Rising Seas From Fossil Fuels Threaten Inland Migration ‘Never Witnessed in Modern Civilization’

Posted on by

Yves here. Even though Trump is making headway on his project to reduce living standards in the US to the level of the 1890s, one area where he is coming up short is on climate change. A general rise in temperature levels and more and more wild weather is defying his desire to return to the past.

Since the early 2000s, the Pentagon has been briefed on what even then were depicted as inevitable climate-changed induced mass migrations, which would be enormously destabilizing. So the story line that major population movements are inevitable is not news. However, citizens in high income countries have a weird way of thinking they are not much exposed.

This article gives a needed, if sobering, update, that surpassing the temperature rise target of 1.5°C would produce seriously bad outcomes, and even merely holding at the current 1.2°C increase level will produce enough in the way of sea level rises to generate large-scale migration and population displacement.

By Jessica Corbett, a staff writer at Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams

With governments “scaling back their already meager” actions to tackle climate breakdown, said one ecologist, “our present-day human culture is on a suicide course.”

Less than six months away from the next United Nations summit for parties to the Paris climate agreement, scientists on Tuesday released a study showing that even meeting the deal’s 1.5°C temperature target could lead to significant sea-level rise that drives seriously disruptive migration inland.

Governments that signed on to the 2015 treaty aim to take action to limit global temperature rise by 2100 to 1.5°C beyond preindustrial levels. Last year was not only the hottest in human history but also the first in which the average global temperature exceeded 1.5°C. Multiple studies have warned of major impacts from even temporarily overshooting the target, bolstering demands for policymakers to dramatically rein in planet-heating fossil fuels.

The study published Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications Earth and Environmentwarns that 1.5°C “is too high” and even the current 1.2°C, “if sustained, is likely to generate several meters of sea-level rise over the coming centuries, causing extensive loss and damage to coastal populations and challenging the implementation of adaptation measures.”

“To avoid this requires a global mean temperature that is cooler than present and which we hypothesize to be closer to +1°C above preindustrial, possibly even lower, but further work is urgently required to more precisely determine a ‘safe limit’ for ice sheets,” the paper states, referring to Antarctica and Greenland’s continental glaciers.

Co-author Jonathan Bamber told journalists that “what we mean by safe limit is one which allows some level of adaptation, rather than catastrophic inland migration and forced migration, and the safe limit is roughly 1 centimeter a year of sea-level rise.”

“If you get to that, then it becomes extremely challenging for any kind of adaptation, and you’re going to see massive land migration on scales that we’ve never witnessed in modern civilization,” said the University of Bristol professor.

In terms of timing, study lead author Chris Stokes, from the United Kingdom’s Durham University, said in a statement that “rates of 1 centimeter per year are not out of the question within the lifetime of our young people.”

There are currently around 8.18 billion people on the planet. The study—funded by the United Kingdom’s Natural Environment Research Council—says that “continued mass loss from ice sheets poses an existential threat to the world’s coastal populations, with an estimated 1 billion people inhabiting land less than 10 meters above sea level and around 230 million living within 1 meter.”

“Without adaptation, conservative estimates suggest that 20 centimeters of [sea-level rise] by 2050 would lead to average global flood losses of $1 trillion or more per year for the world’s 136 largest coastal cities,” says the study, also co-authored by University of Wisconsin-Madison professor Andrea Dutton and University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Rob DeConto in the United States.

DeConto said Tuesday that “it is important to stress that these accelerating changes in the ice sheets and their contributions to sea level should be considered permanent on multigenerational timescales.”

“Even if the Earth returns to its preindustrial temperature, it will still take hundreds to perhaps thousands of years for the ice sheets to recover,” the professor explained. “If too much ice is lost, parts of these ice sheets may not recover until the Earth enters the next ice age. In other words, land lost to sea-level rise from melting ice sheets will be lost for a very, very long time. That’s why it is so critical to limit warming in the first place.”

While the paper sparked some international alarm, Stokes highlighted what he called “a reason for hope,” which is that “we only have to go back to the early 1990s to find a time when the ice sheets looked far healthier.”

“Global temperatures were around 1°C above preindustrial back then, and carbon dioxide concentrations were 350 parts per million, which others have suggested is a much safer limit for planet Earth,” he said. “Carbon dioxide concentrations are currently around 424 parts per million and continue to increase.”

