This article applies to Australia also.Just a short perusal of contour maps will give a fair idea of what areas are at grave risk of inundation.

My impression is that very little is being done by the appropriate authorities to plan for this virtually inevitable eventuality.One would think that the precautionary principle would apply at the very least.

The present course is the road to stupid.So what else is new?

A question: Australia is on a tectonic plate, that also has India on it, and we're moving North at around 2cm per year, are we also moving up or down?

Also, isn't India sub-ducting under the Himalayas, that may cause a tilt at the other end of the plate, say around the SE corner of Australia.

So claims that the SE corner of Australia is in danger of going under due to the climate changing, may not apply. It may actually start to rise - other parts of Australia not as much. As India dives under, the water level will rise for them.

Winners and losers, India gets smaller, Australia gets bigger.

We live in a very complex world, where people try to predict what will happen if this or that thing happens, it's often in isolation, or if they model, they use a "factor" to take account of things. Nature rarely subscribes to such methods, and is unpredictable.

Unfortunately, the same people, when their theories seem to be coming adrift tend to try to prop them up further rather than admit error.

Such is the pull of the mighty $ on all our sciences now, and the size of egos puffed up by the attention they get from the media.

I fully agree with the views expressed by the authors and having recently undertaken a simple study of the effects on sea level of melting land-based ice, I have reached the conclusion that average global sea levels are likely to rise by 0.9-1.1m by 2050 and by 2.1-2.4m by 2100. Thereafter, they are likely to continue rising by 2.0-2.5m per century for at least the next 1,000 years.

It is timely to remind the public that just over 70% of the world population lives on or near the coast, that most of its major cities are port cities and that all are exposed to the dangers of rising sea level. The authors identify some of the major cities and delta areas which will have to contend with rising sea level and flooding within the next 50-100 years.

They might have noted that this includes many of the great cities of northern Germany with Hamburg, Bremen, Lübeck and Rostock being particularly vulnerable. And of course the significance of river delta’s being flooded is not only that they are heavily populated areas but, more importantly, they are major food producing areas on which a much larger population depends for sustenance. Loss of their productivity will see hundreds of millions deprived of access to the essentials of life, food and water.

Rising sea levels are not the only worry. We should also be concerned that ocean acidification is increasing and is a major cause of coral reefs dying. When they die, they expose coastlines to the full force of rising sea level and king tides, storm surges and high winds. This is a deadly combination, increasing sea levels significantly and exposing coastlines to far more potent erosive forces.

The increased speed with which the Greenland ice cap is melting and the potential for relatively rapid sea level rise were the underside of the West Antarctic marine ice sheet to separate from the sea-bed should increase our concern. Problem is, sea level rises so slowly that we tend to ignore its very real dangers.

The dire threat of sea-level rise is truly shocking ! If we do nothing for the next two thousand years, the sea-level will have risen more than fifty metres ! Millions of people will be drowned ! We must immediately teach all children to swim and plan for the re-location of cities before it is too late ! Already here in South Australia, a secret bi-party committee has ordered surveys of Mount Barker as an alternative site for Adelaide, and there is a rumour that the Sydney City Council is planning to shift its offices to Springwood and, in the meantime, build a fifty-foot sea-wall from Newcastle to Wollongong: but that would work for only a few hundred years. Clearly, the entire world is in deep trouble !

On the other hand ....

When I did Geomorphology back in the seventies, we learned that the Gangetic sub-plate was sinking in the east and tilting to the west, so that in time the Brahmaputra delta would suffer more flooding while the Ganges delta would rise. We also learnt that the building of the Aswan dam in the sixties was already having effects in the Nile delta, with less silt getting down the river, causing the sea to move in and submerge parts of the delta. And one of the causes of so much damage to New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina was reported to be the submergence of the entire Gulf Coast, due to the long-term action of removing oil and water from beneath the Gulf. And we have learnt that over-use of ground-water in Pacific Islands has allowed sea-water to seep into hitherto fresh-water pumping sites. And then we hear that there has been no sea-level rise in the Maldives !

Come on, all you beach-going oldtimers - how much has the sea-level risen in your time ?

So who do we believe - on the basis of evidence, not faith ? Or will schadenfreude trump common-sense yet again ?

Joe Lane

Isn't this fun!
Who can come up with the scariest legend? Manorina and Agnostic of Mittagong are real doomsday supporters aren't they?
My suggestion to the authors and those above is that you all continue with your medications.
Have you not heard of the Archimedes Principle?
Why not tell us that the IPCC proves that the glaciers in the Himalayas and Patagonia are all melting. Now that would be a hoot!
Don't listen to scientists such as Cliff Ollier in WA. He's an Academic so he isn't imbued with the faith.

'In the 20th century, sea level rise was primarily due to thermal expansion of ocean water.'

I wasn't all that hot in Physics in school, but I do recall that water doesn't expand when it gets warmer, but it DOES expand as it cools, from about 2 degrees C to below freezing. That's why ice floats on water. It's why milk-bottle tops are pushed out on a winter's day, or used to be before AGW. But it allows life in near-freezing waters, under the ice. This anomaly about water is the one reason why I might believe in a God because without it, there would be no life on earth. I like a God with a sense of the ridiculous.

So 'thermal expansion' ? Wave it at the hystericals all you like, but please don't pass it off as science. Or have I missed something ?

Joe