That’s not what the claim is that in next 100 years that could happen. Claim is that IF and WHEN caps melt, they would lead to 20ft rise in sea-level. As I said above, the original estimates have been revised. Earlier the thought process was it could take much longer time, compared to recent thought process of few hundred years. I could see the revision because nobody could have expected India and China to be doing what they are doing even 20 years ago. Also, I don’t think you could simply keep putting greenhouse emissions in the atmosphere and assume ABSOLUTELY NOTHING would happen. Nothing is free. There are always consequences. ACID RAIN was not figment of people’s imagination. After Saddam set fires to Kuwaiti Oil Feilds, it MOST CERTAINLY HAD REAL IMPACT on enviorment.
So I don’t claim to know exactly what will happen when. I believe it would take a long time. However, I also believe it is NOT wrong to want to invest in technologies like NUCLEAR ENERGY which is in my view, cheapest, safest and greenest. I think its foolish to wait for debacle to happen and then say we would do something as it would be too late then. We simply can collect as much data as possible and if it seems that greenhouse emissions are having impact on polar caps, then I see nothing wrong in taking steps to keep it to minimum.
Also, economically I believe Nuclear Energy can really help us. We are paying too high a price to get our energy from fossil fuel, both in terms of dollars and in terms of damaging the enviornment.
Then it doesn't sound like much of a problem.
I could see the revision because nobody could have expected India and China to be doing what they are doing even 20 years ago.
But the entire Global Warming thing was cooked up in the last ten years. Everybody knew that China and India were developing phenomenally ten years ago. Even twenty really, I know I was talking about it with friends then.
Also, I don’t think you could simply keep putting greenhouse emissions in the atmosphere and assume ABSOLUTELY NOTHING would happen.
No it wouldn't be wise to assume that. It also wouldn't be wise to assume it would. That is why I have looked at data about greenhouse gases.
The Role of the Greenhouse EffectGenerally understood, but rarely publicized is the fact that 95% of the greenhouse effect is due solely to natural water vapor. Of the remaining 5%, only 0.2% to 0.3% of the greenhouse effect (depending on whose numbers you use) is due to emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases from human sources. If we are in fact in a global warming crisis, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have an undetectable effect on global climate. However, significant efforts to limit the emission of greenhouse gases in the United States are currently underway.
ACID RAIN was not figment of people’s imagination.
Oh!? What did it actually do? I haven't seen an article about that for twenty years.
After Saddam set fires to Kuwaiti Oil Feilds, it MOST CERTAINLY HAD REAL IMPACT on enviorment.
Then you can link to an article about that REAL damage. ???