Climate

Greenland Study: Sea level rise could be double IPCC projections

Last year, Nature Geoscience and Science published major articles suggesting that the consensus projection for sea level rise this century was far too low — and could be as high as five feet. Now the Journal of Glaciology joins in with a remarkable analysis, “Intermittent thinning of Jakobshavn Isbr¦, West Greenland, since the Little Ice Age.”

The lead author, Beata Csatho from the University of Buffalo explains implications of this work for the traditionally very simplified ice sheet models, such as those used by United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make projections of sea level rise:

“Ice sheet models usually don’t include all the complexity of ice dynamics that can happen in nature. This research will give ice sheet modelers more precise, more detailed data.

If current climate models from the IPCC included data from ice dynamics in Greenland, the sea level rise estimated during this century could be twice as high as what they are currently projecting.

jakob.jpgThe study “focuses on Jakobshavn Isbrae, Greenland’s fastest moving glacier and its largest, measuring four miles wide.” It documents the behavior of Jakobshavn Isbrae since the late 1800s by combining “field mapping, remote sensing, satellite imaging and the application of digital techniques in order to glean ‘hidden’ data from historic aerial photographs as many as 60 years after they were taken.” It is a very impressive piece of work. (The photo on the right is from 1944 — click to enlarge.)

For the record, five feet of sea level rise would displace more than 100 million people worldwide — the equivalent of 200 Hurricane Katrinas!

Tags

45 Responses to Greenland Study: Sea level rise could be double IPCC projections

  1. paul m says:

    ….could be twice as high as what they are currently projecting….

    why don’t they use more accurate description like ‘…probably be…. ‘ people need to realize and be motivated!

  2. David B. Benson says:

    paul m — Scientists are a cautious lot. The ice sheet models are still far to imprecise to be very definite, AFAIK.

  3. Peter Foley says:

    100 Million people in a hundred years= 1 million a year, less then one part in Six thousand. = Minor problem. Just think about all the fresh water available for cooling power plants and extracting oil from tar sands, Win- Win!

    Did you bother reading the report? It said basically we don’t know much re glaciers. P.S. the seas have been and will continue to ‘rise’ until the next ice age.

  4. John L. McCormick says:

    Peter Foley, go back to sleep!

    Sea level rise will displace many millions of people as will metback of glaciers that provide fresh water to cities, industries and farms. The melting Himalayan Glaciers provide fresh water to more than 1.6 billion people today. Combine the number of coastal inhabitants and those reliant upon glacial melt and the social unrest due to migrations will be incalcuable…we will have wait for the military responses of the invaded countries to gauge the cost in lives.

    I cannot fathom how you read the post or the study and concluded that Greenland meltback would provide more fresh water for power plants and tar sands.

    The seas have been rising but the level of input from your side is not.

  5. Dano says:

    The seas have been rising but the level of input from your side is not.

    Indeed. Someone should plot the rising level of shrill coming from the denialist camp lately.

    Best,

    D

  6. d. beck says:

    Yes, the IPCC knows that it is way off. They said as much in their final draft noting that recent research was showing an acceleration of ice moving to the seas that is only beginning to be understood.

    Dr. James Hansen said a few months ago, speaking of the recent findings, that it means the sea level rise will be two to five meters in 2100. That was the subject of a talk at the Dec. 07 American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco too.

    I’ll try to get a link to this stuff for you.

  7. RhapsodyInGlue says:

    I suppose in a way it’s good for people like Mr. Foley to express those views in public. At least it will help solidify the process of denialists being discredited. Even very conservative people such as military strategists are sounding the warning bell about the potential for large scale destabilization of countries and economies if these projections are correct… with huge costs both in loss of life and wealth. Mr. Foley and people like him demonstrate how totally out of touch with reality they are.

