Ocean surface temperatures at all time high

[Iron E]

Originally Posted by BG305

If costal areas are in jeopardy due to global warming and sea level rise. Why do banks give 30yr loans on the most expensive real estate in the world and why do insurance companies ensure them?

Considering the dubious recent history of Banks and Insurance companies, I feel this is the weakest of arguments. Akin to saying, It doesn't make sense that a company would be in business selling a product that killed its customer.

[Ryban]

Originally Posted by Striker

Modifications that allowed the species to continue or not. Evolution is not something that happened, its still happening.

For most species, it doesn't usually happen quickly enough to adapt to step-changes in the environment though -- which is what Climate Change looks like on the time scales that are relevant here. There have been massive temperature swings in Earth's history, but even the the most rapid occurred over hundreds, and more often, thousands, of years. The temperature swing we're experience now is occurring of the course of half a century. Maybe more strictly speaking, evolution does happen in the sense that mass extinction events (what this is) provide opportunities for other species to evolve into the niches previously occupied by now extinct species. However, that takes millions of years, and isn't a fun time to be around.

I also take issue with your caricature of the EV market and its customers. There is absolutely an environmental cost to constructing new vehicles and the batteries to run them. But there is also an environmental (and economical) cost to continuing in our ways and changing nothing. A balance needs to be struck where EV adoption can occur in a way minimizes its impacts while steadily reducing ICE emissions, and I think the deadlines we've set are totally appropriate to that end. It would have been nice if we could have started this effort sooner, provide more time to make the transition, and meet our emissions targets sooner -- but instead, we spent decades denying climate change for political points and to keep wealthy people's pockets lined.

[Marathon1150]

Originally Posted by Ryban

For most species, it doesn't usually happen quickly enough to adapt to step-changes in the environment though -- which is what Climate Change looks like on the time scales that are relevant here. There have been massive temperature swings in Earth's history, but even the the most rapid occurred over hundreds, and more often, thousands, of years. The temperature swing we're experience now is occurring of the course of half a century. Maybe more strictly speaking, evolution does happen in the sense that mass extinction events (what this is) provide opportunities for other species to evolve into the niches previously occupied by now extinct species. However, that takes millions of years, and isn't a fun time to be around.

The speed with which an environment changes has differential impact on different species. Short generation times in a rapidly changing environment can lead to dramatic genotypic and phenotypic change in an organism with a short generation time. Some organisms can be more responsive to environmental change through fast reproduction cycles OR large numbers of highly genetially variable offspring. Of concern is that some of organisms that will be happy in a warmer or colder climate, or a rapidly fluctuating environment, are less desirable than others. Covid-19, for example, responded very quickly to a changing environment and will continue to do so. A simple genome and billions of virus particles moving amongst hosts makes selection of successful genotypes pretty much guaranteed. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics and pest resistance to pesticides are economically challenging races to keep up with natural selection.

Climate change induced ocean temperature changes will allow some species to expand their geographic range. This may not be a good thing. For example, tuna may extend their range both north and south and prey on desirable species such as salmon in the north. There are myriad other examples of where less desirable species of economic or other interest will replace more valuable or useful species.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Marathon1150

T
... For example, tuna may extend their range both north and south and prey on desirable species such as salmon in the north. There are myriad other examples of where less desirable species of economic or other interest will replace more valuable or useful species.

“Implications for the global tuna fishing industry of climate change-driven alterations in productivity and body sizes” ~ by Maite Erauskin-Extramiana et al (2023)
➥ https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...280?via%3Dihub

Tuna species productivity and size may decrease due to climate change
➥ https://phys.org/news/2023-02-tuna-s...-decrease.html

“Large-scale distribution of tuna species in a warming ocean” ~ by
Maite Erauskin-Extramiana et al (2019)
➥ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.14630

Climate change will redistribute tuna
➥ https://phys.org/news/2019-04-climat...bute-tuna.html

[Striker]

