Rising Sea Levels

[TalkingDog]

Someone posted a portion of a new report yesterday, that suggests the water levels may rise some 230 feet due to glacial and permafrost melting.

Most people were commenting on what might happen along coastal areas, where most populations tend to be concentrated.

I started to think about the long term effects of rising water levels.
Obviously there would be a steady influx to the higher elevations. Most likely with people settling, then having to move again a few years later as the water encroached more and more. State and local infrastructures would be incredibly stressed, some even to the point of collapse.

The waters would become steadily more polluted as they continually overtook factories, farms and refineries....places with concentrations of pollutants.This would affect sea life, not to mention the weather patterns and capacity of our forests to survive.

Then I started thinking about the mid-west, people rarely think about rising sea levels affecting the land locked, yet vital food producing area of our country.



Poking around I ran across this image of the midwest that shows sea levels in the mid-Cretaceous Period. The blue areas are water. The aqua areas are more shallow.

I'm no geologist and didn't want to spend my morning googling a topographical map that shows all areas in the US below 230 feet. (We're well above that here.)

Hatin' to be a crank here, but I don't want to spend my old age beating back SUV driving beach dwellers who didn't have the sense to turn off a damned light once in a while or for Chris'sake walk to the store occasionally and what the hell do you need an A.C. for? We live in the South and we've never owned one.

Anyway...just pondering....




My favorite Future Famous Dead Artist: KarenParker

[SPKrazy]

1. I Doubt That 230 Feet Will Cover The "High Plains"

But Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Floriduh, are all states that have land under 230 feet.

It's an interesting thing to even consider rebuilding New Orleans IMO when you think about the water rising so far above it.

But that isn't politically correct to say I guess.

[heartofthesiskiyou]

8. correct.. the big

valley that shows up on this map when water was high in the middle of the present US now has the Rockys. The colision of the two land masses, eastern US and western US pushed (approx. 20M yrs ago)the rockys up. Generally the midwset is safe from raising seas. I wouldn't want to count on it as a bread basket though. No one has any idea whatsoever of were the remaining rains wil fall.

[opihimoimoi]

2. But seaside land fetches higher values,,,jus kiddin

Well, we had a window...and we closed it...never even thought to open and look at what we Humans are doing

Now, it LOOKs like its too fucking late, we Humans blew it.

Our children will face harse times...war, famine, disease, and Floods/droughts....

The IGNORANCE that caused this apathy lies in the direction of the PUBS who refuse to admit GW is caused by man...and won't address the horrendous amount of Co2 emmitted by this nations factories....they wish to save money by not installing those expensive scrubbers...cheap fuckers, now, we all gatta suffer and die. FUCK those GOP MFrs who still cling to DENIAL.

[halobeam]

3. This thread is relative in sorts to what you are discussing....

thought it might be interesting.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1943391&mesg_id=1943391

[opihimoimoi]

26. Thank you...the answers lie in the direction of Peace and Unity

Things our present leaders ignore reject...

We continue to ignore the CommonMasses to indulge in exploitation and waste

The degradation of the Social Fabric in America has intensified since Reagan and the Bushies

[sendero]

4. I'm not sure what that map..

.. is supposed to be. For example, it shows the eastern portion of the TX/OK border as aqua, yet I have land there and the elevation is over 700 feet above sea level.

[sutz12]

5. He labeled it as "Cretaceous"

So it is not an accurate map of current landforms. It represents a time prior to a lot of geologic change due to continental drift. Many Cretaceous fossils are found in high mountains.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

11. exactly. The Cascades on the West coast wouldn't be covered w/water

Cretaceous (144 to 65 mya)


the first volanic rock in the Cascades is dated about 54 mya, probably from the Challis arc episode. The Cascades have only been active for about 34 mil. years.
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Oregon/HighCascades/description_high_cascades.html

I'm off in search of an updated map.

[sutz12]

12. See post #10, below.

;)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

17. thanks

looks like I'll be heading for the hills! Cool. I could stand that. :)

[LWolf]

29. Exactly what I was thinking.

I cannot imagine waters rising high enough to reach me here east of the cascades. Water that rises 10,000 feet to cover the Cascade Range is not going to leave too much ground above water on the planet.

[itsrobert]

6. This map shows El Paso

under water. El Paso is like 3500 feet above sea level. I doubt your map is any good.

[alfredo]

15. To find out if you city is under 250 elevation type

your town and the word elevation into Google. (eg: Houston Tx elevation) Houston is a goner if there is a moderate rise in sea levels.