  8. Peter Foley says:

    John L. McCormick, Did you review the report? (the title”intermittent thinning of ….”) gives it away. The “tongue” has changed but the change doesn’t map to the Alleged AGW. To me the shape of the slope of the ice mass appeared to maintain its basic shape and location as the length of the flow-age varied.
    Even without the alleged AGW the seas will rise ~2 to 3 mm a year on the average. So how many coastal cities will have to be abandoned at the status quo ante alleged AGW?
    Re: Himalayan glaciers, how does their melting effect the water flow down the drainage basin? What do they drink now in the winter? Are you implying it’ll quit raining in the mountains or the the snow line will rise several thousand feet? Please elaborate.
    Incalculable? You can tell me how high the waters will rise a 100 years from now but, can’t figure how many people need to walk up the hill 5 feet?
    Milatary planners HAVE to plan for all possibilities, no matter how unlikely. I’m sure even the Pentagon can get their pound of flesh out of the tax payers to cover the remote possibility AGW is happening. Crunch some numbers, its cheaper to move the 100 million then to lower the globes economic growth rate 1% over the next 60 years.
    The AGW cultists attitude that all changes from warming are always bad all the time globally is intellectually dishonest. In hell no one gets frostbite or has to listen to the darn neighbor’s singing all day. Some things are improving due to changes in the climate natural and otherwise. Again another report twisted to support the AGW dogma.

  9. Dano says:

    I suppose in a way it’s good for people like Mr. Foley to express those views in public. At least it will help solidify the process of denialists being discredited.

    Well, it’s easy to identify a strident denialist, what with the liberal use of ‘cultist’ and poorly thought through arguments (ah, whatever sounds good at the moment, anything really, this’ll do no one will check), but the fact is that psychologically, that’s how many cope.

    Best,

    D

  10. Peter Foley says:

    Dano, any replies to my questions? Which argument is poorly thought through, all the one’s that don’t match your faith? Not one tax dollar will go to support this religion until it changes to a honest presentation of the facts. Put down the green tinted glasses and whip out some actual facts that prove burning carbon is raising global temps. I’ve never said average temps are not rising I just disputed the quality of the data, the methods of collection, the bias of the collection organizations, and various sundry assumptions used to trim the data to fit the model ex post facto. The AGW groups own data interpretation doesn’t match the historical record, temps have increased and decreased at various time while the carbon # increase in a smooth function. Socially I see the AGW cult shaking out in a similar fashion to the early Christian church, differing sects are included or excommunicated on various political realities, and various texts included or excluded in the New Testaments of AGW. Of course it happens a little faster with the Internet. If your belief is actually based in facts, let us hear them, Teach me. Show me my errors. If my statements weren’t based on reality, they wouldn’t bother you. Only your enemies always tell the truth about you.

  11. John L. McCormick says:

    The Anatomy of a TROLL

    To quote Peter Foley: [Only your enemies always tell the truth about you.]

    Contributors to the AGW blogs and chat rooms accommodate or dismiss contrarian opinions basec upon the respondent’s tolerance level or mission to set the record straight and/or educate the contributor to resolve misunderstanding, ignorance or mischief. Joe Romm has certainly won his stripes recently trying to engage a challenging contibutor.

    I do not have that patience level.

    Foley has hung himself on his own choice of words and checked himself out of the sphere of the misinformed and chose to be a misanthrope instead.

    I have no interest in catering to his nonsense.

    I hereby relegate him to the BOZO BIN and suggest others consider that a suitable end point for his pointless end.

  12. Peter Foley says:

    Check out this Graph, http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/02/07/more-satellite-musings/

    John, I’m a bozo? Is not that an Ad hominem attack? Tell me what word choices offend your delicate sensibilities and I’ll try not to offend you again.
    I don’t hate people, I just hate the acts of the misguided (sins).
    Again, bring me to the light of your position by actual facts and reasonable conclusions. Is your world construct so fragile it can be exposed to a little constructive criticism? Even the Roman Catholic Church uses devil’ advocates to insure quality control.

    Do you speak for Mr. Romm? I haven’t been able to detect any engagement yet besides a vague “you dare to question AGW’ and ‘you’re making up numbers’ Nothing regarding my questions concerning the manipulation of the data to further the AGW groups agenda.

    Here is another inconvenient question, Just what is slowing/reversing the global Sea temp. averages?

    From the “BOZO BIN”
    P.S. the “just think about all the fresh water for… was intended to be a joke, But I am soliciting for some venture capital if the Arctic Ocean melts clear next summer. Oil tankers could stop at Greenland and swap out Sea water ballast for fresh melt water to return to the Mid-East.

  13. David B. Benson says:

    Peter Foley — “Its cheaper to move 100 million…”

    I’ll call and raise. Let’s see the analysis.

