Florida's impending doom and Rick Scott beliefs.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Starting here

Four hundred scientists gathered in Copenhagen this month to talk about the warming temperatures in the arctic. Their conclusion: The arctic's glaciers are melting faster than anyone expected due to man-made climate change.

As a result, the world's sea level will rise faster than previously projected, rising at least 2 feet 11 inches and perhaps as high as 5 feet 3 inches by 2100, they said.

In low-lying Florida, where 95 percent of the population lives within 35 miles of its 1,200 miles of coastline, a swelling of the tides could cause serious problems. So what is Florida's Department of Environmental Protection doing about dealing with climate change?

"DEP is not pursuing any programs or projects regarding climate change," an agency spokeswoman said in an e-mail to the St. Petersburg Times last week.

"That's a crying shame," said former Gov. Charlie Crist.

It shows how fast popular causes can come and go in Florida politics — even ones that are put into state law. Yet even when causes lose favor in Tallahassee, that's not necessarily the end of them.

Four years ago, the newly elected Crist told legislators that global warming is "one of the most important issues that we will face this century." Crist pledged to "bring together the brightest minds" and "place our state at the forefront of a growing worldwide movement to reduce greenhouse gases."

Crist's climate-change crusade got him national attention, with a write-up in Time magazine and an interview on the CBS Early Show. He shared a stage with singer Sheryl Crow and met with Robert Redford. California's then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called him "another great action hero."

Crist's enthusiasm led to more than just meetings. At his urging, the Public Service Commission rejected a plan for a coal-fired power plant near the Everglades because of its greenhouse gas emissions, and other utilities that had been planning coal-fired plants changed course. That may be Crist's biggest climate change legacy, said Susan Glickman of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.

With little opposition, the Legislature passed a bill called the Florida Climate Protection Act calling for DEP to set up a program to cut back greenhouse gases, such as with a cap-and-trade system. The act also created a Florida Energy and Climate Commission to recommend other steps for the state to take.

But Crist's ardor for battling global warming cooled considerably as the economy collapsed and he mounted a bid for the U.S. Senate. Crist's successor, Gov. Rick Scott, doesn't think climate change is real, even though it's accepted as fact by everyone from NASA to the Army to the Vatican.

"I've not been convinced that there's any man-made climate change," Scott said last week. "Nothing's convinced me that there is."

Now Tallahassee has lost its passion for combating climate change. Some lawmakers attempted last month to repeal the Florida Climate Protection Act, arguing it was no longer needed. They did pass another bill abolishing the Florida Energy and Climate Commission and handing its duties to Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam, suggesting they see the future in ethanol and biofuels, not solar, wind or other alternate fuels.

The shift came as a surprise to commission chairman Jim Murley.

"It's possible they just don't like commissions," joked Murley, a former secretary of the Department of Community Affairs, who said he did not know if Scott will sign the bill into law.

In its two-year lifespan, the climate commission did very little about climate change, Murley said. Instead, thanks to an influx of $175 million in federal stimulus funds, it turned into an ATM for energy-efficiency projects, which he said is a good legacy if this is the end.

But some of the commission's grants went to two groups in Florida who still care about climate change: local government agencies and universities. As Tallahassee has turned its back on the subject, those groups have become more active than ever.

After all, they have seen the results of rising sea level — roughly 9 inches in the past 75 years, with an acceleration in the rate of rise in the past decade, according to a report from Florida Atlantic University. On Big Pine Key, for instance, what used to be a pine forest has turned into a tidal marsh.

Last fall, Florida State and the University of Florida started a joint Florida Climate Institute, the main focus being the impact of climate change on agriculture. And four South Florida counties have agreed to work together on how to deal with a rising sea level that will inundate the state's barrier islands and coastal wetlands and taint the underground supply of freshwater.

There are big issues to be settled, said Peter Harlem, a research ecologist with Florida International University who has been studying rising sea levels since the 1980s — for instance, what to do about saving Florida Power & Light's nuclear plant at Turkey Point from being swamped. Dealing with those issues would be easier if the governor and Legislature were involved again, he said.

"While they're playing politics," Harlem said, "the water's still coming up."

The leader of the state of Florida doesn't believe in Man-Made Climate Change?

