With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

On Feb 4, 3:06�pm, wrote:
On 4 Feb 2007 11:34:59 -0800, "
wrote:

With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

Based on the predictions of the rate of sea level rise, about 2150 or
so.
I doubt *an extra foot or so of water is going to deter someone who is
built 11-15 feet above (2007) sea level. I could use an extra foot of
water in my canal.

some are talking 20 feet, will your feet be wet if it rises that much

On Feb 4, 2:58 pm, wrote:
On 4 Feb 2007 11:34:59 -0800, " wrote:

With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

Water front estates in the 8 to 25 million dollar range in BC Canada that have never
been on the market have been sold at 'bargain' prices recently.
One estate on a point of land was recently sold by it's original owners for 8
million, well under it's market value. It's so low that a rise of a foot in sea level
along with bigger storms will see waves washing right over it.
Rumor has it that it was sold to an American who doesn't believe in global warming.



Greetings,

Any time we want to end global warming we can cheaply and easily by
simply blocking out a tiny portion of the sun's light. There are many
strategies for doing this such as blasting dust into the air with a
nuclear weapon creating a small "nuclear winter" designed to
counterbalance global warming. Others want to use a sun shield in
space or to selectively block out rays which are harmful instead of
sunlight across the spectrum. Whatever the end strategy global
warming will be stopped, possibly even reversed, whenever people
decide to. Environmentalists will probably protest the end and
reversal of global warming as much or more than anyone. GLOBAL
WARMING WILL NOT END THROUGH REDUCTION IN CARBON EMMISIONS. Even if
the USA and Europe cut down, the rest of the world will continue to
emit. As long as the USA won't build nuclear power plants to replace
other carbon emitting forms of power generation it will be almost
impossible for us to make the drastic cuts.

This sounds like it is off the topic of home repair but hopefully it
helps in answering your question.

--William Deans

I think this is a valid topic for home repair since it effects homes
and their values. I heard 34% of the population live in coastal areas,
this can disrupt home values nationwide

wrote:
..
Any time we want to end global warming we can cheaply and easily by
simply blocking out a tiny portion of the sun's light.

Sure thing. However if you check you will find that we have already
done that. The average sun radiation (light) striking the earth is down
about 3% in the last ~20 years as I recall. All that stuff however seems
better at blocking what is bounced back. According to the theories I have
read, it would take so much crap in the air to deduce the warming that it
would be killing off much of our farm production and we would start
starving.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit

wrote:
On Feb 4, 3:06?pm, wrote:
On 4 Feb 2007 11:34:59 -0800, "
wrote:

With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

Based on the predictions of the rate of sea level rise, about 2150 or
so.
I doubt an extra foot or so of water is going to deter someone who is
built 11-15 feet above (2007) sea level. I could use an extra foot of
water in my canal.

some are talking 20 feet, will your feet be wet if it rises that much

Not to mention storm surge. Someone was quoting that the average at the
Goldengate bridge is up about 7 inches in the last 15? years.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit

On Feb 4, 2:34 pm, " wrote:
With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

Related subject: when are they going to envoke not building in 100
year flood plane rule that we have for county's new construction?
Frank

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 22:59:10 -0500, wrote:

Not to mention storm surge. Someone was quoting that the average at the
Goldengate bridge is up about 7 inches in the last 15? years.


This is a global warming alarmist site and their predictions range
from 200mm to a bit over 800 MM in the next 93 years. When the water
goes over my dock in the worst case scenario I will be over 150 years
old. I will take my chances.
Storm surge itself is such a crap shoot I am not losing any sleep over
an extra couple feet of sea level. If it is coming it will come today.
That is why I have flood insurance

Several large insurance companies are considering not offering flood insurance to NEW
owners. If that happens your property value will plummet when banks refuse to give
them a mortgage.

No, it's wind coverage that's being dropped, not flood.

Flood insurance is a federally-run program, part of FEMA. Private
insurers don't generally offer their own flood insurance, they sell NFIP
flood insurance, at least up to the limits of the FEMA program. There
are private excess flood policies available for people whose homes or
businesses exceed NFIP limits.

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html

wrote:

On 4 Feb 2007 12:08:47 -0800, "
wrote:

On Feb 4, 3:06?pm, wrote:
On 4 Feb 2007 11:34:59 -0800, "
wrote:

With the hoopla over global warming rising sea levels When will home
prices start droping in coastal areas?

Based on the predictions of the rate of sea level rise, about 2150 or
so.
I doubt !n extra foot or so of water is going to deter someone who is
built 11-15 feet above (2007) sea level. I could use an extra foot of
water in my canal.

some are talking 20 feet, will your feet be wet if it rises that much

That is not a rational estimate and far from what any reasonsible
scientist has predicted. I am at 14 feet and I will be dead long
before that happens, even if you take the worst guess scenario.

NOT TRUE.

Here's a VERY "reasonable scientist" (Jim Hansen, director of NASA's
Goddard Institute for Space Studies) who says:

"If we follow business as usual, and we don't get off this course where
year by year we're getting larger and larger emissions of CO2, then
we'll have large sea-level rises this century and I think that will
become more apparent over the next decade or two," Dr Hansen said.

"The last time it was 3C warmer, sea levels were 25 metres [82 feet]
higher, plus or minus 10 metres [33 feet]. You'd not get that in one
century, but you could get several metres [3.3 feet per meter] in one
century," he said.

