Hacker News Reader

Comment by adamch | Hacker News Reader

Rising sea levels are unambiguously bad for the millions of people who live by the coast.

People will migrate up to where the coast is. The North-Sea used to be inhatibed ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland )

On a long timescale, yes, they will. On a short timescale, many people will die. You can't just move an entire house to a different city (and obviously no-one will be able to sell a house on a drowning coastline).

For example, the Pacific Islands will face rising tides along their whole coastline, while simultaneously facing extreme weather events and agricultural disruption. What's your solution for an entire country of people simultaneously trying to immigrate elsewhere?

Some people will die of ancillary causes (mostly lost wealth). It will impact the poorest, and frankly dumbest, individuals who will not face a creeping inevitability.

You are describing a deluge, end of times. Not a rise in sea level.

I wish that were true, but there are already uninhabited islands that have sunk below the waves [1]. There are inhabited ones (e.g. the Carteret islands) which are on their way out and already suffering:

"Since 1994, the islanders of the seven atolls, lying only 1.2 metres above sea level, have already lost about 50 per cent of their land. Traditional food sources have become scarce, regularly placing the islanders in situations of near famine. The communities also face severe water shortages due to prolonged droughts and sea-level rises that affect their freshwater supply." [2]

[1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2146594-eight-low-lying...

[2] https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-06-11/understanding-...

There have been uninhabited islands that sunk below the waves since the beginning of time.

But how is this "many people will die"? Have people already died? Are they dying by the 100ths? Or the thousands?

I guess not. And they will migrate away.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com