The new paper continues an intense stream of bleak studies on the worsening climate emergency, and specifically, looming sea-level rise. Another, published by the journal Nature in February, shows that glaciers have lost an average of 273 billion metric tons of ice annually since 2000.

Despite scientists’ warnings, the government whose country is responsible for the largest share of historical planet-heating emissions, the United States, is actually working to boost the fossil fuel industry. Upon returning to office in January, U.S. President Donald Trump declared an “energy emergency” and ditched the Paris agreement.

Responding to the new study on social media, Scottish ecologist Alan Watson Featherstone called out both the U.S. and U.K. governments. He said that with many countries “scaling back their already meager and [totally] inadequate actions to address climate breakdown, our present-day human culture is on a suicide course.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

10 comments

  1. BillS

    Add rising sea levels to the fact that mountain glaciers are disappearing. As an avid mountain walker, I have seen an alarming decline in glaciers over just the last 20 years. Here in Italy, heavily reliant on hydroelectric power and high mountain reservoirs, the risk of running out of water reserves from glaciers and snowpacks for energy, irrigation, municipal use, etc. is practically unavoidable. The answer of the government in Rome and our regional government is….MORE TOURISM and more artificial snow for ski runs (since it does not snow any more, but skiers need to ski) as we “delocalize” the remaining productive industry.

    The great Asian river systems depend on melt from the Himalayan range. If I am not mistaken, 3/5ths of the world’s population will be at risk of starvation when these water sources dry up – Jackpot writ large. I wonder how long we have to wait. Anyone keeping a list with names and photos of those who should pay the bill when the Mad Max-style Great Reckoning comes?

    Reply
    1. Henry Moon Pie

      Re: tourism:

      New technologies such as solar-powered water heaters, temperature control systems, and energy saving appliances allow the industry to lessen its carbon footprint. Yet these innovations are not enough to outweigh the emissions created by a growing number of travelers. Projections indicate that tourism emissions could reach 6.5 billion metric tons by 2025. This represents a 44% increase from 2013, and is equivalent to about 13% of current global greenhouse gas emissions.

      Based on my in passim reading of the Harvard Class of 1975’s Red Book, international travel is the pre-eminent status symbol among that part of the PMC. According to a recent study, the world’s richest 10% contributed 65% of global warming since 1990.

      Reply
  2. The Rev Kev

    As flooding becomes a frequent event in US coastal cities, what then? Will the people be relocated. Where will they be relocated to exactly? FEMA camps perhaps? Who will pay for it all? The US Navy is set to lose a lot of their bases too for that matter. Will those flooded zone be abandoned as the sea water weakens the building there. Most important question of all – is anybody planning what to do as this all happens? I would guess no.

    Reply
    1. Samuel Conner

      I wonder if new construction codes could be revised so that structures are inundation tolerant, and upper stories would remain habitable even if ground floors are too damp for use.

      I have been told that things are kind of like this in Venice.

      It’s IMO a silly idea but, given the inertia, perhaps cities will slide into this kind of “adaptation”.

      Reply
  3. juno mas

    So. It looks like the security that the Atlantic and Pacific presents the USA from national enemies is going to defeat it with sea level rise. Irony, indeed!

    What the authors don’t seem to understand is that it is not the height of land above current sea level that matters. It is the height of municipal utilities (electrical, wastewater) above sea level that matters. It is clean water, cleaned effluent, and the transmission of electricity that makes cities livable. (And this ignores transportation corridors that may be affected by sea level rise.)

    My small city (80,000) sewage treatment plant is now ~1 meter above level— All 80K citizens (some live 100′ above sea level) will lose out if the treatment plant is inundated. Los Angeles is in the same position, but services millions of homes/businesses.

    And no, independent septic systems are not a solution. Most would fail from overuse, alone.

    Cholera will be the new Covid.

    Reply
  4. mrsyk

    I imagine this package comes with collapsing ice shelves and accompanying tsunamis. And it’s not like inland is going to be much better, what with their floods and fires package featuring superstorms.

    Reply
  5. GC54

    The En-roads climate simulator allows study of the projected sea level changes at coastal areas of your choosing. It is just one of many outcomes to review as you adjust its forcing parameters to 2100. The simulator is free and runs quickly online with nice graphical summaries and details if desired. Highly recommended.

    Reply
    1. Henry Moon Pie

      Amen. I’ve preached that gospel here a few times in the past.

      And always check the growth slider and its powerful effect on emissions. (They should increase the options to negative growth. Covid demonstrated how it works.)

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *