Will Earth Become a Planet Without Ice Caps? Leading Expert Says "Yes"
Rising sea levels will not extinguish humanity, but they will transform life on planet Earth as we know it according to Peter Ward professor of biology and earth sciences at the University of Washington. Here are his predictions in a new book, The Flooded Earth, which will be published this July.
By 2050: Sea levels will rise 0.5 to 1 meter. Well established coastal cities will battle the rising waters with dikes and levees; other cities will see their underground infrastructure impaired and face building collapse.
By 2300: The seas will rise 20 meters
reshaping the world's geography, forming new rivers and lakes as
Antarctica's ice melts. Massive icebergs will form in the southern
hemisphere interrupting historic shipping lanes.
2500-3000: the
sea will reach its maximum levels completely wiping out coastal cities
and forcing massive human and animal migration. Greenland and
Antarctica will be transformed into prime farmlands. In southern
regions will face the spread of tropical diseases and the possibility
of mass extinctions.
Image above: Red represents areas where temperatures have increased the most
during the last 50 years, particularly in West Antarctica, while dark
blue represents areas with a lesser degree of warming. Temperature
changes are measured in degrees Celsius. Credit: NASA/GSFC Scientific
Visualization Studio.
Casey Kazan
Related Galaxy Posts:
Is Global Warming Part of Earth's Natural Cycle: MIT Team Says "Yes" -A Galaxy Insight
Global-Warming Tipping Point: 9 Degrees Temperature Increase Would Devastate Earth's Population
Source: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/warming_antarctica.html
Comments
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bf7f753ef01157088688e970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Will Earth Become a Planet Without Ice Caps? Leading Expert Says "Yes":
« Military Shuts Out Scientists from Infra-Red Signatures on All Meteors Which Hit the Planet | Main | International Space Station Gets a New "Eye" on the Cosmos »

New ice is accumulating in Antarctica at unprecedented rates. Even Arctic ice is growing from its recent low in 2007. This summer appears to indicate continued growth of Arctic ice so far.
Of course, any prediction made over multi-decadal timescales may eventually prove correct or not. The question is whether the predictor's methods were valid, or were instead based upon political bias.
All indications suggest bias, in the case of Peter Ward.
Posted by: Alice | June 28, 2009 at 09:55 PM
This is BS. There are more chances we get an ice age before we get 20m sea rise.
Posted by: Christian Rioux | June 29, 2009 at 05:14 AM
The ice caps melting is such a stupid media scare. Ice is less dense than water, because of the forming of a crystal lattice during the freezing process. When water freezes, this lattice causes the volume of the frozen liquid to increase. Therefore, by reciprocity, when ice melts, the volume of water will decrease. So, if the ice caps melt, we will not have to worry about rising sea levels, but rather worry about our fish population dying from lack of sea. Please, if you read this, do not perpetuate the lie that global warming will drown cities. Global warming may melt the ice caps, but it will not drown anyone.
Posted by: Bryan | June 29, 2009 at 03:50 PM
@Bryan - ice may be less dense than water, but the bulk of the water tied up in ice at present isn't floating, it's resting on bedrock. So meltwater from Greenland or the Antarctic will contribute directly to sea-level rises. Even the breakup of floating ice, for example in the Arctic, is worrying, as it reflects temperature increases, and contributes to process by decreasing albedo (white ice reflects sunlight better than dark ocean). And the state of the icecaps is clearly a concern - during the last ice age, the seas were 122m lower than they are today.
Posted by: Toby | June 29, 2009 at 04:17 PM
I believe that at some point, the whole world will be one temperature. It is the changing from hot to cold, good to bad that causes natural disasters. We either need it to be one way or the other. Some people think global warming is a threat while others argue a global ice age. Which shall it be? It is talk like this that creates a line that separates people.
Posted by: Scott Seiter | July 03, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Disagree fully with some comments above.
Yes we do not exactly know when and IF all the ice over the polar areas will melt.
BUT if it will melt we better shall prepare (we humans ALL) to definite changes in the echo system , in the rain and new deserts areas, in the overall temperature further increase due to loss of reflectance form the polar ice caps, in the rise of NOT-salted oceans...and many other umpredictable rippling effects.
Somebody in above comments has said that in 2008 the ice cap has increased respect to 2007 : do NOT know if this is another 'fiasco info'....what I Know is that never since the modern time the sun has so low number of sunspots.
Therefore 2008 and 2009 are years of MINIMUM solar effect (= heating) on our ATM...that in simpler terms means...if we had and will have global increase in temperature in these two years we were-will be in BIG trouble...BIG ONES.
Then skeptics can remain skeptics...here in the 'Med' (MED = mediterranean sea)...we have massive temperature and climatic changes...too much rain ...weather fronts entering south Italy from north Africa rather than north atlantic ocean.
Strange climate and some worries....here.
Then we live the skeptics to remain skeptics....carry on polluting with your gigantic 4WD car....it is a good new....not so new.
Weak up guys....or if you do not want ...you better keep silent.
Reagards to Gea (our planet)
Posted by: claudio | July 04, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Wait...how does the southern hemisphere start forming icebergs while antartica- which is IN the southern hemisphere- start to melt?
Posted by: astrophysics11 | July 05, 2009 at 09:12 PM
Does anybody really know what is this matter about? I am not messing around, for real, I am just kind of slow handling this sort of information. I apologize if somebody think I am messing around, because I am actually not.
Posted by: Kamagra | October 14, 2010 at 08:06 AM
well the way i see it, there was apparently less ice in the triasic period, and scientists claim that it was a lush jungle, with hardly any desrt areas. im not worried, its gonna take a long time for all this to happen and there will be alot more technology to help ADAPT the future populations to it, i do say adapt not battle because if we dont adapt we're doomed anyway! with climate change in all the history of this planet its the species that adapts to its environment that survives.
scientists have looked at periods of time by geolgy and it seems that the when the planet was warmer we had LARGER life, so why should we worry about it, it may even eradicate deserts turning them into grasslands and forests grow in places they couldn't before, yes it'd free up mure water to open up more to evaporate, the oceans absorb more heat from the sun then any other source on our planet and our deserts and snow reflect it all back. Im all for this climate change it is more likely to benefit wildlife and humankind then trying to hold it back.
Posted by: william murrell | October 26, 2011 at 07:39 AM