Posted on 09/13/2018 9:24:52 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Up to 30 per cent of coastal wetlands could be lost globally by the year 2100 with a dramatic effect on global warming and coastal flooding, if action is not taken to protect them, new research warns.
The global study, led by researchers at the University of Lincoln, UK, suggests that the future of global coastal wetlands, including tidal marshes and mangroves, could be secured if they were able to migrate further inland.
Geographers examined localised data from around the globe on coastal elevation, tides, sediment availability, coastal population and estimates of sea level rise to assess whether coastal wetlands are likely to have enough sediment to increase their elevation at the rate sea levels will rise, or whether there is enough space to establish themselves further inland.
The results show there could be global coastal wetland gains of up to 60 per cent if more than a third of the areas had space to move inland. The use of more localised data provides more accurate global results than previous estimates which warned of catastrophic losses of up to 90 per cent -- but scientists say action must be taken now to save coastal wetlands from ever increasing sea levels.
Further research is now needed to improve understanding of the adaption mechanisms of coastal wetlands to see level rise, particularly their ability to migrate inland.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Gerbil Warming.
BS.........
It’s not nice to f*ck with Mother Nature.....
Yeah and take away rich folks beach front property?-)
Mom takes care of “herself”, we are like fleas fighting over the same dog
Been that way always and will stay that way, any thoughts or protestations to the contrary is like a fart in a tornado
It’s all insane lib BS....
Just follow the money trail....that’s what they’re really after; the legalized theft of billions of dollars to fill their coffers...and their pockets. The SOBs need to be locked up in an asylum to Make America Safe Again.....MASA!!!!
Maybe they can relocate a few volcanoes. Earthquakes and hurricanes while at it.
File it under problems that will take care of themselves.
Yes , this is total baloney. There is absolutely, unequivocally, zero global warming. none. In fact the Antarctic ice shelf grew enormously last year and it was real cold where I live.
if action is not taken to protect them..
—
The Erf is a living breathing planet and sometimes the stench from the Left becomes so oppressive, they lose their very minds. The Erf has been taking care of business for billions of years, it will do just fine after the last lib is eaten up by it.
Well then, those wetlands should rent a U-Haul and move.
I’ve read a number of articles about Hurricane Florence, and alsmost every single one included discussing climate change.
The media people are all.on board with climate change, and it’s just reported as fact now, that climate change is causing hurricanes.
I suppose they believe Nature is no longer capable of moving wetlands inland all by herself, as she has for millenia previously, without their expert meddling.
The opposite of coastal westlands moving inland, is the return of more coastal areas to the wetlands they used to be before excessive and expensive (constant damage and replacement) of human habitation encroached on them.
Taxes should not support rebuilding human habitation areas on the coasts, zoning should not encourage that development and private insurance on such areas should increase greatly, to gradually reverse development trends on the coasts.
In time those things should have the same affect - increasing coastal wetlands, as articially increasing wetlands in the interiors adjacent to the coasts, which will require even more government intervention and regulation than just outlined.
Now then, it does not take “climate change” or concern for any unpredictable amout of “sea rise” to suggest these changes.
The constant history of the sea coast damages and rebuilding and all the related costs can support the changes outlined above, “global warming” or not.
The American natives living near the Atlantic coasts were smarter. They fished the ocean but they did not live on the coasts. The kept the buffer of the trees and wetlands of the coasts protecting their villages planted inland away from the coasts. They knew the history, the constant history of storms arriving along the coast, in any season. They admitted the history and sought to protect what they had instead of allowing it to be constantly destroyed, just so they could live on the coast. You say they were poor because they didn’t have inurance or a giant government taxing enterprise? No, those things are not free and too much of the burden falls on those who do not even live there.
You say “tornadoes” and earthquakes cause damages too, damages as bad as Atlantic coastal storms and hurricanes? Nothing beats the latter in terms of the consistency and amount of damages incurred over time, when the constant damages over time are looked at collectively.
How can wetlands move? Do they call Mayflower Van Lines?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.