Lol, so we may see road side signs with caricatures of chickens saying “eat more tuna”!!����
I don’t think cars are the problem, especially since most electric cars are powered by coal. And , to be honest, in a state that has hurricanes or a state with rolling blackouts…..well, electric car is not my go to.
I think it would be nice if they could re cycle lithium batteries by sticking them in a rocket and letting them burn, spurt a few Falcons upwards but i dare say some rhodes scholar will find a couple of “studies “ that says that aint gonna happen.��
In the meantime, I am just gonna do what humanity does. And humanity will evolve, or it won’t.
Oh, and evolution does not always take millions of years. The Russians ( yeah them bad ruskies) proved that with dogs. I would find and post the studies, but it’s nap time��

[Striker]

Hmpf, those question marks we’re supposed to be smiles, just so you know how serious I take all this.

[MicHughV]

Ha, go to a country like South Africa, where rolling blackouts is the new "norm" for the entire country....
Practically over homeowner that can afford it, has a generator alongside their house to make morning coffee...
I don't see EV's making any inroads there for some time..

[Striker]

Ha, I was in a major port facility last year… thousands of cars. I asked “whats the deal” oh, they’re all of to Nigeria. Likely giving them away. Keep the prices inflated in the US, those suckers work 50 weeks a year to buy a car for 100g.
So those bad old cars don’t all go away.
And I didn’t see any EV”s amongst them either.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Striker

...
I don’t think cars are the problem, especially since most electric cars are powered by coal...

Not in my part of the world.

Hydro is the largest source of electricity generation in Canada, providing more than 60% of Canada’s total electricity, with an installed capacity of about 85,000 MW.

In the U.S., last year, more electricity was generated from renewables, than from coal; and natural gas generation was about twice that of coal.

In 2022, about 4,243 billion kilowatthours (kWh) (or about 4.24 trillion kWh) of electricity were generated at utility-scale electricity generation facilities in the United States.
About 60% of this electricity generation was from fossil fuels: natural gas (39.8%), coal (19.5%), etc.
About 18% was from nuclear energy, and about 22% was from renewable energy sources.

[dannc]

Originally Posted by Montanan

It is becoming more and more of an issue in financing and in permitting of infrastructure construction and repurposing to have climate resilience be a key factor. I work in corporate finance, ALL of the boxes have to be checked off.

Just ask anyone in Florida or Louisiana how expensive and difficult it is to obtain flood and wind coverage. And as to the huge amount of government funding invested into flood walls and water run off handling equipment, including massive pumps. And one can view very large acreages of ghost forests along the east coast where the salt water intrusion of the ground water aquifer has moved further in land and killed a tremendous amount the trees and shrubs....

Most of South Florida was swamp land until the last 50-70 years. The house I lived in, right next to I95, was swamp until canals were built and land raised from the canal spoil. This was done in the late 1960's early 1970's and that house was considered to be Out West. Most of South East Florida was swamp west of what is now I95. The Everglades has been diked, canalized, and drained mostly for farming, mainly Big Sugar, and later, development. What was a rural, agriculture land 40 years ago is now urban.

South East Florida is now wall to wall development from the ocean to the Everglades, which are more accurately named Water Management Areas, because the water flow is most certainly managed by humans. This was all done to sell land for farming and development and has been going on for a century or more. South West Florida has under gone the same transformation.

Salt water intrusion is from building canals connected to the Inter Coastal Waterway which allows the sea water to move many miles inland. The Inter Coastal Waterway destroyed at least once fresh water river that I know about. Ground water pumping can allow in sea water as well but I am not sure how much of that is done now in South East Florida. Certainly it was done before cities were built but now I don't know. I do know that Broward county pumps treated sewage into the aquifer.

I never saw salt water killed trees and spent quite a bit of time out in the Everglades and the South Florida Coast but with the canals and dredging it certainly is a threat and problem. However, I have seen forests of non native trees killed by government programs. I personally helped kill non native trees, plants and animals. Back in the 1920s/30sThere were programs to spread the non native Melaleuca tree to dry up the swamps and I have seen old news reels of people dumping boxes of Melaleuca seeds out of airplanes over the Everglades. The Melaleuca tree is very hard to kill, cutting it down, and leaving the trunk on the ground, will cause the trunk to sprout. Burning causes it so spread seeds. The Melaleuca grows into very dense forests that crowd out native trees, or any other plant for that matter, and due to the oils in the trees, are a fire hazard.