I highly doubt that? What kind of ethics and morals must one possess to be able to be such a fraud that they do things like this?

These are just a few of the possible impacts. Here’s the bigger picture:

• By 2070, nearly 5 million people and $3.5 trillion in assets could be flooded by a 100-year coastal flood in the Miami area alone.
  
• Sea level rise of a little more than 2 feet would place 9 percent of the state’s current land area underwater at high tide (over 99 percent of Monroe County and nearly 70 percent of Miami-Dade County)—an area with a population of 1.5 million.
  
• The bread-and-butter tourism industry could lose $40 billion annually by 2050 and $167 billion annually by 2100 if no action is taken.
  
• Greater evaporative losses from surface water reservoirs would affect water availability.
  
• Drought events could contribute to saltwater intrusion into coastal freshwater aquifers, contaminating drinking water supplies.
  

Just 2 feet huh? That is all it will take?

Hopefully the AMO put's on it's red cape and body suit with that big S on it and swoops in and spends the summer in Greenland trying to keep the ice shelf's frozen. We don't need Greenland washing out another 500,000,000,000 GT of ice this summer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiribati

I had to do a triple check to see if this was legit about Florida. So sad.

[turtlehurricane]

The Florida Keys and the Florida Everglades are 1-5 feet above sea level, some of the lowest areas are at sea level itself, which is common in the Keys and around Florida Bay. Even a tropical storm can inundate entire islands. The actual metropolitan areas of SE FL are on a ridge that's fairly high above sea level though (~10 feet).

The sad part is large swaths of freshwater ecosystem will be destroyed with rising sea levels, but I'm sure a vibrant brackish ecosystem will quickly take hold in such areas. Plenty of the Everglades around Florida Bay have already gone through this process.

No one lives in the really low areas btw due to hurricanes. There will be no "doom" even if the ocean rises that much.

[dabize]

The near 6 feet end of the IPCC range is a lot more likely than the near 3 feet end.

A 6 foot rise will put a large part of Southern Florida out of business.

If that - a fairly likely outcome of AGW by 2100 - isn't considered doom to politicians who represent the folks who will be displaced, then they are criminally neglecting their responsibilities.

What do the insurance companies think? Are they issuing new policies in South Florida?

[turtlehurricane]

The near 6 feet end of the IPCC range is a lot more likely than the near 3 feet end.

A 6 foot rise will put a large part of Southern Florida out of business.

If that - a fairly likely outcome of AGW by 2100 - isn't considered doom to politicians who represent the folks who will be displaced, then they are criminally neglecting their responsibilities.

What do the insurance companies think? Are they issuing new policies in South Florida?

I disagree that we'll have a 6 foot rise in the next 90 years, but to answer your question it is nearly impossible to get insurance in SFL due to hurricanes.

[The_Global_Warmer]

It's obvious 3-4 feet is a given at this point around 2100. But as we have seen positive feedback's can be a bleep. Regardless of that, the Governor of the state holding this kind of position is really messed up. This is as real as it gets when it comes to National Defense, let alone Global Defense.

At the very least, the most affordable, economical preperations need to be already in place. A fund can be set up, a Global Warming disaster relief fund directly for Sea Level Rise.

Every home or business can be taxed something small and straightforward like $2 per business per year and $1 per home if you live in an area that would flood if the Sea Level rose 2 meters or less.

It's amazing to see this:

We know the Sea Level is going to continue to ruse and accelerate overtime.

Does this man not see these charts?

What about the Grace Data? How about actuall video's of the melt ponds on Greenland that show the lake depth and size getting larger and under ice rivers of water pouring into the sea that we don't quantify because they are not on the top of the ice shelf. But it adds up when the Grace data shows massive 500-600 billion GT back to back melt seasons. The same Grace shows why the Sea Level had a temp drop with a La NIna and record precipitation years.

But yet folks go to internet blogs and so called "experts" trumpet the sea rise isn't happening. It's bleeping criminal. And Unethical by anyone whith any integridy's standards.