    Remember the factor in the price of all the resource wars along the way…

  14. Dano says:

    It’s not up to me, Foley, to teach you. I merely point out the FUD. Speaking of FUD, here are some FUD phrases in Foley’s comment above, which is our clue to tune him out (I do this for fun, but others can killfile):

    o your faith
    o this religion
    o the green tinted glasses
    o the bias of the collection organizations,
    o trim the data to fit the model
    o The AGW groups own data interpretation doesn’t match the historical record,
    o temps have increased and decreased at various time while the carbon # increase in a smooth function (implicitly FUDding feedbacks -D)
    o the AGW cult
    o differing sects are … excommunicated on various political realities,
    o the New Testaments of AGW.
    o your belief

    Now, that’s some pretty good FUD, foley. FoleyFUD. That must have kept your cut/paste function busy for awhile, eh?

    Best,

    D

  15. Peter Foley says:

    D.B.Benson, I’ll ignore the one half of the people would have been forced to relocate with ‘normal’ inter ice age sea level rise. One million a year divided into 6.65 Billion people = one per year out of 6,650 people. 6,650 annual incomes X one percent would =66.5 average annual incomes. Thus 66.5 X the average per capita income(10,200$) 2006 est. = 678,300$ US per refugee, I’d move for 2/3rds of a million. This ignores the future value of compounded growth rates of not burdening our global economy with a moronic regulatory choices. All choices of government that diminish the long term growth rate of our economy are huge taxes on the future forever.
    Why would there have to be a War? Any fighting-no money. We could deport the twelve million illegal aliens here and substitute the first twelve million actual ‘wet’ foots. I’m not even going to discuss the various land-rushes as the lands are freed from the ice. Heck, some of my Norwegian neighbors might even go back to the old country.

  16. Peter Foley says:

    Dano, Dano, I had to look up FUD, you suppose Dr. Goebbels hated it when the Soviets used some of their propaganda techniques against the Nazis? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
    Faith: a belief held with little/no factual basis. Example One might say I believe we need to end property rights, raise taxes, add two layers of global bureaucaries, limit then ban all carbon burning, and stop any increases in energy/population growth because global temps are rising ~ 1/3 of one per cent between 1975 and 1998, because it kind of matches the increase in CO2 except during the 1940s to 1975 and every other period when it got colder as carbon burning increased, furthermore I’ll ignore the last nine years of data that doesn’t match my faith.

    Religion: A group of memes that don’t have an objective observable basis. In the past and the future I’ve/will practice ritual cannibalism with 900 million other Roman Catholics
    Green tinted glasses: Forgive me Mormon’s but this is a change up on the original Pink sunglasses the illiterate founder of Mormonism(Joe Smith?) read the gold tablets with before they were returned to heaven –All information must be used in the global war against the ‘other’, the not greens.
    Can you look in the mirror and state Dr. Hanson of NASA hasn’t crossed the line several times on balance issues. Even the blog host has stretched the facts to fit his agenda.
    Bias of Orgs: Bio 101 all organisms want to continue to exist, thus the IPCC et Al’s choices are biased toward more money/food.
    I’ve already covered the little data gap above.
    Cult= a religious group whose founders are not yet dead.
    I’ve watched other the years as ethanol was first hailed as an important part of the green world and is considered heretical now. Similar non-logic is generated to exclude nuclear power from a post carbon world.
    Publications are vetted by the ‘green’ cardinals then given the imprimatur of the green Vatican. Documents that don’t further the agenda are ridiculed without any factual bias.

    My beliefs aren’t germane to a scientific discussion.
    But I value honesty and integrity and like Anne Frank under all the back stabbing and manipulating I believe (despite Dano’s actions) that most people are mostly good.

    It is unfortunate that you appear to be unable to form thoughts on your own. The only thing I ‘cut and pasted’ was the web site that shows the present 8-9 year long hiatus in warming. I’m not Newton or Hawking, I don’t claim to have many original ideas but we can stand on the shoulders of giants with a little intellectual sweat and integrity.

    Dano, it appears that you truly have very little (I’ve learned what FUD is) positive to teach me, I hope you are more useful in your other endeavors.

