tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post1637226582033625928..comments2024-01-24T18:56:58.635-08:00Comments on EXPLORING CULTURES: A Global Blog (all languages): Polar Cities a Haven in Warming World?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-26350943851332806792008-03-31T19:51:00.000-07:002008-03-31T19:51:00.000-07:00"This polar city scenario is most likely going to ..."This polar city scenario is most likely going to be used as a FINAL resort. Though I am just a teenager (attempting to understand the world’s problems), I think I know enough to say that things may reverse order before this disaster may occur. It is obvious that global warming is the basis of all these problems, followed by George Bush’s refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty/Act. But, as stated in “An Inconvenient Truth”, had the world stopped this problem when it would be easy, this unnatural addition to the earth’s carbon cycle would not be existent. It is still reversible-if unnecessary factories are eliminated, and if natural resources were used more often. <BR/><BR/>— Posted by some dudeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-89420919937461654472008-03-31T19:48:00.000-07:002008-03-31T19:48:00.000-07:00''I read your article posted on Dot Earth. That's ...''I read your article posted on Dot Earth. That's really a great idea. You<BR/>should try to take a further step to build a prototype and have an<BR/>experiment down there in the Antarctica. But I guess this will cost a lot.<BR/>Maybe you should try to approach to some successful business men to raise<BR/>the fund. They would love the idea, and probably become your sponsors.''Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-14810389608565876642008-03-30T08:04:00.000-07:002008-03-30T08:04:00.000-07:00NY Times scientist talks on climate changeBy: JESS...NY Times scientist talks on climate change<BR/><BR/>By: JESSICA BARTLETT <BR/>Life and Style Editor<BR/>Posted: 3/25/08<BR/><BR/>"This pale blue dot - so much has unfolded," said Andrew Revkin as he looked up at a photo of earth projected on the screen. <BR/><BR/>A science writer for The New York Times since 1995, Revkin came to UVM on March 18 to talk about the issues involved in global climate change. <BR/><BR/>His lecture, "Making Sense of Climate Change from the North Pole to the White House" centered around the problems presented by a growing population, the hinders of journalism in the sciences, and the need for dramatic evidence of a warming climate to spur action. <BR/><BR/>"How do you make a big movement?" Revkin asked the audience. Even though there is evidence, climate change is happening, said Revkin, it is not as dramatic as we'd like it to be. <BR/><BR/>Although photos of drowning polar bears and foggy cities have more shock value, in all actuality, the less dramatic problems are actually the more pressing. <BR/><BR/>Scientific discoveries lacking that journalistic "punch," what Revkin called the "front page thought," are usually put in the recesses of a newspaper and, consequently, in the recesses of the public's mind, said Revkin. <BR/><BR/>In addition to journalistic obstacles, another issue with getting the word out about climate change is the doubt caused by skeptics. <BR/><BR/>"There will always be discord between scientists," said Revkin, "For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD."<BR/><BR/>However, most of the skepticism spurs from the fact that there is no concrete data to predict the future. "We can only speculate," said Revkin.<BR/><BR/>This inability to see what's ahead also has many also wondering about the effect of our rapidly growing population.<BR/><BR/>"There are 6.7 billion people now … and it's predicted to be around 9 billion in the next hundred years," said Revkin. The all-pressing question is: what then?<BR/><BR/>With sea-level on the rise, and an increasingly more polluted earth abound, we need to be aware, said Revkin. However most people, he stated, aren't ready to be. <BR/><BR/>"Earth is increasingly what we choose to make it … and we're not ready for that responsibility," said Revkin.<BR/><BR/>"We have a lot of work to do," he told the audience after showing numerous pictures of ice depletion and discussing how 29 tons of CO2 are released into the atmosphere every year.<BR/><BR/>However, the problems of climate change don't stop there.<BR/><BR/>According to a graph from www.aas.org shown in the presentation, spending on climate change problems has been steadily decreasing as time progresses. <BR/><BR/>"Wealth and technology isolate us from the climate risks," said Revkin about the nation's lack of concern for climate change. <BR/><BR/>"We have a finite basket of worries," said Revkin, saying that usually global climate isn't one of them.<BR/><BR/>However, there are solutions in sight. <BR/><BR/>Revkin said that much of the research not dramatic enough for the newspaper is still being discussed, and awareness is steadily increasing.DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-74066923820938576672008-03-30T06:48:00.000-07:002008-03-30T06:48:00.000-07:00''Very fascinating concept, and it's good to see t...''Very fascinating concept, and it's good to see that you're getting ahead of the curve.''