Insurance is Florida is expensive due to the hurricanes over the last few years but also because of the roofing scams were contractors and lawyers tell home owners they can get a new roof paid for by their insurance. Insurance pays out but everyone's rates increase. There has been a change to law/regulations that is supposed to minimize this issue. The fact, is people have moved to a high risk area, an area that was relatively unpopulated a few decades ago, but is now a very densely populated area. This also happen in other areas, like NC, where historically not many people would go and build on barrier islands, or even along the coast, due to storms and the fact the land was swamp. Though I live far inland my insurance premiums have increased to cover people building homes in flood zones on the coast....

Car insurance in South Florida, when I lived down there, was very high because about half the drivers did not carry car insurance. Insurance issues have been a problem in Florida for a long time.

There are areas in in South Florida were the land is simply disappearing. The drained swamp land is very fertile but as crops are grown, and the land dries out, the soil is used up. There are concrete posts that were driven to bedrock back in the 1920's and 1930's. The posts were left level with the ground but I have seen some of these posts are now six feet or so above ground. That is how much soil has been lost. One can drive in the Agriculture Areas and see how much lower the farm fields are than the road bed. The roads are built along canals that are used to drain the Everglades and the spoil used to build the road. So while the road way has been built up higher than the grade level, the "fields" are much lower as the soil disappears. At some point there will be no soil just limestone bed rock. I would think much of this land, though far from the coast is now below sea level.

Back in the 1980's, there was a Florida University professor talking about the cause of beach erosion being caused by the inlets, jetties and sea walls. Beaches were growing in the Big Bend area of Florida because there was little to no human barriers to the movement of sand along the coast line.

[Montanan]

Climate Change Risk and the Costs of Mortgage Credit
By February 15, 20210
A new challenge: pricing climate risks

https://sites.duke.edu/thefinregblog...o%20SLR%20risk.

In recent remarks, financial regulators across the globe have stressed the importance of understanding the effect of climate risks on the financial system. In a statement released on November 9, 2020, Governor Lael Brainard of the U.S. Federal Reserve stressed the importance of lenders’ abilities to identify and measure the risks posed by climate change. In particular, she emphasizes the importance of moving “from the recognition that climate change poses significant financial stability risks to the stage where the quantitative implications of those risks are appropriately assessed and addressed.” Likewise, the Bank of England expects its regulated financial institutions to understand, assess, and take a sufficiently long-term view with respect to the financial risks linked to climate change.

"Using a sample of more than one million mortgage loans originated across the United States, we find that the interest rate for mortgages in a ZIP code where all properties are exposed to sea level rise (SLR) risk is approximately 13 basis points higher than the interest rate for mortgages in a ZIP code where none of the properties are exposed to SLR risk."

. . .

Identifying the effect of sea-level exposure on mortgage prices is challenging, as banks take many variables into account when making their loan pricing decisions. Most importantly, homebuyers in areas with a greater exposure to sea-level risk could have a different level of credit risk compared to homebuyers in other areas. For example, wealthier individuals may obtain a mortgage to purchase properties closer to the coast, and banks may take into account the wealth of these borrowers to determine their mortgage rates.

Note: Ocean front, beach property, water way front property does tend to be expensive, so I perceive that wealth and credit risk makes a big factor in pricing a loan.

. . .

Second, our overall results suggest that lenders are not equally equipped to incorporate climate risks into mortgage prices and that there are several barriers preventing lenders from pricing in this risk. Specifically, we find that the risk premium is more salient in areas with a greater exposure to extreme weather events, such as floods, hurricanes, or tropical storms. In addition, the effect is stronger after the occurrences of deadly hurricanes and after important climate change events have been covered in the news media e.g., after Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in December 2009 or the Paris Agreement in April 2015. We also find that the risk premium is more prevalent in neighborhoods in which local residents are more likely to believe that climate change is happening. Our overall results suggest that it is the belief in climate change, reinforced by a greater exposure to natural disaster events, that drives the risk premium.

