Question:
What might be the WORST CONSEQUENCES of the poles melting down under Global Warming, in 50 years time?
2008-07-04 15:27:19 UTC
which countries' people will suffer most ? and what are the safest places in this scenario ?
Nineteen answers:
Benjamin
2008-07-04 16:10:08 UTC
A "worst-case" scenario of both poles melting would be a 140 feet sea level rise. Almost every coastal city would be flooded, displacing billions of people. The countries most affected would be China Bangladesh, America (Florida, New York, the entire Eastern seaboard), countries of the South Pacific



But this is not likely for a very long time (i.e. thousands of years). However, the IPCC was unable to provide a best estimate or an upper bound for sea level rise for this century. That is because there are changes taking place right now on Greenland that they are unable to model for. The IPCC states, "Dynamical processes related to ice flow not included in current models but suggested by recent observations could increase the vulnerability of the ice sheets to warming, increasing future sea level rise. Understanding of these processes is limited and there is no consensus on their magnitude."



Rapid changes are currently occurring on the Greenland ice sheet include the loss of buffer tidewater glaciers;[1] the formation of huge[2] Moulin are allowing melt water to settle on the bedrock and to lubricate for a faster flow of ice; and the occurrence of ice-quakes[3].



Scientists were surprised at the speed at which the Larsen B Ice Shelf, in Antarctica, disintegrated in March 2002.[4] I am not suggesting that the same thing could happen to the Greenland ice sheet, but it should at least be considered possible.
Tom P
2008-07-05 10:03:53 UTC
According to the US Geological Survey, if all of the ice on land melted the sea level would rise by about 230 feet. That figure is very debatable, but it will serve us here.



Billions would be displaced, as many of the world’s largest population centers are located in coastal regions. Global commerce would cease as the world’s ports become useless. Starvation would be a major problem, particularly in countries who are net importers of food. According to a World Bank Research paper, 131 of 196 countries are net importers of food. War, disease, and starvation would kill off a significant portion of the earth’s population as we fight over food, land, and other resources.



If you do not take into consideration the impossible increase in temperature necessary to melt Antarctica in 50 years, the countries least affected by the rising sea levels are those in central Africa. Africa is the only continent where populations are concentrated on the interior of the continent as opposed to coastal areas. Nations such as Mali, The Central African Republic, Uganda, and Zambia are landlocked net exporters of food. Their populations will not be displaced, nor will their people starve. Of course any country with a surplus of food will be invaded by neighbors with a shortage of food, so in reality there is no best place to be.



The good news is that according to the IPCC’s 4th assessment, sea levels are rising at a rate of 1mm per year. At that rate, even Al Gore’s alarmist 20-foot scenario will take over 6000 years. The ice caps are melting, and have been since the end of the last ice age. If all anthropogenic CO2 was removed from the atmosphere, and humans ceased to exist, the ice caps would continue melting.
Candi
2008-07-04 20:05:16 UTC
davem: the poles are melting, and it is serious, because the more oil we use, the more we pollute and the more we consume the bigger the problem is going to get.



we need to get back to old life styles, like growing our own food, because it takes a lot of oil, and energy to get food from where it is grown, to where ever you live. We need to go green because really, we don't have a bright future especially if we keep consuming and then throwing away. We have taken so much oil that soon we won't have any more oil left to take. and we fill landfills everyday, it is horrible, we do so much and it harms the environment so much that if we can't stop, and global warming gets worse, it is our fault. Global warming is because the country and other places consume and use to much energy. The USA is the top consuming country in the world and china is the second. We need to stop otherwise what the scientists are predicting is gonna happen.



If you don't believe me watch ' An Inconvenient truth' that is great movie, and what is happening in our world that people are not realizing is indeed an inconvenient truth and we need to face it.



but really the whole world is gonna suffer no particular country. there is no safe place. Not to mention that hte sea level is rising, and the current population is almost 7 billion, we passed our maximum about 3 or 4 years ago. We need to get our act toegether.