  17. John L. McCormick says:

    Mr. Chairman,

    Can we have regular order in this thread. Enough of Foley!

    John McCormick

  18. Dano says:

    Agreed, John. Although I suspect someone so over the top is a parody character.

    Nonetheless, I call Godwin’s Law on this thread. No need for a Chairman.

    Best,

    D

  19. John L. McCormick says:

    Dano,

    moving on,

    Would you care to speculate on the possible diminished inflow and drawdown of Lake Mead below the outtake pipes in a maatter of years?

    See the following NYT piece at:

    http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=92902

    John L. McCormick

  20. Dano says:

    I saw that yesterday, John, and passed it around the office. We were just talking this week about the likelihood of cross-basin transfers to bring water to the Front Range (in addition to agriculture selling its water rights), and then this study pops up. Gotta think that likelihoods of cross-basin transfers are going down the more we learn.

    Speculating on the societal effects:

    Certainly the West is seeing less snowpack [e.g.Woodhouse, C. A., S. T. Gray, and D. M. Meko (2006), Updated Streamflow Reconstructions for the Upper Colorado River Basin, Water Resour. Res., 42. Summary article. ].

    This is also further complicated by the fact that our society is actually more vulnerable to drought, despite protestations that greater wealth will buy us resilience.

    RP Sr et al recently concluded in Pielke Sr. R.A. et al. 2005. Drought 2002 in Colorado: An Unprecedented Drought or a Routine Drought? Pure Appl. Geophys. 162:8-9 pp. 1455-1479:

    The magnification of the impacts, therefore, with respect to the actual precipitation deficit indicates Colorado society is now more vulnerable to short-term drought than in the past. This sobering message is the one the policy makers need to digest and react to.

    There certainly isn’t much action from decision-makers on this front – turf restrictions, xeric landscaping requirements, widespread tiered rate structures, no more golf courses, etc. Especially today, where SW Colo is buried in snow. I like to think I’m a glass half-full guy, but there’s little political will or leadership to address society’s pressing problems, and water is absolutely in the top three.

    Best,

    D

  21. Paul K says:

    Certainly the West is seeing less snowpack [e.g.Woodhouse, C. A., S. T. Gray, and D. M. Meko (2006),

    Isn’t this a high snow year out west?

  22. paul m says:

    heres a scary thought…from this graph..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Northern_Hemisphere_Sea_Ice_Extent_Anomalies_Oct_2007.png

    the sea ice basically collapses in a 3yr period…if we assume that a similar behavior will occur for the GIS and the AnIS we are in for a wild ride. Large dynamic collapse of these will probably happen in less that ten years(more like 5)…ouch!

    How do we predict when it will happen….maybe we will get a flat extended period of ice mass recovery just before the event, similar to the ArSI one shown in the graph above around 2003/2004…

  23. Dano says:

    Isn’t this a high snow year out west?

    One year is not a trend.

    Best,

    D

  24. David B. Benson says:

    Here is the world per capita income which I found:

    Region Per Capita Income in US$
    World 8,200

    The other mistake is in assuming that the 100 million can be moved at a rate of 1 million per year. It won’t work like that.

    But rather than spend some substantial sum of moneys just relocating whole populations, how about investing in sources of non-fossil fuel, renewable energy which then avoid the necessity of such transhumination?

    The unintelligent and unalert fail to understnd this is happening right now. A good thing, too, with pek oil upon us and peak coal to soon follow…

  25. David B. Benson says:

    It is obvious I could use a spellchecker, if there was one…

  26. Peter Foley says:

    David B. Benson, I’ve checked four sources, they’re all 10K -+500$. Are you retroactively changing the task? The world’s economy is growing faster then the population, so if there is enough money in year one there is more money in the future barring irrational government. I recall reading how a poor camel herder could build his own way out of a flood event in the old Testament. I did ASSUME the wealthier countries would assist our culturally diverse but economically retarded brothers. By the by what is Transhumination, is it the process of manufacturing Soylent Green? I thought I heard it mentioned once on the 4th series of DR.WHO shows

    John L. McCormick, You’ve taught me another two words “Godwin’s law”– I’ve never encountered before. So does erasing the existence from your posts of on the most horrific examples of 20th century fascism improve your intellectual abilities? Going forward I’ll not intentionally mention the unmentionable again while you are in the Internet cafe with the adults. Do you have a web site where I can read up on your issues, I don’t want another episode caused by my unintentional gibes–just the intentional.
    Any interest in discussing AGW?