[Montanan]

As Sea Levels Rise, So Do Ghost Forests

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...t-forests.html

Snipets:

"As saltwater moves into the ground, oak and other sensitive hardwoods die first. Loblolly pine, the most salt-tolerant, is often the last tree standing until it, too, is overwhelmed.
Then the saltwater marsh plants move in. If you’re lucky, velvety tufts of cordgrass sprout. If not, impenetrable stands of cane-like Phragmites, an invasive species, take over.
One reason the effects of rising seas are so noticeable here is that the land has very little slope. Those five millimeters of sea level, a rise that’s only slightly more than two half-dollar coins stacked, can translate into saltwater pushing 15 feet inland per year,"

. . .

Increasingly powerful storms, a consequence of a warming world, push seawater inland. More intense dry spells reduce freshwater flowing outward. Adding to the peril, in some places the land is naturally sinking.
All of this allows seawater to claim new territory, killing trees from the roots up.


Migrating marshes.

The Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, where Dr. Gedan does research, lost 3,000 acres of forest and agricultural land between 1938 and 2006. More than 5,000 acres of marsh became open water.

At first, this trend depressed Matt Whitbeck, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service who works at the refuge. Saltwater marshes are important nurseries for the fish and crabs people like to eat.

But in 2012, he realized the marsh wasn’t entirely disappearing; it was migrating. Some of the 3,000 acres of forest that the refuge had lost had transformed into saltwater marsh.
His outlook changed. “We need to think about where the marsh is moving, not where it is,”

Coastal communities become threatened by the loss of forested land and conversion to marsh, with marsh lands converting to open water. That is to say there is a receding shoreline.

[MicHughV]

Interestingly, I live in the NE Florida area, and of late, there is a lot of noise being made by the numerous beach re-nourishment programs on the book or being planned, etc.
The folk that actually live right on the ocean, are the chief benefactors of these programs and are also the one's screaming the loudest to get them done, but the funding for these type of projects is facing headwinds, such as..... Who gets first dibs at it, as beach renourishment programs are typically confined to a given area ?? And who pays for it ?
One wonders at these programs. I've witnessed several beach renourishment programs in my area, but each passing hurricane pretty much obliterates all the work done during these programs.
Another alternative is to build seawalls, but here too are many headwinds, typically from several permitting agencies that rule who can do what, where, how and when, etc.
Add to this, there are sections of the coastline that have had several renourishment programs, but all to no avail, and local guv'mints are now faced with the option of buying these homeowners out as renourishment programs are simply not working.

I can't say that the so-called "climate factor" is at work here. Every year we get "hurricane predictions" but it seems to be that throwing a dart can likely produce the same predictions as million dollar compute programs.

At the end of the day, I see little change. Many people like to live on or near the beach and are willing to take their chances and little, if any thought, is given to climate change.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

Could it be that people are just eating more crab ???

The lobster industry has almost ground to a halt as people have chowed down most of the lobster...

We have moratorium's on various fish species due to certain species getting overfished, etc..

'jes sayin'

Why a Billion Crabs Have Suddenly Vanished From the Bering Sea

https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...crabs-missing/

A 90 percent drop in the crab population led officials in Alaska to cancel the official fishing seasons for both king crab and snow crab. The snow crab and king crab seasons are canceled this year, Alaskan officials say. An annual population survey is well below safety thresholds and up to a billion crabs short.


10 billion snow crabs disappeared from the Bering Sea. Scientists and fishermen are working to learn why.
By Kirsten Dobroth, KMXT - Kodiak -May 5, 2023

https://alaskapublic.org/2023/05/05/...-to-learn-why/

The lack of sea ice.

