Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (23244)	11/12/2008 12:42:32 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Neo, you wrote "have a problem" which is getting the tense wrong. You mean "will have a problem". Yes, if there was sea level rising to problem levels, then Maldives, being poor, with few people, and a high boundary to area ratio, would have a LOT more problem than Nederlands. I wondered about accelerating coral growth but suspect that coral does as well as it can and shipping in supertankers loaded with trash and other unwanted solids requiring disposal would be the best method of building islands 1 km high. Heck, why not go for 10 km high [for some of them anyway]. Keep in mind that tsunami resistance is required rather than avoiding sea level rise due to ocean warming or ice melting. As you can imagine, sea level rise due to tsunami happens much faster than sea level rise due to global warming. When a bolide splashes down in the Indian ocean, a 100 metre wave would travel quickly to Maldives. Rather than Australia, they could go to Africa, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and lots of other countries closer than Australia. The reason they want Oz is that they want OPM. Mqurice