  27. John L. McCormick says:

    Dano, thanks for your thoughts on Lake Mead. I will read the Barnett piece today and would like to come back to you.

    I know a bit about the Colorado River water wars history and know it is a heavily gauged system. It would not be difficult to take the water gauge readings at Lees Ferry from about 1998 and compare with the depth gauge readings at Lake Mead.

    Though 2007-2008 Rockies snow pack is 128 percent of normal and that could add about 3.5 Mmaf to the Lake, I wonder about the very high summer temps in that region and increase evaporation from the Colorado system. Adding that to the water loss due to phreatophyte growth along the river and the fact the Southwest surface is drying out, water loss is likely a huge factor.

    The lake is not sitting in a ceramic tub and we know the strata are sandstone and absorbing lake water. What if the region’s groundwater table is also descending and the Lake is actually feeding into aquifers below.

    This is worthy of a thread on RC and anything you folks can do to prod Gavin and the gang might make for a very interesting discussion.

    If Dr. Barnett’s projection is even in the ballpark, there will not be time to fully adjust and hard times are ahead for Phoenix.

    John McCormick

  28. Dano says:

    John:

    any time. One more ref that I think is worthwhile for perspective.

    The invasive phreatophyte growth in my mind does increase evap. somewhat at local scales, but more importantly it decreases soil moisture and also releases chemicals in litter to discourage other plant growth, thus altering habitat. Altering habitat decreases resilience, and coupled with your cogent evaporation/infiltration points makes for grim scenario analysis.

    You also may want to check out the 2/08 NatGeo, which has a very good article about the drying west – esp. the picture on pp 106-107 , which is subtle genius in my view and worth a year’s sub. (altho the GF pays for it).

    Lastly, about impacts, one last article about habitat impacts and by implication what they may mean to humans. IIRC linked from Headwaters News.

    Best,

    D

  29. John McCormick says:

    Dano,

    I know phreatophyte control on the River has been tried and found to be very expenseive and not effective. CO2 fertilization and diminished shoreline flooding and vegetation clearing likely have added to the volume along the entire river. But, I believe only a small percentage of water loss represented here.

    Reduced aquifer rechage in the Basin during the years of extreme drought according to the Palmer Index maps could drop water tables in areas where discharge occurs and River inflitration fills the gap. These are huge measurement tasks but given the stakes involved, I wonder what the BuRec really does in its spare time?

    Yes, the Southwest is drying out as the Arctic ice sheet ienhances its disappering act each longer melt season and – heh – isn’t the Amazon basin being deforested at an increasing rate lately? What do we suppose is caught in the middle?

    John McCormick

  30. David B. Benson says:

    Peter Foley — The correct spelling is ‘transhumanation’. It means that a bunch of people move elsewhere, as in the great Germanic tranhumanations of the fifth through eighth centruies in Europe: Franks, Ostragoths, Visigoths, Lombards, …

  31. Peter Foley says:

    David B. Benson, I think your spiritual side is leaking into the rational lobes of your memory, maybe too many statins? Transmigration= A people crossing through another’s native range to reach their destination in physical manner as opposed to the Spiritual(I think nut job) definition=Crossing over into some sort of para-whatever astral plane. I believe that some people believe L. Ron Hubbard has been Transhumanated to a ‘higher’ existence. Thus converting Scientology into a Religion from ‘cult’ status.
    In regards to the = 200 Katrina’s Comment in the Blog, The USA evacuated 1.1million and then returned ~900,000 refugees in less then a year at a cost well under 200,000$ each. That is over twice the mission requirement. And less than a Week? on the removal phase from the effected low lands/coast. Dollar wise that is only twenty times the Worlds annual income average or 25 X your numbers.

  32. David B. Benson says:

    Peter Foley — I assure you that ‘transhumanation’ is the (now probably) outdated word used to describe the movements of the Germanic peoples. You’ll not find it on the web that way, since others seem to have misused the word. But check the Oxford English Dictionary.

    As for your ‘mission requirement’, you might find matters rathre different in the Adaman Islands and in Bagledesh.