More than 10 billion Bering Sea snow crabs disappeared in Alaska between the years 2018 and 2022, devastating a commercial fishing industry worth $200 million just last year. The population crash coincided with a marine heat wave that hit the Bering Sea. Now, fishermen and researchers are working to figure out what happened, and they think warmer ocean water could be to blame.
Bycatch, which is the catch of a non-target species, has also drawn criticism from fishermen for its effect on the snow crab fishery. Even with the fishery closed to crabbers, the bycatch limit for the trawl sector is 3.6 million individual snow crabs this season.

a large, sudden die-off and the lack of sea ice was a red flag for scientists

sea ice is an important ingredient in the snow crabs’ life cycle. In the winter, it accumulates on the water’s surface. And during the summer, the ice melts, sending cold, dense water sinking to the ocean floor, where it hovers just above freezing at around 35 degrees.
Scientists call it the cold pool, and it’s a sanctuary for young crabs. Warmer temperatures can lead to starvation, and higher rates of disease.


“We know that increases in temperature increase metabolic rates of fish and crab, causing them to need to eat more and more,” said Fedewa.

In a shrinking cold pool, that means more crabs pushed into the smaller space, fighting for less food. Across the hall from the federal lab, Ben Daly, a research coordinator with Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game, is also trying to figure out how a smaller cold pool affects crabs in the Bering Sea.

“That’s part of what we’re doing now is trying to untangle the what happened part. That’s only half of the challenge. The other half of the challenge is what do we do next,”

[Creedence]

Originally Posted by dannc

Most of South Florida was swamp land until the last 50-70 years. The house I lived in, right next to I95, was swamp until canals were built and land raised from the canal spoil. This was done in the late 1960's early 1970's and that house was considered to be Out West. Most of South East Florida was swamp west of what is now I95. The Everglades has been diked, canalized, and drained mostly for farming, mainly Big Sugar, and later, development. What was a rural, agriculture land 40 years ago is now urban.

South East Florida is now wall to wall development from the ocean to the Everglades, which are more accurately named Water Management Areas, because the water flow is most certainly managed by humans. This was all done to sell land for farming and development and has been going on for a century or more. South West Florida has under gone the same transformation.

Salt water intrusion is from building canals connected to the Inter Coastal Waterway which allows the sea water to move many miles inland. The Inter Coastal Waterway destroyed at least once fresh water river that I know about. Ground water pumping can allow in sea water as well but I am not sure how much of that is done now in South East Florida. Certainly it was done before cities were built but now I don't know. I do know that Broward county pumps treated sewage into the aquifer.

I never saw salt water killed trees and spent quite a bit of time out in the Everglades and the South Florida Coast but with the canals and dredging it certainly is a threat and problem. However, I have seen forests of non native trees killed by government programs. I personally helped kill non native trees, plants and animals. Back in the 1920s/30sThere were programs to spread the non native Melaleuca tree to dry up the swamps and I have seen old news reels of people dumping boxes of Melaleuca seeds out of airplanes over the Everglades. The Melaleuca tree is very hard to kill, cutting it down, and leaving the trunk on the ground, will cause the trunk to sprout. Burning causes it so spread seeds. The Melaleuca grows into very dense forests that crowd out native trees, or any other plant for that matter, and due to the oils in the trees, are a fire hazard.

Insurance is Florida is expensive due to the hurricanes over the last few years but also because of the roofing scams were contractors and lawyers tell home owners they can get a new roof paid for by their insurance. Insurance pays out but everyone's rates increase. There has been a change to law/regulations that is supposed to minimize this issue. The fact, is people have moved to a high risk area, an area that was relatively unpopulated a few decades ago, but is now a very densely populated area. This also happen in other areas, like NC, where historically not many people would go and build on barrier islands, or even along the coast, due to storms and the fact the land was swamp. Though I live far inland my insurance premiums have increased to cover people building homes in flood zones on the coast....

Car insurance in South Florida, when I lived down there, was very high because about half the drivers did not carry car insurance. Insurance issues have been a problem in Florida for a long time.

