Hacker News Reader

Comment by jandrese | Hacker News Reader

At some point in our lifetime we are going to have to effectively abandon cities like Miami, and our politicians will still be in denial about climate change.

View on HN

Aside from all the misery this will cause, it'll be interesting to see what happens to property rights once you coastal parcel gets submerged.

Will you still own it?

Will you be able to build some sort of platform above sea level with a house on it given that the submerged land was once yours?

Will it eventually give rise to a "living on the sea" movement?

Or if you don't want to commit to building a pier or platform, could you moor a houseboat there?

It's worth noting that flooding isn't an all or nothing thing. I live on the New England coast and my neighborhood occasionally floods during storms. This is a disaster for some houses, but only a temporary inconvenience for others which are build on a tall foundation and have a raised area for parking.

FWIW, I'm not sure if any main stream politicians are arguing today that there is no climate change. I could be wrong, but most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated, rather than whether it's happening at all.

There are some obvious exceptions like people pandering with "record low today, how about that global warming libs", but as far as I can tell this isn't the official position of any political office.

"FWIW", the last president declared that climate change was a hoax invented by China to make the US weaker. I don't know about "official position of any political office" but "climate change is a hoax" (or similar) is a common position on one half of the US political divide.

You can say his name, it's not like we're going to cause him to appear if we say his name 3 times.

You do tend to get Downvoted when you say it.

Depending on the thread I think it's either people annoyed that they're seeing his name at all, and people who don't like seeing their guy getting criticized, but either way the result is the same. HN does generally swing much righter than the rest of the internet, too.

I'm still a big fan of making all elected officials wear NASCAR inspired suits with the patches of all of their corporate sponsors so we know who's actually talking when the elected person's mouth moves.

Yes, that's an example of the obvious pandering that I left room for.

>> most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated, rather than whether it's happening at all.

I feel like that's last decade's news.

Many people I hear now are just fed up of the hypocrites and would as soon watch it all melt/burn/explode rather than let smug folk like Kerry be the "Climate Czar" while tooling around the globe on his Airstream.

Greta has a point when she starts raving about the climate change conferences where each of the attendees all flew in on their private jets. It's pretty shameful.

What were the going to do travel by sailboat for weeks? Some of the most important/powerful people in the world? They aren't used to zoom so flying it is.

but most of what I hear is a question of how much is human caused/accelerated

That's just another form of denialism. "Climate change is a hoax, I don't have to change my behavior." is little different from "Climate change is real, but I'm not convinced it human-caused, so I don't have to change my behavior."

I suspect the next stage will be to admit that it's real and was caused by humans, but argue that it's too late/expensive to do anything about it. (And therefore I don't have to change my behavior.)

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/climate-deniers-117...

Climate Change denial is alive and well in the US. In some areas it is considered a political liability to acknowledge climate change.

It isn't that they're in denial. They know full well what is happening. It is just that they are selfish. They're going to get theirs while there is still something to get in the hopes that they'll be able to weather this disaster until they are no more.

It's entirely possible to wall off the sea and pump river water over it to keep cities dry. The Dutch have been doing it for centuries. All that is required is quite a bit of money and political will.

I don't see Miami ever being abandoned, even if they have to float it.

Anything south of Orlando is basically drained swamp. The bedrock is eroding due to over development (which causes the land to sink) and salt water has encroached on the fresh water aquifer. Miami spent half a billion $ a few years ago on a pump project that is already being overwhelmed.

I would be stunned if Miami survives as anything but a billionaires island 20 years from now.

It's not just will and money that are needed. You need competence, actual ability, as well. Otherwise you're just playing at being King Canute while someones get rich.

Poor King Canute—still misunderstood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_tide

Miami is built on limestone. The water comes right out of the ground.

And everyone who doesn't live near a coastal city is going to pay for the relocation of everyone who continues to live there despite recurring flooding and a bleak future outlook.

Sounds like a perfect time to invest in coastal properties then /s

Everbody in USA already pays to subsidize flood insurance for rich people who insist on building houses on the coastline.

Yeah, I don't know of any technology capable of holding back nearly a foot of water. Hopefully they figure it out before it's too late for Miami.

The technology exists, but it wouldn't help Miami. The city is built on porous limestone, so even encircling it with a 50' wall wouldn't do anything.

Maybe Miami will be the new Venice :)

You can find a below sea-level hole inland then redirect the water to it.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-scientist-expla...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com