    Not to mention the loss of good crop land…

  33. Peter Foley says:

    David B. Benson, Seas have risen for the past One Hundred Centuries, most of the ice has already melted. It is not like a Tsunami– more like Venice Italy, jack the cultural treasures up and move the people to high and dry. The need for farmland has actually declined as the green revolution has born fruit. If we let the third and fourth world industrialise they be able to take care of themselves and pay for their own conservation. I’d worry more about a seismic, or impact event then the ice-melt if I were living at or near sea level. More people die every week due the lack of refrigeration(food poisoning) and clean water then have ever died from AGW.

  34. David B. Benson says:

    Peter Foley — You exposure your ignorance of the matter of losing cropland. Do some research before posted, hmmm?

    “have ever died from AGW.” Yet.

  35. Peter Foley says:

    Every year in America some %(about 0.3%/year (USDA)) of cropland is converted to other uses, yet the value and amounts of food and feed has risen every year on the average. How is this possible? How did more people starve to death in the 20-30s last century then now when the Population is nearly four times as great?
    Could there be some sort of mechanism that allows ever greater economic production every year? Why, until ethanol subsidies came into being was the inflation adjusted price of farmland decreasing? Forty Million Frenchmen(tree-huggers) might believe in Papal infallibility(we’re out of Ag land), but it doesn’t make it true.
    How many Islander’s world wide have died from AGW compared to volcanoes/Tsunamis?

  36. Joe says:

    Gimme a break. Ethanol subsidies have NOTHING to do with AGW.

  37. Peter Foley says:

    Joe, the most probable answer is Subsidies have very, very, little to do with the Alleged fossil carbon forced AGW. As always I am against the ethanol subsidies–a perversion of the free market and an unnecessary tax on most Americans. If anything Ethanol has lowered net fossil carbon emissions in America over the last five years, one and one-half gallons of alcohol replacing one gallon of fossil gasoline. And think of all the unburned bunker oil saved by not exporting all that nasty field corn to starving poor who otherwise would have kept burning cow droppings and breathing.
    I hold that all taxes increase waste as a ‘natural’ by product of the inherent inefficiency of the government collecting then disbursing the funds even when needed. One of the pesky Laws of thermodynamics would cover the model. You can never recover all the energy(money) placed in the System. If the US Congress would remove the subsidy without giving it to some other Scyophant, it would grow the economy and lower the amount of energy used per unit of output without fail.
    As a group the “Greens” knowledge of economics is as weak as their knowledge of the other sciences. Every unit of currency had a fuel/energy cost to create it–Thus if you destroy(Spend funds that don’t create more money)wealth you have added to the environmental problems instead of improving the status quo. Civilization will never tax its way to a greater level of rational stewardship of the Earth. Even Jesus spoke against Zero Sum economics two thousand years ago.

  38. Joe says:

    What “free market”? Gimme a break. Never has been one. Never will be one.

    “Alleged fossil carbon forced AGW” — try “proven fossil carbon forced AGW.” Either you believe in science or you don’t.

  39. Peter Foley says:

    Joe, in the interests of honesty you should precede or follow all of your work with the first sentence of the 0908am 18 February 2008 post. I love to eat watermelons but I think they should be keep out any positions of leadership. How’s the Twenty-First-Centuries experiments in state run markets doing? North Korea= eating grass for two of three meals, Cuba, Pimping its women out to earn foreign exchange, and Hugo Chavez’s nationalised shrinking 90$/barrel oil industry can’t float his workers inflationary paradise. I trust the results of honest Scientists based on actual data from the real world. I ‘believe’ most people are good most of the time. I know ‘good’ people have irrational belief systems that warp their world view. Your models are departing further away from the actual data every day. “Record long cold spell in Hong Kong blamed on AGW” was particularly amusing. Heck if China keeps driving up coal demand you won’t need a carbon tax to jump start nuclear power.
    If your group’s various political positions weren’t so greedy I’d be inclined to allow some wastage of tax monies for a short period of time, but the declaration of total unconditional warfare upon the Western Civilization’s means of growth forces one to stop/slow the insanity until the alleged science becomes untenable to even the less educated.
    Thanks for the moment of total honesty.
    Some examples of nearly free markets, One Scalped Superbowl tickets, Two P.C. hardware, and thirdly any commodity market without subsidies or excessive regulatory burden.