There are areas in in South Florida were the land is simply disappearing. The drained swamp land is very fertile but as crops are grown, and the land dries out, the soil is used up. There are concrete posts that were driven to bedrock back in the 1920's and 1930's. The posts were left level with the ground but I have seen some of these posts are now six feet or so above ground. That is how much soil has been lost. One can drive in the Agriculture Areas and see how much lower the farm fields are than the road bed. The roads are built along canals that are used to drain the Everglades and the spoil used to build the road. So while the road way has been built up higher than the grade level, the "fields" are much lower as the soil disappears. At some point there will be no soil just limestone bed rock. I would think much of this land, though far from the coast is now below sea level.

Back in the 1980's, there was a Florida University professor talking about the cause of beach erosion being caused by the inlets, jetties and sea walls. Beaches were growing in the Big Bend area of Florida because there was little to no human barriers to the movement of sand along the coast line.

Great post. I just visited Loggerhead Key in the Dry Tortugas and read up on its history, and this post kind of resonates with what I learned there. Carnegie established a laboratory there to research the local environment in the early 1900s, and naturally the Big Brains (TM) planted a bunch of invasive, non-native species which consumed the island, and it took well into the 1990s to eradicate them and restore the island to its (relatively) native state. I say relatively because we left the non-native coconut trees, but they look cool, so they get a pass (I endorse that decision though, it does look cool).

We do plenty of damage, and the discussion always seems to focus on renewable energy and EVs which carry their own damaging side effects, or rising sea levels (my favorite recent example was the discovery of a cemetery from the 1800s in the Dry Tortugas last week under 30’ of water, and the central thesis of the article was that it sits 30’ underwater because of sea level rises and climate change).

I’m not wading into the debate (I maintain an immovable opinion based on my personal observations and life experience- and it’s not hard and fast on one side or the other, it contains elements of both), but I do see very little being done here in Florida to mitigate the directly observable aspects you address. Not a Tesla or wind farm on earth is going to mitigate those elements, but that’s where the debate lives. (And before we go all Sailing Anarchy and start a Desantis spin-off, I did say I’m not wading into the debate... the political parties are two sides of the same corn-impregnated turd log).

As someone who works closely with academia, I can say with certainty it’s due in large part to the fact that it’s where the funding flows.... NASA is a great example of that phenomenon with their persistent “near earth asteroid” messaging. It’s an effective way to maintain URGENCY which translates to POLITICAL CAPITAL, which motivates Congressional Appropriators, which ultimately means FUNDING!!! (that’s literally from the horse’s mouth- a NASA procurement policy guy I work with). Meanwhile, we all come here to relax and think about boats, but instead walk away more stressed wondering why THE OTHERS simply don’t get it!!!!

Is green stuff the answer? Frankly, I don’t care. Once it’s ready for prime time and capable of seamlessly replacing current tech, I’m sure folks will adopt it en masse. Until then, half the political spectrum will embrace it, and the other half won’t. (And here in Florida, those who embrace it with EVs almost always have an IC-powered vehicle as well as EVs are not realistic for evacuations among other things).

I’m just about certain learning that crabs cant smell anymore isn’t going to strike a chord with a meaningful group of otherwise entrenched people, but if I’m wrong I’m sure we’ll learn of the surge in EV purchases next quarter (little tongue in cheek there). It’s probably not going to strike a chord with commercial entities that seem to be taking a pass on battery powered alternatives. I don’t see any commercial highway maintenance crews here using battery powered stuff, and there’s a reason for that. My personal observation, I’ve yet to see a commercial lawn crew with any as well- although I’m sure an anecdote of one could be found somewhere (though the Internet Discourse SOP provides a mandate for someone come along and showcase an example of one so we can perpetuate the circle jerk that’s been going on the past decade with no meaningful progress)- also somewhat tongue in cheek.


The takeaway: Make it practical, heck, even functionally advantageous and marvel at how quickly the dynamic shifts. Keep people drinking from paper straws so sea turtles don’t choke, and expect a continued tepid response. And if we’re going to raise cane over the environment, perhaps address the things like those in the quote which can be seen in states across the country (heck especially in developing nations as well) while going on about energy. Energy is a piece of a broader topic but it gets 97% of the air time.