<BR/><BR/>NYC commenterDANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-177622306838853612008-03-30T06:28:00.002-07:002008-03-30T06:28:00.002-07:00HUMOR!I am pleased to announce acreage for sale at...HUMOR!<BR/><BR/>I am pleased to announce acreage for sale at the two poles.<BR/><BR/>Currently covered by glacial ice, these lots should be available for development in the next ten to fifteen years. Buy now at down-to-earth pricing. Prices will remain frozen for the next several years.<BR/><BR/>Financing available from laid-off Bear Stearns employees. <BR/><BR/>— Posted by Location. Location. Location.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-13048539163366587302008-03-30T06:28:00.001-07:002008-03-30T06:28:00.001-07:00Good work, Danny. I find Lovelock’s arguments pers...Good work, Danny. I find Lovelock’s arguments persuasive, and backed by solid reasoning. <BR/><BR/>Geochemists I have talked to are skeptical of Lovelock, maybe because they will look too foolish if he turns out to be wrong. But these same scientists write papers about the feedback loops that Lovelock describes: ocean warming and methane burps, huge releases of both CO2 and methane from melting of tundra and peat in the boreal region, massive forest fires, and so on.<BR/><BR/>These are not science fiction scenarios. Danny, your visualizing where things may actually end up is a great idea. Living in concrete bunkers and fighting nature could very well happen, to our horror. If temperatures rise beyond what Lovelock predicts (a theoretical possibility), it may be over for all of us.<BR/><BR/>Few members of the public know about Lovelock’s predictions in detail. I wish they could be presented by a mainstream publication, and not just in Rolling Stone. Whether he is right or not, this is definitely a possible scenario.<BR/><BR/>Coal and power companies, forest rapists, and oil companies are engaging in the worst kind of criminal activities. This also goes for the faux scientists who echo their claims in denying the reality of global warming. This should be communicated forcefully to the public, since what we are really talking about is good vs. evil. <BR/><BR/>There are alternate strategies as well: I know a firm working with the major insurance and financial sectors to deny financing to carbon emitters as a way to force change, since the US government is filled with hopeless whores. Maybe this is what it will take. <BR/><BR/>— Posted by Mike RoddyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-72917631254438221782008-03-30T06:28:00.000-07:002008-03-30T06:28:00.000-07:00The issue is whether it’s wise to populate the Arc...The issue is whether it’s wise to populate the Arctic, exploit necessary natural resources, open up the Northwest Passage to year round traffic or to leave the North Pole in as pristine condition as possible. It should be up to Canada, the U. S., Russia, Norway and Denmark, all with legitimate territorial and geological claims to use collective common sense in any process of polar development. <BR/><BR/>Frankly, I would count on the Scandinavians to do the best job. <BR/><BR/>— Posted by juan sigloAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-90546187488398806932008-03-30T06:27:00.000-07:002008-03-30T06:27:00.000-07:00Since the latest data from around the globe seems ...Since the latest data from around the globe seems to indicate that the Klimakatastrophe is progressing even more rapidly than the worst-case scenario of the IPCC (e.g. increasing glacier melting rate, decreasing oceans’ ability to absorb CO2), I tend to believe Lovelock’s predictions are spot on. <BR/><BR/>I think an interesting point to ponder on Dot Earth is: who will populate these refuges? Who will rule them? Even now, Russia and Canada are beginning to squabble (still diplomatically) over who has the “rights” to the Arctic’s resources. Fast forward a decade or two, and these squabbles may become more physical - and the Antarctic resources will begin to be more accessible, prompting conflict there as well.<BR/><BR/>Einstein once said, “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” Similarly, I do not know who will find refuge from the Klimakatastrophe in the Arctic, but they will probably be refugees of the Polar Wars as well. Bloom’s design needs to include pretty strong military defences, if the polar cities are to survive. <BR/><BR/>— Posted by Yuval KfirAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-11868041862946130182008-03-30T06:26:00.000-07:002008-03-30T06:26:00.000-07:00Congratulations on this column on Dot Earth blog! ...Congratulations on this column on Dot Earth blog! <BR/><BR/>I do, however, loathe the concept presented here of invading the Arctic or poles with self sustaining communities as our Earth warms. <BR/><BR/>Please understand ....I’m condemning our potential infiltration of those beautiful places. I’m one who will never accept with any grace or joy that those places I hoped would remain isolated, pristine and unparalleled wild lands, will not. How terribly sad, again.