"act now to save the next generation"
Clover
2008-07-05 02:35:02 UTC
Q: which countries' people will suffer most ?

A: the countries those are in equators and especially those people who lived in deserts.



Q:and what are the safest places in this scenario ?

A:i have read on the newspaper that scientists have discovered that there is a water and bacteria but it doesn't say on the newspaper that there is air. But scientists are trying to solve this problem for us to not to suffer. For now, if you have a baby or you are a babysitter, minimize the use of the diaper, and also plastics because they took hundreds of years for them to lost in this world.
Mark T
2008-07-05 07:27:17 UTC
Well, the worst case scenario is pretty freaking bad. It would involve the rise in the sea-level of some 200 meters, basically making the Earth, an ocean-world. with just our mountain-ranges and higher-plains livable.



So I don't know about you but I'd prefer that Phoenix wasn't beach front property.
stall
2016-10-25 07:42:53 UTC
"Scientists say that global warming now might want to be very undesirable and ice sheets on the pole are melting yet why is it nonetheless very chilly in Alaska?" Scientists say that the summer season is hotter than the wintry climate, yet inspite of us getting closer and in route of the summer season the ice on the North Pole has no longer turned to boiling water.
Bob
2008-07-04 16:04:26 UTC
The problems vary with country.



In rich countries it will be a financial problem dealing with flooding, relocating people, etc.



In poor countries much agricultural land is barely above sea level. They're going to have a hard time getting enough food.



Some may flee into other countries. The resulting chaos (and probably war) won't be good for anybody.



There's no place to hide. The indirect effects of the financial drain, and the chaos, will affect us all.
Ben O
2008-07-05 00:11:17 UTC
The sea levels are rising - have been since the last ice age.



Maybe we should wait and see if this rate increases or just stays the same as the natural rate before we start panicking.
D
2008-07-04 19:09:55 UTC
Actaully I think there will be no safe place because with current human population and rising of water level there will be too little land for so many people. Beside land, food and drinking water will be in very much shortage. All country will face the impact. Big country will have high hills or mountain to move to but small country like Maldives will be gone.

"Act now to safe the next generation"
2008-07-04 17:22:12 UTC
It will create a large area of cold water further south from the North pole and further north from the South pole. This will make the tropics more temperate and winters will get progressively colder... You know where we're heading don't you?
Barna B. the Busy B.
2008-07-04 16:10:39 UTC
If the poles did melt, Real estate values for land in Antarctica

would go way up.
2008-07-04 19:15:21 UTC
The worst consequences will be that it won't happen and liberals will have egg on their faces AGAIN.
Live free or Die
2008-07-04 15:37:27 UTC
I would think in the desert a few hundred miles from oceans. Also what the left wing machine won't tell you is that Mars is going through global warming as well. Maybe the Mars NASA rovers are causing it!
davem
2008-07-04 15:36:06 UTC
The poles aren't going to melt, relax. No country will suffer - this is an alarmist tactic and it isn't happening. Just like the doomed polar bears...that was a lie too.



The reason the alarmists use terms like '50 years from now' is because they're guessing. They don't know. They don't have a clue. And when it doesn't happen, their silly prediction will be long forgotten.
iloveyouiswear
2008-07-04 15:42:34 UTC
the people who live near the water would suffer themost if it really happens.

i say go find a mountain to live on.
2008-07-04 15:55:30 UTC
Oil drilling in the polar egions.
nwick
2008-07-04 15:36:29 UTC
go to an altitude map, any area showing under an elevation of 10 meters altitude will likely be under water, for the US, kiss most of the eastern seaboard goodby, vitrually all of Florida, and most of the gulf of mexico states plus the great central valley of california.
2008-07-04 16:11:57 UTC
The sea level could rise and could flood countries and kill people.....
2008-07-04 15:41:32 UTC
The best out come would be that a few thousand Liberals will drown. We can only hope for the best!


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...