Those folks being up rooted in Egypt, the Pacific Islands probably don't understand why their homes and crops are being flooded with Sea water. But the folks in Florida who later in life will be wondering the same thing for themselves, children, and Grand Children will have only themselves to blame, and it will be pitiful wearing the Scarlett CC When your family home turn into a flood plain and the Government ain't paying for it. Maybe the government will promise to subsidize all of the neighborhoods lost and pay fair market value to citizens for their homes being a part of the GOM and Atlantic ocean now.

I just do not understand how this can be in the making with the enormous amount of data we have and folks will push this to the bitter ends until the water is on there shores like the folks in Virginia.

[turtlehurricane]

Current rate of sea level rise is a quarter centimeter per year based on those graphs, to get a 3-4 foot rise by 2100 that rate would have to quadruple.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Current rate of sea level rise is a quarter centimeter per year based on those graphs, to get a 3-4 foot rise by 2100 that rate would have to quadruple.

That really isn't hard to attain as the Earth continues to warm. Mostly because the warming is amplified at the poles. Clearly the Northern Pole will warm faster and contribute more in the short term.

Beyond arctic sea ice and temperature. We have seen some impressive changes in Glacial Ice Mass(not including Greenland, increased vegetation, possible Methane Clathrate melting(also, warm water depths in arctic ocean previously never seen, some of them are staggering and scary like 4C at the bottom of the Laptev off shore. An extra month of sun(mabye 100W/2 would definitely boost that by possibly double. We would see at least a top layer methane clathrate meltdown. Early Spring snow melt, regardless of pattern, this is a change that keeps getting earlier and faster. These factors all show positive feedback enforcement in the region and we know this will continue to become the normal.

Even if we do not make it to that by 2100, it will come. We can already project Co2 rising to 500PPM bare minumum, more likely it will rise to 550-600PPM at least. Methane is rising, and we know as the perma frost and arctic melts methane will pick up substantially, we don't even need a huge blowout, just 3-4 decades of accelerated release, like the current Co2 issue.

http://grist.org/cli...sea-level-rise/

It's not very much fun actually connecting the dots and thinking about the consequences. This is really sad.

I won't see the worst of it, but at age 29, if I make it to 80 years in a mostly aware state I will live to see it become a fore front issue.

But I will get to tell stories of how when I was a young man we knew, it was all right there in front of us and we ignored it.

even if we move and we end up ok, we will have lost so much more to the Oceans.

[turtlehurricane]

The trend has been quite linear though, things are going to have to break from the current trend soon to make that prediction come true.

[The_Global_Warmer]

The trend has been quite linear though, things are going to have to break from the current trend soon to make that prediction come true.

That is because of the source region for the SLR. Greenland is one of two big dawgs who can sneeze out ten times as much as of the rest of the Earth combined and it's not even a minute worth of work.

The next 5-8 years will tell us a whole lot about the next 50 in terms of Sea Level Rise.

[Jonger]

Imagine how interesting it will be to follow ice extent at the pole with no ice left after summer. I was shocked to learn how thin the ice has been historically, its really just a thin shaving compared to the south pole or greenland. The albedo change is going to be the biggest effect when gone.

Heres my question: How much of the suns energy is really reflected back anyhow, isn't the angle of sunlight pretty low to begin with?

[TerryM]

Imagine how interesting it will be to follow ice extent at the pole with no ice left after summer. I was shocked to learn how thin the ice has been historically, its really just a thin shaving compared to the south pole or greenland. The albedo change is going to be the biggest effect when gone.

Heres my question: How much of the suns energy is really reflected back anyhow, isn't the angle of sunlight pretty low to begin with?

I thought it had been relatively thick - what figures do you have?

[Jonger]

I thought it had been relatively thick - what figures do you have?

It averages less then 10 feet thick. Before really digging into the topic, I always though it was 100s of feet thick. I changed my opinion after reading that and accepted the idea it would melt out relatively soon.

[WeatherRusty]

It's obvious 3-4 feet is a given at this point around 2100. But as we have seen positive feedback's can be a bleep. Regardless of that, the Governor of the state holding this kind of position is really messed up. This is as real as it gets when it comes to National Defense, let alone Global Defense.

At the very least, the most affordable, economical preperations need to be already in place. A fund can be set up, a Global Warming disaster relief fund directly for Sea Level Rise.

Every home or business can be taxed something small and straightforward like $2 per business per year and $1 per home if you live in an area that would flood if the Sea Level rose 2 meters or less.