<BR/><BR/>Danny, applause for your creativity and innovativeness regardless of my opinion. It is always inspiring to see a fellow Dot Earther creating, creating, creating!<BR/><BR/>For the Artic, what a major drag to hear official projections your lovely being is destined to open up to the insatiable human whose economic and consumption interests never seem to reach “enough”. The beginning of yet another end.<BR/><BR/> <BR/><BR/>— Posted by Elizabeth TjaderAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-949421001644904537.post-90288032954123906902008-03-30T02:46:00.000-07:002008-03-30T02:46:00.000-07:00April 2008What experts in the climate change field...April 2008<BR/><BR/>What experts in the climate change field have told me over the past 12months:<BR/> <BR/>The following quotes are from emails from scientists and experts in the field of climate change and scientific research. Since the emails were private and not intended for publication with their names attached, I have decided to keep their actual names private, keeping with international standards of Internet etiquette. -- DB<BR/><BR/>*NOTE: Below are comments, some supportive but many of them critical or negative, from scientists and professors in several English-speaking countries, and one from Russia. <BR/><BR/>Professor A: "If it comes to that, in the far distant future, as you say, we probably won't have the social stability to<BR/>sustain such advanced developments as 'polar cities'."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Professor B: "While I think that polar cities might surface as a reasonable model for future habitation, I'm still not ready to give up on reorganizing ourselves in the lower latitudes just yet. In other words, given the warming scenarios, why not simply reconstruct sustainable (and, most especially equitable) kinds of communities in northern Canada, Alaska, Siberia, Russia Scandinavia?"<BR/><BR/>Professor C: "With the movement of grain belts north, and the thawing of lots of open ground, wouldn't it be much easier, less costly and accommodate many more of global warming 'refugees; if we were to build closed-loop, sustainable communities in the north -- but above ground? Are your polar cities above ground or below ground?"<BR/><BR/><BR/>Professor D: "Sir, your notion of polar cities for survivors of global warming in the distant future is quite provocative -- and most interesting. My real hope is that it will help prod the conversation in the direction it needs to go. If it serves that purpose, that, alone, will be a considerable achievement." <BR/><BR/><BR/>Professor E: "I doubt I would have any useful comments to make on something 400 years from now. However, people are clever and will create for themselves very interesting living conditions as time goes on."<BR/><BR/>Professor F: "I had not heard of this idea until now. If we do not halt global warming, it is probable that by 2500 the polar areas will be quite warm. It will probably take many thousands of years to melt all the ice in Antarctica, but the northern tundra of Canada and Siberia may become more habitable and it may indeed be possible to establish cities there. However, most of the tropical and all the temperate zones will also still be habitable. In any case most people are not likely to try to make plans more than 100 years ahead."<BR/><BR/>Professor G: "The last time the Earth was this warm with high levels of CO2 was the Cretaceous Era, and at that time the temperature was not much hotter in the tropics than at the poles, so yes, I think James Lovelock is wrong. Of course we don't want to wait and see, do we? There is still a chance of stopping things before they go too far. Keep up your work, but please don't send me more questions as I have a lot of other emails and so forth to deal with."<BR/><BR/>Professor H: "If we don't take action immediately to begin reducing GHG emissions, we could end up with a planet that has habitable zones only at high latitudes. However, we probably should not forget about global warming's twin, global cooling, who still may be lurking up the road. I'm inclined to think, however, that global warming is going to carry the day as various positive feedbacks kick in. Regarding 'polar cities', I'm unclear about how long it will take the tundra to transition to a non-frozen, heavy weight bearing state, which I suppose would be necessary for construction to progress. When tundra melts, how long does it take for the muck to solidify into weight bearing soil?" <BR/><BR/>Professor I: "Civilization can gradually move to higher latitudes and altitudes. The<BR/>required times are a century more, so this will happen naturally, almost<BR/>imperceptably. This sort of shift has happened in the past as climate<BR/>has changed, leaving behind archeological sites. The world is full of<BR/>ghost towns that were populated hundreds or thousands of years ago.<BR/>Famous examples are Pompeii and Ostia Antica near Rome and the abandoned<BR/>farmsteads on Greenland, but Europe is full of them (often plowed under<BR/>by modern agriculture). Moving to the poles is more remote (the North Pole is under water). Note the global warming warms the winters, not the summers, so that<BR/>the present tropics and temperate latitudes will not become uninhabitable."