Global Warming And Beachfront Property ?

[Khun Jean]

sorry double post.

Edited March 25, 2008 by Khun Jean

[quiksilva]

Ahh I see.

Let me decode the valuer talk. It sounds to me as if a government project has been announced, but the final decision has not yet been taken. The valuers in your case seem to be covering their bases, as is the right thing to do, professionals should be conservative in their approach.

Their use of the language "Probably" is a conservative way of saying this is extremely likely to happen, but there are no certainties in this world apart from death and taxes and we don't want to get sued so we will avoid using definitive words.

Note though that their view might be not related to global warming at all (unless specified otherwise), I suspect that it will be related to a local government announcement to prevent natural coastal erosion. The fact that all of the valuers came back with the same news and described the same proposed methods and said that it might even have to be subject to demolition (which in the UK would only be possible with a compulsory purchase order) also suggest that this is announcement is on a public record somewhere. (Sorry to hear about that)

I have some experience of this from my work in Devon and Cornwall, although this was more common with cliff side property in locations like Dover, and the ever eroding chalk cliffs, but this does not mean that is directly related to global climate change, just the harsh mistress that is the sea.

Edited March 25, 2008 by quiksilva

[altman]

whether called man made global warming, natural climate change, or unidentified extra terrestrial interference something is happening. when, how much, and which direction the scientists have made efforts to describe. but for every scientist with facts there are a thousand deniers with hope, faith, and belief on their side to refute what can only be, until it is all over, scientific hypothesis.

my partner has no scientific background and wouldn't know a hyperbole from a hypothesis but she is planning for people from BKK to flood (pardon the pun) into her small village in the highland interior. some have already begun buying property in and around her village. whatever it is called it is happening and some people are already making plans for it.

as to fresh water being in short supply. i ditto that.

as to buying on a beach. i wouldn't.

[Khun Jean]

^. I think that is in response to the claims of some thai newspaper/scientist or whatever who spread the 'news' that Thailand coastal areas will be under water in the next 8 years. I laughed about it, but i was amazed at how many people heard this story and believe it. Unfortunately no bargains to be had beachfront. But then again most beachfront has been bought in the last few years by bankokians who heard of the thai riviera and already ask prices as this riviera is already there and booming with tourism.

[Khun Jean]

^^ Unlike the cliffs that are eroding since the day they went up from the seas the coastal area my appartments are have more problems with large deposits of sand that has to be moved away to not disturb the local economy.

Rising sea levels are used to push plans for new large appartment buildings that will make millions of euros to developers and other people involved. Global warming is a very convenient instrument to use for that purpose. As such i would suspect coastal areas in Thailand would also be subject to this global warming to fill someones pockets.

[Naam]

^. I think that is in response to the claims of some thai newspaper/scientist or whatever who spread the 'news' that Thailand coastal areas will be under water in the next 8 years. I laughed about it, but i was amazed at how many people heard this story and believe it. Unfortunately no bargains to be had beachfront. But then again most beachfront has been bought in the last few years by bankokians who heard of the thai riviera and already ask prices as this riviera is already there and booming with tourism.

a sucker is born every minute

[Smithson]

^. I think that is in response to the claims of some thai newspaper/scientist or whatever who spread the 'news' that Thailand coastal areas will be under water in the next 8 years. I laughed about it, but i was amazed at how many people heard this story and believe it. Unfortunately no bargains to be had beachfront. But then again most beachfront has been bought in the last few years by bankokians who heard of the thai riviera and already ask prices as this riviera is already there and booming with tourism.

So we have one scientist saying coastal areas will be under water in 8 years, while another is saying there's nothing to worry about because we're too far from the melting ice.

[thaiclan]

Yes I saw it too, but still there are respected scientists disputing his claims.

I still don't know what the truth really is and whether it is actually that inconvenient.

I normally consider myself to be quite liberal in my thinking but in this case, I still think we need more proof. The statistics in his film are certainly startling, but even so, I still find it very difficult to believe that Bangkok (and many other cities throughout the world) will be underwater within 10 years.

What sort of proof would you need?

A UK teacher took the education dept to court for allowing the film to be shown, he said there wasn't enough evidence to prove global warming.

The judge disagreed, saying the evidence is there, although he found 9 points in the film that lacked evidence. So it may not be as bad as the film suggests, but it doesn't look good.

That's just it, Im no expert in this matter so I can't speak in specific terms, but what I can say is if we are talking about an event that will submerge several capital cities and displace millions within the foreseeable future, then the evidence should be specific, irrefutable and like all good scientific theories we should be able to use it (repeatedly) to make accurate predictions.

I'm not talking about the earth shattering events, but even if we could just show the changes that would happen within this year, or next year, that would show the world something.

But right now it seems as though we cant do that, or if we can, I haven't heard about it. Until that happens it remains just a hypothesis.

We know that due to humans this time next week an approx 5 animal species will be extinct. This is measurable and scientific and not contested. Does it make a diffference ? Will those species even make the back end of a tabloid...not a chance. Are we going to do anything about it or for the next week and the next week? Of course not. Unfortunately we do not listen to the signs because we do not care as none of the doom will happen (apparently) in our life time.

There IS enough food, water, logistics and resources in the world to stop the 20k plus kids dying every day, there is just not the will. Ditto the environment.

[abcd22]

We know that due to humans this time next week an approx 5 animal species will be extinct. This is measurable and scientific and not contested. Does it make a diffference ? Will those species even make the back end of a tabloid...not a chance. Are we going to do anything about it or for the next week and the next week? Of course not. Unfortunately we do not listen to the signs because we do not care as none of the doom will happen (apparently) in our life time.

There IS enough food, water, logistics and resources in the world to stop the 20k plus kids dying every day, there is just not the will. Ditto the environment.

Wot....only 2 - 100 million left!!! Quick man the pumps. We are all doomed.

Bibliographic Entry Result

(w/surrounding text) Standardized

Result "Animal." World Book Encyclopedia. 16 vols. Chicago: World Book, 2003. "So far scientists have named and classified more than 1½ million animals. Over half of these are types of insects and other species are discovered each year. Scientists believe there may be from 2 million to as many as 50 million kinds of animals alive today." 2 - 50 million 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. The World Conservation Union (IUCN), 26 May 2003. "Furthermore, there are currently about 1.5 to 1.8 million named species, but it is estimated that the actual number of species in the world ranges from 5 to 10 million (May et al. 1995)." 5 - 10 million Wolosz, Thomas. How Many Species are There? Center for Earth & Environmental Sciences, SUNY at Plattsburgh, 1988. "The most commonly quoted estimate is somewhere between is somewhere between 30 and 50 millions based on Erwin's (1988,1997) study of tropical insects." 30 - 50 million Just How Many Species Are There, Anyway? Society For Conservation Biology. 26 May 2003. "'Right now we can only guess that the correct answer for the total number of species lies between 2 and 100 million,' says [Michael] Rosenzweig." 2 - 100 million

[Khun Jean]

You know this 'global warming' is actually a big hoax. It can be used for anything. Like raising taxes for energy, carbon footprint (ha ha ha ha ha). What kind of carbon footprint does mount Vesuvius have?

I agree with the greenies that we should not make our own home a dirty place, but global warming, come on. All the real evidence is not supporting it.

And the last few years the earth is actually cooling. Now that is a REAL FACT!!! *

So prepare yourself for the coming of a new ice age, same like as in the eighties, remember?

* edit. I should mention for the nitpickers that the temperature since 1998 is now actually lower, but since 2002 it has been the same until now. So in the last 10 years it is going down. If you only measure the last 6 years it is the same.

Edited March 28, 2008 by Khun Jean

[LaoPo]

i have heard some clever head from thailand say that thailand is to far away from the melting ice so the sea level will not raise in thailand

You heard correct and that 'clever head' is Thai hydrologist, Suphat Vongvisessomjai, a former professor in water resources engineering at Bangkok's Asia Institute of Technology.

It's an older topic and started last year, 2007 in April:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=117475

LaoPo

[VegasVic]

You know this 'global warming' is actually a big hoax. It can be used for anything. Like raising taxes for energy, carbon footprint (ha ha ha ha ha). What kind of carbon footprint does mount Vesuvius have?

I agree with the greenies that we should not make our own home a dirty place, but global warming, come on. All the real evidence is not supporting it.

And the last few years the earth is actually cooling. Now that is a REAL FACT!!! *

So prepare yourself for the coming of a new ice age, same like as in the eighties, remember?

* edit. I should mention for the nitpickers that the temperature since 1998 is now actually lower, but since 2002 it has been the same until now. So in the last 10 years it is going down. If you only measure the last 6 years it is the same.

KJ, The carbon footprint thing is the hoax (the greenies think that they can fix anything), global warming is very real Of course Thailand won't be affected should the oceans rise because some obscure thai bureaucrat hydrologist said so I haven't followed the weather patterns in Thailand, but in the U.S. 7 of the hottest summers on record have occured in the past ten years. For future refrence though, global warming is calculated at the poles, but since nobody lives there I am not certain if it matters

[Khun Jean]

I agree the carbon footprint is the real hoax, but it is made 'popular' by global warming. Taxing it is the greatest idiocy i have ever seen. 3rd world countries will be laughing. They couldn't care less. So first world countries go and tax your citizens and companies into a irreversable recession.

One single vulcano going poof will put so much co2 and other poisenous gases in the air that it will be 100 times more than all the industry and cars produced since their invention.

The 'global warming' is measured using the tempreature of the oceans. As they are 2/3 of the planet and the largest storage of heat. Land areas dissipate heat very quickly.