  40. Joe says:

    Superbowl? Uhh, that would pretty much be a monopoly.
    PC Hardware. Made in China, which keeps their currency artificially low.
    Most commodity markets have a subsidy and are regulated.

    I take it you are for slave labor, child labor, no Clean Water Act, no Clean Air Act, or other “excessive” regulatory burden.

    We have different time stamps. Do you mean “It is always worth remembering what we are fighting for: the next generation!” That of course was a humorous post. We are really fighting for the health and well-being of the next 50 generations or more.

  41. Dano says:

    I need find some time to add this blog to greasemonkey so I can killfile Foley.

    Best,

    D

  42. Peter Foley says:

    More ad hominem attacks– “I take you are for slave labor…. ”
    I’m for rational regulation that keeps the markets free and maintains the flow of information necessary to make rational choices. I’m against all regulation that are ‘sin’- taxes. I’m against any type of rationing of resources outside of an on going true national emergency. Where is the slave labor issue component of the alleged AGW? The child labor issue is a nonstarter that exists to show the depths of ignorance the average American that certain morally lacking questionable groups use to further their questionable agendas. Child labor is far from the worse possibility for children in third and fourth world economies–their work income will allow their own children to a, exist and b, have an education leading to the countries economic advancement. Misguided First world child labor activists have the long slow death of hundreds of thousands if not millions of youth by starvation and disease on their collective conscious.
    Returning to the Greenland ice, how does the AGW tribe plan to maintain the suspension of reality during even more climate benchmarks that can’t be spun to further the dogma? The ice is getting thicker because it is? Average temps are dropping how?–Where are all the BTUs going? What was the loss rate of the Ice ante the AGW ‘event’ Whats the ‘normal’ flux in glacier masses world wide?
    I’d suggest you come up with an exit strategy that preserves your family’s economic future.
    Dano, is your belief in carbon AGW so weak that any exposure to actual facts and science will corrupt your faith? Could you please publish a list of the heretics. I’d think the Chinese government might let you use a copy of their Internet filter you could tweak to eliminate any information that doesn’t conform to your dream world view. I hope you can take the quiet time to learn about the world as it actually is.

  43. Anonymous says:

    I love the “problems” that people make for themselves…

    “Not only would coastal residents be at direct risk from flooding but drainage systems would suffer as salty ocean water would move back into river deltas, changing the biological environment, Hu wrote in an e-mail.”

    But wait… these “deltas” might experience biological environmnents due to … salt water intrusion from the ocean.

    These are “be aware” papers.

    The issue that people (even Foley) need to be aware of is the financial meltdown that will occur with NYC is flooded… You think the banking meltdown caused a recession? Wait till 100 coastal communities are flooded and communities have to move…

    If you are wondering where the plan is to deal with this situation, be aware that the USA government says Social Security will be running a negative number around 2030–and we have no solution for that either…

    I think Foley and similar (lets wait for a real emergency crowd) should plan now so that the implementation of the plan can proceed smoothly. “Better to be prepared than caught with your pants down”…

  44. Counsel says:

    There are too few facts to have any “answer.” We have been measuring this data for a minute amount of time on the geologic scale, and ice ages and warming events move slowly.

    However, Anon (above) is right, I think. “Good” government has a plan to deal with eventualities and potential events. If you have no plan, you are left looking foolish and ineffective (because you are…).

    The facts show sea level rise is happening (slow now) and that ice sheets (some) are melting faster than “expected.” While I am not moving away from the shore just yet, I am aware that Boston, New York, Miami, and several other large cities are situated along coastal areas and lack significant topography to “harbor” all of their residents/services if sea level rises “more than expected.”

    If we agree that sea level will continue to rise “until the next Ice Age,” what is/are the plan/plans to deal with flooding cities so that we avoid issues like financial instability for everyone–rather than just those who live on the coast?

    Logical and Reasonable Governmental Planning does not equal over-zealous regulation…

    I am not for “over-zealous” governmental regulation either, and I, of course, think the banks should have been forced to enter bankruptcy (pick your Chapter) in the first place… There are some things the “free” market can deal with better than governmental intervention while there are some things that will require governmental intervention…