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Professor J: "We'll adapt to a warmer climate. In the late Middle Ages, this is<BR/>called a Climatic Optimum. Cities naturally turn over their<BR/>infrastructure on a time of 50 -- 100 years, so the cost of moving<BR/>inland (uphill) is not prohibitive compared to the ordinary costs of<BR/>maintaining a living city."<BR/><BR/>Professor K: "Global warming warms cold winters. It doesn't affect hot places or hot<BR/>summers. Nothing is going to become uninhabitable, although places already<BR/>very hot (Death Valley, Persian Gulf, Sahara, etc.) will remain so."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Professor L: "Thank you for sending me the polar city images you have created. It may very well happen and soon."<BR/><BR/>Professor M: "As for James Lovelock and his predictions, he doesn't understand climate or<BR/>physics. He only knows that doomsaying sells books, and he won't live to<BR/>be proven wrong."<BR/><BR/>Professor N: "I am an optimist on human adaptability because history shows that humans<BR/>(and ecosystems) adapt to change. The details may be a problem (arctic and<BR/>alpine species may go extinct, millions may die in floods in Bangldesh,<BR/>though this is avoidable with sensible planning and preparation, many<BR/>coastal cities will be abandoned, etc.) but humanity will survive. If<BR/>Eskimos can survive the arctic, Bedouin the Arabian desert and various<BR/>Indian tribes the Amazon, all with stone-age technology, humanity as a<BR/>whole will survive the climate of the next 500 years, whatever it will<BR/>be. The Earth won't turn into Venus."<BR/><BR/>Professor O: "We cannot plan for future centuries ahead because technology will change so much.<BR/>Suppose we tried to plan in 1900 for cities of today -- 2008. Big apartment houses,<BR/>a small grocery on every block, ice factories in every neighborhood, express<BR/>streetcar lines everywhere, lots of TB sanitaria and isolation wards for new<BR/>immigrants, utility poles for thousands of telephone wires everywhere..."<BR/><BR/>Professor P: "I think I will pass<BR/>for the time being on writing about your polar cities idea, unless you<BR/>have some funding or other form of high-level backing...it's thought<BR/>provoking but the idea of future generations having to move to the<BR/>arctic in a few hundred years time makes me shiver, and I fear it may<BR/>sound scaremongering to others."<BR/><BR/>Professor Q: "Je crois que James Lovelock exagere peu etre un peu trop. Bien que ce<BR/>scenario reste plausible, il serait dommage que nous ne pourrions pas<BR/>changer le futur plus que ca. J'ai bien lu le livre de Mr. Lovelock et je<BR/>crois qu'il a bien dessine les possibilites atroces qui peuvent nous<BR/>attendre. Je ne crois pas d'autres parts que ses predictions nefastes qui<BR/>sont dominantes dans la derniere partie de son livre sont croyables, surtout<BR/>que celles-ci ne sont pas basees sur des recherches scientifiques assez<BR/>valables. Votre scenario de ville futuristique enfin est intrigant et, souhaitons le,<BR/>ne sera pas necessaire."<BR/><BR/>Professor S -- [Sergey Zimov, Russia, Northeast Station, Siberia]: "Thank you for your interest to the topic.<BR/>I would say yes, the world might need 'Polar Cities' some time. I think<BR/>it can happen earlier than 2500."<BR/><BR/>Professor T: "Climate change will come upon us far more rapidly than that! Year 2500 is too generous. It will happen much quicker than that! And you can quote me on that!"<BR/><BR/>Professor U: "Polar cities are a fine idea. I am sure there will be more urbanization near the poles as the Earth warms. Of course we need some planning, but it is just not something I have given much thought to. There is a guy in Holland who is promoting floating cities, so there are all kinds of ideas out there. I am a little busy to give a lot of attention to every idea." <BR/><BR/>Professor V: "I think the polar cities might surface as a reasonable model for <BR/>future habitation. But I'm not ready to give up on reorganizing <BR/>ourselves in the lower latitudes just yet."<BR/><BR/>Professor W: "I have a daughter, and in my bones I am afraid for her and her children."<BR/><BR/>Professor X: "I think the futuristic look of the polar cities graphics is blinding us to the reality that we already have "polar cities" - in Russia and Alaska. The cities portrayed somehow suggest an alien ice enviroment, but with global warming the area will actually be more human friendly."<BR/><BR/>Professor Y: "It is not productive to talk about polar cities now, when humanity needs to focus on how the<BR/>world can drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It's silly to think 200 or 300 years into future, it's more useful to<BR/>think 20 or 30 years out."<BR/><BR/>Professor Z: "If your ideas alert the public to the real dangers of climate change and global warming, then your project is a good one. But who knows what life will be like 500 from now. It might be too late by then."DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.com