It's amazing to see this:

We know the Sea Level is going to continue to ruse and accelerate overtime.

Does this man not see these charts?

What about the Grace Data? How about actuall video's of the melt ponds on Greenland that show the lake depth and size getting larger and under ice rivers of water pouring into the sea that we don't quantify because they are not on the top of the ice shelf. But it adds up when the Grace data shows massive 500-600 billion GT back to back melt seasons. The same Grace shows why the Sea Level had a temp drop with a La NIna and record precipitation years.

But yet folks go to internet blogs and so called "experts" trumpet the sea rise isn't happening. It's bleeping criminal. And Unethical by anyone whith any integridy's standards.

Those folks being up rooted in Egypt, the Pacific Islands probably don't understand why their homes and crops are being flooded with Sea water. But the folks in Florida who later in life will be wondering the same thing for themselves, children, and Grand Children will have only themselves to blame, and it will be pitiful wearing the Scarlett CC When your family home turn into a flood plain and the Government ain't paying for it. Maybe the government will promise to subsidize all of the neighborhoods lost and pay fair market value to citizens for their homes being a part of the GOM and Atlantic ocean now.

I just do not understand how this can be in the making with the enormous amount of data we have and folks will push this to the bitter ends until the water is on there shores like the folks in Virginia.

Winning the next election cycle is all important, rational thinking be damned. Placation of the ignorant masses, based more on ideology than science is of paramount importance to these people (mostly Republicans and conservatives on this issue). When you have been convinced that Michael Mann and Phil Jones are scientific frauds your logical train of thought becomes set in stone.

[skierinvermont]

The trend has been quite linear though, things are going to have to break from the current trend soon to make that prediction come true.

Thus far SLR has pretty much just been ocean expansion and a little from mountain glaciers. Greenland, which dwarfs all other ice masses except Antarctica, has been pretty stable thus far, but is approaching temperatures where it has destabilized historically. We're already seeing the ocean nimble at its edges and a large increase in surface melt ponds in summer. It probably won't really start melting for another 30+ years. Recently it's been contributing around .5mm/yr to sea level. Later this century it could easily contribute 10-50mm/yr. It's all about Greenland, and it is a very good bet that Greenland will melt given we know what temperatures it has melted at in the past.

[salbers]

Judging from this abstract the acceleration rate has doubled the rate of Greenland Ice Sheet loss over the past 11 years or so.

http://www.agu.org/p...9JB006847.shtml

[The_Global_Warmer]

It averages less then 10 feet thick. Before really digging into the topic, I always though it was 100s of feet thick. I changed my opinion after reading that and accepted the idea it would melt out relatively soon.

That is modern ice. And that is overdone, those greens that are 3 meters were not that widespread then either.

Back in the 70s and before. The ice typically was 7-10 Meters along the Canadian Islands From Eastern Alaska to Greenland. In the waterways ice could reach 50-100M against the shoreline called Fastice, this ice would be stuck on the shore by sheer weight and pressure from winds putting it there. This ice in some cases would be there for hundreds maybe thousands of years like semi permanent glaciers. But in the water/on the water. Just imagine the ice sheet by the shore being super thick to reach the floor, then going from 50-100M to 7-8M as it went out. Overall the interior arctic basin in summer used to melt out to 9-11mil km2 on the extent. And have around 20,000km3 for the min volume. Now it's 4.5 mil km2 with the min volume reaching 4000km3. Which is a HUGE change.

So the ice was much thicker before and still was relatively thick up to 2007. Since then, it hasn't been able to recover.

The ice is changed now in many ways. But mostly Albedo. the ice is to thin to stop the sun.

Low angle or not the arctic potentially receives more W/M2 than anywhere on Earth, outside of the south pole.

Once a large area of the arctic goes ice free, it could have a 1040HP sit there with sunny skies for 5-6 days in a row, with 100 hours in a row of sunlight. Thats why it can warm up so fast.

[beneficii]

The Florida Keys and the Florida Everglades are 1-5 feet above sea level, some of the lowest areas are at sea level itself, which is common in the Keys and around Florida Bay. Even a tropical storm can inundate entire islands. The actual metropolitan areas of SE FL are on a ridge that's fairly high above sea level though (~10 feet).