And it is those oceans that did not rise in temperature but actually go down in the last 10 years. That is why there is a global cooling.

The prove of the co2 in icecores is silly. When it is warm the ice melts and nothing of the circumstances at that moment is recorded in ice.

I just think it wil go the same way as 'acid rain', 'global cooling', 'global warming'. The models that predict this are failed. And it is very hard to accept that. Call it scientists 'face'. But actually it is just money, follow it and it will be clear. Like research budget......

In europe we have some hot summer records to, they were in the 50's and 70's.

[backflip]

In the mid-70s, "scientists" warned about "global cooling"...and now it's global warming. There's always something to worry about.

[donx]

I agree the carbon footprint is the real hoax, but it is made 'popular' by global warming. Taxing it is the greatest idiocy i have ever seen. 3rd world countries will be laughing. They couldn't care less. So first world countries go and tax your citizens and companies into a irreversable recession.

One single vulcano going poof will put so much co2 and other poisenous gases in the air that it will be 100 times more than all the industry and cars produced since their invention.

The 'global warming' is measured using the tempreature of the oceans. As they are 2/3 of the planet and the largest storage of heat. Land areas dissipate heat very quickly.

And it is those oceans that did not rise in temperature but actually go down in the last 10 years. That is why there is a global cooling.

The prove of the co2 in icecores is silly. When it is warm the ice melts and nothing of the circumstances at that moment is recorded in ice.

I just think it wil go the same way as 'acid rain', 'global cooling', 'global warming'. The models that predict this are failed. And it is very hard to accept that. Call it scientists 'face'. But actually it is just money, follow it and it will be clear. Like research budget......

In europe we have some hot summer records to, they were in the 50's and 70's.

Not that I am an expert in meterology or geology or whatever, but I thought I remember hearing that volcanoes actually have the opposite affect of global warming. I remember hearing a scientist talk on the radio about one approach to reducing the affect of global warming would be to release the same type of gasses that get released into the atmosphere when a volcano errupts. He said that although that was a feasible solution he felt it just doesn't make sense to be adding more contaminents to our atmosphere.

By the way, my wife bought beach front property not too long ago. I plan on building a retirement home on the site in about 20 years from now. That gives you an idea of how worried I am about the affects of global warming on my beach front land. I suspect that most other owners of beach front land are likewise not going to reduce their prices. Not until there is actually some reason for concern.

Remember all the people that tried to find cheap beach front land in the areas hit by the tsunami? As far as I remember there were no bargains to be had. I tried to find some but there just weren't any. This even knowing how another tsunami is likely to happen again.

[thaihome]

Reminds of the urban myth in Southern Calif back in '70 that Howard Hughes was buying all the desert west of Las Vegas as speculation it would be beachfront after the "Big One" and Calif fell into the ocean.

I am all for cutting back pollution and living in the cleanest world we can. If this global warming stuff scares people into actually doing something, then go for it.

Oh, and the only melting ice that could impact ocean levels would the ice on land, primarly Greenland and Antarctica land mass. Melting ice in the oceans have no impact, otherwise your glass with ice in it would overflow when it melts.

TH

[klikster]

We definitely will NOT have to worry about in our lifetime if ever. Icebergs are mostly under water anyways and the rising of the seas will be affected VERY little if any when or if they do melt. The sea level may even drop because of increased evaporation. Global warming may even be a natural cycle of our mother earth.

It isn't quite that simple. If the ice shelves in Antarctica keep breaking off and the sea is able to "attack" the mainland ice on the continent .. that ice is miles thick and hundreds square. Also the cold zones that flow along the floor of the oceans are significantly influenced (cooled) by the "doughnut" of cold water around the continent.

Sorry, I'm not doing a very good job of explaining it.

While you're at it, read up on "katabatic winds" and the active volcanos under the ice streams on Antarctia.

[klikster]

In the mid-70s, "scientists" warned about "global cooling"...and now it's global warming. There's always something to worry about.

Yeah .. dam_ned stupid those guys that warned about terrorism.

[VegasVic]

In the mid-70s, "scientists" warned about "global cooling"...and now it's global warming. There's always something to worry about.

Actually they are both correct As global warming progresses there will be parts of the world that will be much warmer (and drier) and parts that will be much colder. In particular the N.E. part of the U.S. , the eastern part of Canada, and central and northern Europe will be thrust rapidly into an ice age. This will occur when enough glacial meltoff from the Greenland icesheet flows into the north Atlantic and shuts down the ocean conveyer system, thereby radically changing weather patterns in that part of the world. I am not a greenie or a proponent of an inconvienent truth, in fact I feel that what is occuring now globally has very little to do with man made CO2 (although I do admit that humans are exacerbating it), it has much more to do with natural cycles and the release of methane hydrate from the worlds oceans. It is a pure pipe dream by the greenies (and quite an arrogant one at that) that man can control what is occuring in nature and in the cosmos by reducing man made CO2.