[mcscajun]

20. It's more than just your town's elevation. Houston would be gone, true.

Distance also plays a role. 230 ft. rise in sea levels means there'll be far, far more seawater; it does not mean everything lower than 230 ft. elevation regardless of location would be underwater. The Great Plains, as flat as they might be, will remain mostly dry, although the Mississippi will be a hell of a lot closer to some than it used to be.

[alfredo]

23. There will also be migration of seawater into aquifers.

The central valley in California has had trouble with that, and look how far it is from the sea. Salinity is also a byproduct of all the artificial fertilizers used.

[TalkingDog]

18. Just about anybody can read, but some need lessons in comprehension

That's why I labeled the map as being from the mid-Cretaceous era....a long, long, long time ago. I knew it wasn't accurate and implied as such.

So, re-read my post, and consider that even though the map isn't exactly accurate, that many areas will be flooded with a 230 foot rise in sea level.

Welcome to DU. Enjoy the not yet watery view.

[itsrobert]

24. I can read just fine, thank you.

Also, I earned an "A" in Geology in College. Thanks. I know the land where El Paso sits probably was below sea level at one point. But your map is not representive of what it would be if the sea level would rise.

[johnaries]

7. Imagine what would happen to the lower Mississippi River

valley. Check out the topo map here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_elevation

[SPKrazy]

9. Maybe The Gulf Of Minnesota In The Future? n/t

[sutz12]

10. That's a scary idea.

Pretty much anything on the map in green is wet. :scared:

[KansDem]

13. Just curious but why is Kansas red?

I mean, I know there are a lot of Repubs here, but why is it red in this drawing?

[sutz12]

14. Kansas is the new Noah's Ark

God will save Kansas from the flood.

[TalkingDog]

16. As suggested, I just ran across it.

I don't know topography and have no idea about sea levels and etc. It just occured to me that 230 feet of water is a lot.

Kansas is red because it was being used as an example of an area that used to be underwater, but isn't now.

Any geologist out there, with knowledge of current altitudes of US land mass I'd appreciate some updated info. I don't even know what sites to explore or what questions to ask.

[Swamp Rat]

25. That's where DINOS come from.

:D

[TalkingDog]

19. Having Googled as someone suggested NC will be about 1/3 under water

With the new shore stopping just short of the state capital in Raleigh. It'll knock about 1/2 the drive time off of our yearly beach trips.


Wow.



My favorite Future Famous Dead Artist: KarenParker

[TreasonousBastard]

21. The 230 foot figure is misleading....

since the site only said that there would be a 230' rise if every bit of ice on earth melted. That's never happened at any time in the earth's history, and there's no reason to think it will happen any time soon.

More likely would be a rise of 3' in the not terribly distant future and maybe 30' over a century or so. That's bad enough, though-- not only coastal areas, but major rivers will overrun their banks. If the Mississippi is 10 feet higher than it is now and we get more of those huge rains in the headwaters causing massive flooding, just how high do the levees have to be? And how far up do they have to go?

Amazon, Nile, Yalu, Brahamaputra... Rivers all over the world will be flooding their basins.

But, as I mentioned elsewhere, the colder water melting in to Atlantic could change the course of the Gulf Stream and put North America and Europe into a deep freeze, solving the warming and flooding problems.

Ice fishing and skiing will be the new Florida and Mediterranean tourist attractions.

[n2doc]

22. Au Contrare There have been times when all signficant ice has melted

Just further back in the past.
Link
http://www.discover.com/issues/nov-92/features/whatdrivesclimat148/
snip:

Take a global heat wave 55 to 50 million years ago, when western North America was tropical as far north as Seattle, and flying lemurs--squirrellike relatives of monkeys that are now found only in Southeast Asia--were sailing through the greenery on Ellesmere Island, 12 degrees from the North Pole. the last hundred million years or so sea level has been much higher on average:

[Hemperor]

28. it is actually rare in earth history that there IS frozen water on earth

not to say that the earth temperature has ever risen at a faster pace

[TreasonousBastard]

30. Perhaps, but it's a still a bit speculative just how...

much of a sea rise there was, and how much Antactic ice was around back then. The Earth's surface was quite different back in those days.

At any rate, the USGS says the maximimum sea rise in any interglacial they know of was 20 meters, which is still pretty bad.

[meisje]

27. I've got some ocean front property in Kansas for sale, anyone?

[hedgehog]

31. We should perhaps emphasize that we face ongoing coastal flooding.

As soon as you say, the water will rise X ft in 100 years, people envision water levels staying where they are for 99 years and 11 months, then rising all at once. It's just human nature. Point out that all coastal areas face the increased risk of floods today, and you'll get people's attention.