$25 billion in damages in worst-case scenario.
A new “study” in Risk Analysis claims:
The city of Washington, District of Columbia (DC) will face flooding, and eventual geographic changes, in both the short- and long-term future because of sea level rise (SLR) brought on by climate change, including global warming. To fully assess the potential damage, a linear model was developed to predict SLR in Washington, DC, and its results compared to other nonlinear model results. Using geographic information systems (GIS) and graphical visualization, analytical models were created for the city and its underlying infrastructure. Values of SLR used in the assessments were 0.1 m for the year 2043 and 0.4 m for the year 2150 to model short-term SLR; 1.0 m, 2.5 m, and 5.0 m were used for long-term SLR. All necessary data layers were obtained from free data banks from the U.S. Geological Survey and Washington, DC government websites. Using GIS software, inventories of the possibly affected infrastructure were made at different SLR. Results of the analysis show that low SLR would lead to a minimal loss of city area. Damages to the local properties, however, are estimated at an assessment value of at least US$2 billion based on only the direct losses of properties listed in real estate databases, without accounting for infrastructure damages that include military installations, residential areas, governmental property, and cultural institutions.
The projected value of lost property is in excess of US$24.6 billion at 5.0 m SLR. [Emphasis added]
I agree, the sky falling would be worse, no question about it. I don’t think anyone has ever modeled that and it’s a much, much scarier prospect.
I thought that the latest research based on observations not models, shows that sea levels are static at present.
Just another grant grabbing alarmist claim based on a virtual world that does not in any way represent reality.
Well, some says it is a fraud. And I think it is BS from the usual suspects.
Here;
http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf
This study completely discredited itself in the second sentance of the summary when it said it used a linear model.
I want to know (maybe I missed it) who paid for this BS? I’m afraid that the answer is going to be, us, the taxpayers. Graon.
While doomsayers keep claiming global warming caused by humans, why don’t they check on the summer-temperatures here in Australia? December was the coldest and wettest since 1916 and January remains much cooler, than average. The prediction for our Snowy Mountains area is that there
could be a 17Centigrades drop from average for summer! Thus, the fact is, that there is no “global” change at all and warmer temperatures than average have only shown up in the Northern Hemisphere.
So, the doomsayers should stop spreading their habitual lies and accept, that climate cycles have changed the earth for many billions of years. And by the way, I rather have warming than cooling (ice-age) any time, as more food could be grown, where everlasting ice and tundra exist nowadays. Ask the Greenlanders and Russians and Canadians.
I think it’s a ‘study’ because it uses models and climate models are notoriously inaccurate.
It’ll be even worse if the sky falls!
So, in only 1,000 years we may have some wet basements in what once was Washington DC? And is that $24.6 B expressed as current dollars? Or future-valued for 1,000 years? Will there still be dollars? Will anyone remember this??
This kind of unscientific childishness tends to get laughed out of class – the students find it hilarious.
Washington DC “flooded”….Woo Woo…Couldn’t happen to a nicer place…Bring it on….Drown the Rats…
I’m a new subscriber . .it would be helpful is an opinion was given as to the scientific validity of the many “studies” cited by Junkscience. The quotes around study implies to me that Mr. Milloy thinks this particular item to be in the junk category.