"Half the people in the world live within 15 miles of a coastline. A
large fraction of the major cities are on coastlines."

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2116874.ece

Here are some FACTS:

1. Rising seas, caused by global warming, have for the first time washed
an inhabited island off the face of the Earth.

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2099971.ece

2. The Ayles ice shelf (40 square miles) in the Canadian Arctic has
broken up, 16 months ago

"Until now, there had not been a similar event among the six major
shelves remaining in Canada's Arctic, which are packed with ancient ice
that is more than 3,000 years old."

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2112609.ece

3. Greenland's ice shelves are melting and breaking free of the land

http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=4219963

Here's an interesting excerpt from some "reasonable scientists"

"A study in The Journal of Climate last June observed that Greenland had
become the single largest contributor to global sea-level rise.

Until recently, the consensus of climate scientists was that the impact
of melting polar ice sheets would be negligible over the next 100 years.
Ice sheets were thought to be extremely slow in reacting to atmospheric
warming.

.. . . given the acceleration of tidewater-glacier melting, a sea-level
rise of a foot or two in the coming decades is entirely possible, he
said. That bodes ill for island nations and those who live near the
coast.

"Even a foot rise is a pretty horrible scenario," said Stephen P.
Leatherman, director of the Laboratory for Coastal Research at Florida
International University in Miami.

snip

"Here in Miami," Leatherman said, "we're going to have an ocean on both
sides of us."

snip

Global warming has profoundly altered the nature of polar exploration,
said Schmitt, who in 40 years has logged more than 100 Arctic
expeditions. Routes once pioneered on a dogsled are routinely paddled in
a kayak now; many features, like the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf in Greenland's
northwest, have disappeared for good.

On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 12:15:27 -0800, wrote:

On 4 Feb 2007 12:10:37 -0800, "Some NUT named" wrote:



Greetings,

Any time we want to end global warming we can cheaply and easily by
simply blocking out a tiny portion of the sun's light. There are many
strategies for doing this such as blasting dust into the air with a
nuclear weapon creating a small "nuclear winter"

LOL!
Plonking a nut.

How so? It would obviously work. We even have empirical evidence
of that. Although personally, I'd recommend launching the dust in
cannisters off a railgun. You want your reflectors in the
stratosphere, not scattered in a column throughout the whole
atmostphere.

Goedjn wrote:

On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 12:15:27 -0800, wrote:

On 4 Feb 2007 12:10:37 -0800, "Some NUT named" wrote:



Greetings,

Any time we want to end global warming we can cheaply and easily by
simply blocking out a tiny portion of the sun's light. There are many
strategies for doing this such as blasting dust into the air with a
nuclear weapon creating a small "nuclear winter"

LOL!
Plonking a nut.

How so? It would obviously work. We even have empirical evidence
of that. Although personally, I'd recommend launching the dust in
cannisters off a railgun. You want your reflectors in the
stratosphere, not scattered in a column throughout the whole
atmostphere.

Whether or not it would "work", let alone "obviously work", has not been
determined.

However, there are serious folks who advocate research along those
lines. Check out the news coverage:

"Can Dr. Evil Save The World?"

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...he_world/print

Excerpt:

[Protege of Edward Teller and weapons researcher at Lawrence Livermore
Lab, Lowell] Wood's proposal was not technologically complex. It's based
on the idea, well-proven by atmospheric scientists, that volcano
eruptions alter the climate for months by loading the skies with tiny
particles that act as mini-reflectors, shading out sunlight and cooling
the Earth. Why not apply the same principles to saving the Arctic?
Getting the particles into the stratosphere wouldn't be a problem -- you
could generate them easily enough by burning sulfur, then dumping the
particles out of high-flying 747s, spraying them into the sky with long
hoses or even shooting them up there with naval artillery. They'd be
invisible to the naked eye, Wood argued, and harmless to the
environment. Depending on the number of particles you injected, you
could not only stabilize Greenland's polar ice -- you could actually
grow it. Results would be quick: If you started spraying particles into
the stratosphere tomorrow, you'd see changes in the ice within a few
months. And if it worked over the Arctic, it would be simple enough to
expand the program to encompass the rest of the planet. In effect, you
could create a global thermostat, one that people could dial up or down
to suit their needs (or the needs of polar bears).

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 13:09:06 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:30:17 GMT, Ermalina wrote:



Goedjn wrote:

On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 12:15:27 -0800, wrote:

On 4 Feb 2007 12:10:37 -0800, "Some NUT named" wrote:



Greetings,

Any time we want to end global warming we can cheaply and easily by
simply blocking out a tiny portion of the sun's light. There are many
strategies for doing this such as blasting dust into the air with a
nuclear weapon creating a small "nuclear winter"

LOL!
Plonking a nut.

How so? It would obviously work. We even have empirical evidence
of that. Although personally, I'd recommend launching the dust in
cannisters off a railgun. You want your reflectors in the
stratosphere, not scattered in a column throughout the whole
atmostphere.

Whether or not it would "work", let alone "obviously work", has not been
determined.

Algae in the ocean produce 3/4 of our oxygen. Reducing the amount of sunlight to them
would be completely counter productive and possibly even suicidal..


Interesting theory. Why do you think that the amount of
sunlight is currently a limiting factor?