against the wall and then come down, creating scour holes.

Seawalls can cost anywhere from $0.4 million to $2.75 million per kilometer.

In contrast, a brand-new traffic light system for a small town can run $0.3 million ($300k).

And that's just one effect. That doesn't include the costs of more extreme weather patterns -- more droughts, more heat waves, stronger storms, more floods, more snow (due to more moisture in the air, and snow removal can easily hit $75k per storm for a small town), agricultural failures,

So to answer your question. Even if it takes longer for the effects to hit than the most pessimistic projections: Yes, mitigating the harm of global warming costs more than traffic lights.

Click to expand...