The sad part is large swaths of freshwater ecosystem will be destroyed with rising sea levels, but I'm sure a vibrant brackish ecosystem will quickly take hold in such areas. Plenty of the Everglades around Florida Bay have already gone through this process.

No one lives in the really low areas btw due to hurricanes. There will be no "doom" even if the ocean rises that much.

With higher sea levels, won't storm surges go further inland on average?

[Jonger]

With higher sea levels, won't storm surges go further inland on average?

Well since the water will be inland more, it seems logical that it will. The sea level will start going up when Greenland begins to melt. Between this and economic conditions, you are probably going to see a major shift in carbon sequestration internationally. To the average person climate change is just 1-2 degrees over mid latitudes... Once sea levels ride, you will see major action. Let hope we have a way to cut CO2 levels 100+ ppm and try to get some MY ice.

[turtlehurricane]

With higher sea levels, won't storm surges go further inland on average?

Of course, but one must remember the average sea level rise in a major storm surge far exceeds sea level rise from glaciers melting (anytime soon), so it won't make that big of a difference for awhile.

I'm not sold that Greenland is going to more than quadruple sea level rise rates before 2100. The climate could also reverse before the Florida metro areas really get threatened since we're talking hundreds of years in the future.

[Jonger]

Of course, but one must remember the average sea level rise in a major storm surge far exceeds sea level rise from glaciers melting (anytime soon), so it won't make that big of a difference for awhile.

I'm not sold that Greenland is going to more than quadruple sea level rise rates before 2100. The climate could also reverse before the Florida metro areas really get threatened since we're talking hundreds of years in the future.

The Greenland melt will take several generations to melt out, that's a rise of 21 feet to sea level. Hopefully by then we have a full replacement for fossil fuels and CO2 levels begin to fall again. Ya, we have the methane issue as a possible scenario... Still it will take a while to melt Greenland. Antarctica will never melt unless we have a massive series of volcano's... There just isn't enough fossil fuels left to raise CO2 levels that much.

[TerryM]

The Greenland melt will take several generations to melt out, that's a rise of 21 feet to sea level. Hopefully by then we have a full replacement for fossil fuels and CO2 levels begin to fall again. Ya, we have the methane issue as a possible scenario... Still it will take a while to melt Greenland. Antarctica will never melt unless we have a massive series of volcano's... There just isn't enough fossil fuels left to raise CO2 levels that much.

Just a little nit-picking

If Greenland melts out in two generations - that's about 2050 - Doubt we will have replaced fossil fuels by then.

When fossil fuels do run out CO2 won't start coming down at a meaningful rate for a long long time - think geological time spans.

Antarctica will melt - It will just take a little longer.

Even if warming didn't dislodge sequestered CO2 and CH4, fossil fuels remaining (think coal), are enough to push CO2 much higher, and warming is presently dislodging CO2 and CH4 - no reason on earth to believe that would stop.

Terry

[turtlehurricane]

Just a little nit-picking

If Greenland melts out in two generations - that's about 2050 - Doubt we will have replaced fossil fuels by then.

When fossil fuels do run out CO2 won't start coming down at a meaningful rate for a long long time - think geological time spans.

Antarctica will melt - It will just take a little longer.

Even if warming didn't dislodge sequestered CO2 and CH4, fossil fuels remaining (think coal), are enough to push CO2 much higher, and warming is presently dislodging CO2 and CH4 - no reason on earth to believe that would stop.

Terry

There is no certainty that Greenland will melt totally, or how long it will take if it melts totally. One must remember the scale of Greenland. Even if it was 90 °F everyday across the ice pack it would still take decades if not centuries I presume. Also, the warmer and wetter it gets the more snow Greenland will receive, which will throw a monkey wrench into things.

Even moreso with Antarctica, sure it'll melt at some point in Earth's future, but it's going to take epic climate shifts and lots of time. 90 °F everyday would definitely take centuries if not thousands of years. And it's not even melting at all now.

[TerryM]

There is no certainty that Greenland will melt totally, or how long it will take if it melts totally. One must remember the scale of Greenland. Even if it was 90 °F everyday across the ice pack it would still take decades if not centuries I presume. Also, the warmer and wetter it gets the more snow Greenland will receive, which will throw a monkey wrench into things.

Even moreso with Antarctica, sure it'll melt at some point in Earth's future, but it's going to take epic climate shifts and lots of time. 90 °F everyday would definitely take centuries if not thousands of years. And it's not even melting at all now.

Just quoting from the above, not necessarily my prediction.

Terry

[superjames1992]

It averages less then 10 feet thick. Before really digging into the topic, I always though it was 100s of feet thick. I changed my opinion after reading that and accepted the idea it would melt out relatively soon.

Perhaps you were thinking of the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica instead (which are 100s and even 1000s of feet deep)? I know this (sea ice vs. ice sheets) is something a lot of people have trouble understanding if they are not familiar with the topic.

[WeatherRusty]

There is no certainty that Greenland will melt totally, or how long it will take if it melts totally. One must remember the scale of Greenland. Even if it was 90 °F everyday across the ice pack it would still take decades if not centuries I presume. Also, the warmer and wetter it gets the more snow Greenland will receive, which will throw a monkey wrench into things.

Even moreso with Antarctica, sure it'll melt at some point in Earth's future, but it's going to take epic climate shifts and lots of time. 90 °F everyday would definitely take centuries if not thousands of years. And it's not even melting at all now.

It should take thousands of years to melt out all of Greenland, we agree on something.

It doesn't take an epic climate shift to melt Antarctica, the melt is occurring now. Antarctica is loosing ice mass according to the GRACE satellites. It would take considerably more global warming to melt out Antarctica, even then the position of a large continental mass at the south pole ensures glacial ice there, unless CO2 concentration goes up above about 600ppm and stays there for many thousands of years. Prior to about 34 million years ago CO2 was above about 600ppm and there was no permanent glacial ice on Antarctica.

[dabize]

The climate could also reverse before the Florida metro areas really get threatened since we're talking hundreds of years in the future.

All indications are that Florida will be directly and significantly threatened by SLR by mid century. Some of us still expect to be around by then - if not us, then our kids.

Also, the most salient characteristic of AGW (and most particularly the associated SLR) is its inertia - so even the most heroic reductions in CO2 emissions levels will not stop SLR that is dangerous to South Florida interests this century.

It is unconscionable for FL politicians not to care about this.

I cannot believe that I am having this exchange with someone who sports a red tag........

[turtlehurricane]

All indications are that Florida will be directly and significantly threatened by SLR by mid century. Some of us still expect to be around by then - if not us, then our kids.

Also, the most salient characteristic of AGW (and most particularly the associated SLR) is its inertia - so even the most heroic reductions in CO2 emissions levels will not stop SLR that is dangerous to South Florida interests this century.

It is unconscionable for FL politicians not to care about this.

I cannot believe that I am having this exchange with someone who sports a red tag........

So in 40 years you think parts of Florida will be threatened by sea level rise? At current rates the sea will only rise 10 cm, if that doubles somehow (which would be unprecedented based on fairly linear sea level rise so far) it'll be only 20 cm. Saying that's a threat is hyperbole.

[Jonger]

Just a little nit-picking

If Greenland melts out in two generations - that's about 2050 - Doubt we will have replaced fossil fuels by then.

When fossil fuels do run out CO2 won't start coming down at a meaningful rate for a long long time - think geological time spans.

Antarctica will melt - It will just take a little longer.

Even if warming didn't dislodge sequestered CO2 and CH4, fossil fuels remaining (think coal), are enough to push CO2 much higher, and warming is presently dislodging CO2 and CH4 - no reason on earth to believe that would stop.

Terry

I'm trying to find positive news and it really doesnt require a lot of work.

WIND POWER IS CHEAPER THEN COAL

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/23469

End of coal power plants? EPA proposes new rules

[PhillipS]

I'm trying to find positive news and it really doesnt require a lot of work.

WIND POWER IS CHEAPER THEN COAL

http://www.sustainab...isplay/id/23469

End of coal power plants? EPA proposes new rules

That is good news - but a bit OT for this thread. If you start a new thread on wind power, or renewable energy in general, I'm sure a number of folks would participate in that discussion.