Global Warming Will Lower Sea Levels Essay

Those who are highlighting the danger of global warming would not hesitate to relate it to a high sea level rise simply because according to their premise when there is global warming it affects both the Arctic and Antarctic regions, whereby the melting ice will eventually raise the sea level. The IPCC, the UN branch office that deals with scientific research had predicted a 20 inches sea level rise around the year 2100 and it is obvious that it has based it findings on the above assumption. Other suggestions and analysis indicate that what will in fact happen is the opposite where the global warming if it is true will either slow down the level of sea rise or will reduce it. The new analysis looks at two factual findings. The fact that the Earth temperature had risen 0. 6 degree Celsius in the last 100 years and the sea level had risen by 18 cm. What these analysts are focusing at is there is no relation between the two and especially the rise in sea level occurred independent of what happened to the temperature to a larger extent. What contributed to the rise of the seal level to 18 centimeters starts from the thermal expansion of the warming water body, especially the oceans and that contributed to 4 cm. What comes next is the melting of the so-called continental glaciers that accounted for 3. 5 cm rise level. The polar regions contributed to the lowering of the sea level simply because the warming of the temperature has evaporated more water and some of it rains in the Polar Regions adding to the amount of ice on these regions, hence there will be less water in the seas. But the findings highlight one shortcoming which is that the total amount of rise through the two activities adds up to only 20 percent of the total amount giving hint that there should be other sources contributing to the rise of the sea level other than the current global warming. What this led to was to depend on geological observations that revealed the sea level had been rising constantly for the last centuries at a rate similar to the last 100 years. Accordingly, there was sea level rise in the Little Ice Age from 1450 to 1850 indicating that if there were going to be a sea level rise it would be independent of what is happening in the environment. It was possible to arrive at such hypothesis using a data published on the melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet tracing it back to the end of the last ice age. Hence, the conclusion arrived at was since there had been a 120 meters rise in sea level since the last ice age that took place 18,000 years ago, the melting is still in process and will continue to do so for the coming 7000 years independent of what is going to happen to the present day temperature. What could change this course might be the arrival of another Ice Age, which is not in the prediction. In reality it is possible to say that a global warming caused by human activity cannot contribute to the rise of sea level since the record shows the climate warmed much between 1900 and 1940 and cooled down from 1940 – 1975. The outcome was the sea level rise slowed when the temperature was warmer and it increased when it was colder. The relation here is the two components thermal expansion and glacier melting had a lesser effect on the sea rise level when compared to the ice accumulation on the Polar Regions from the rain caused from warmer weather. Hence, it is possible to make a firm conclusion that warmer air or the current global warming will not contribute to the rising level of the sea. Instead, as it was illustrated it will bring it down by simply changing the amount of water into ice and depositing it on the Polar Regions. In spite of this analysis, the findings based on computer simulation try to demonstrate that the warming of the global temperature due to human induced activities will result in raising the sea level revealing that there is something wrong with such assumption (9). Conclusion In spite of the findings from various sources accurate, satellite measurement taken have not found any trace of global warming. Weather balloons also had shown similar findings. There are indications that the temperature had been rising starting form 1880 but such rise in temperature cannot be caused by greenhouse gases that are coming into existences from human induced activity mainly centered on burning of fossil oil and through the introduction of a developed and new method of land use. The other indication that shows the findings could be wrong is most of the measurements could reflect the temperature and air condition found closer to highly populated cities. All the feared outcomes of a high temperature brought into existence because of the greenhouse effect such as heat wave, hurricanes, or epidemic disease did not occur. If there had been a temperature rise to talk about, it was observed in the nighttime and winter season. Overall, it is possible to discredit the greenhouse apocalypse outright simply because it was not accompanied with all the catastrophic disasters that were predicted and anticipated (10). Even economists are wary of all the concerns simply because there might not be a discernable effect that will materialize from postponing the reduction of the greenhouse gas by another 20 years and see what the outcome will be. One of the reasons for that is meeting the greenhouse gas reduction effort would require getting rid of a big chunk of capital goods before they complete their useful life and that might not make economical sense for something that lacks scientific proof. But there is no doubt that such plans could be part of a long term process of any undertaking and the burden could also be eased as new technologies pertaining to the warming of the globe become readily available. The Kyoto Protocol itself would cost between $7 and $12 billion annually if it is implemented, a sum everyone is not comfortable with, simply because implementing the Protocol alone would cost each household up to $2000 annually and could raise home heating cost by at least 70 percent. Since people, especially those living in the advanced regions are heavily dependant on energy for their day-to-day living, raising the cost permanently to any extent would have a devastating effect, even if energy price is already very high. The only relief is since it fluctuates consumers could stretch their earnings whenever possible. It is possible to take it a bit further and see that if the assumption that the global temperature is rising to a dangerous level is true, a simple cost introduction of raising the federal fuel economy standard from 27. 5 miles to more than 40 miles itself will be costly, since it is such kinds of drastic measures that will bring down the amount of the greenhouse effect as automobiles are the worst source of pollution. The domino effect of such measures will lead to raising the price of cars, while at the same time such cars would have to be compact reducing the safety of cars that is feared to raise the number of fatalities form where it is currently at 4000 annually. The fact that the findings are heavily dependant on observation and computer simulation makes the concern a bit groundless since carbon dioxide is not a deadly gas to have in the atmosphere after all. The reason for that is the more carbon dioxide there is in the atmosphere it adds to thriving of plants that have various use for it. It is not only that if what is said about the meltdown is true that is another advantage for agriculture since there will be more land to put into agriculture that will lead to more foods in the world even if there is no proof that there is shortage of food in the regions where the land is covered with ice sheet. Other areas that would benefit from global warming are those who live in areas where the winter season is cold and long. Regions like that could enjoy longer summer seasons, which would mean longer growing period that will add to the amount of food produced. There are findings that the warmer weather is also good for the health of people in such a way that medical cost in most of the cold regions would come down and the quality life of in such regions would get enhancement. The fear centered on the rise of the sea level that would come into existence when the ice from the Polar Regions melts because of the warm climate for the most part is groundless. The reason for that is the warm weather heats the water from the sea changing it into vapor that will come down as rain. The rainfall that takes place in the Polar Regions would not find its way back into the seas, instead it would add on the amount of ice that is already in existence in the region. This process has dual advantages where the first one is it will add to the amount of ice in the Polar Regions defying the fear that the warming of the climate is causing the ice of the region to melt. Secondly, the amount of seawater will come down through the process since some of it will become ice. Hence, it is possible to say that the warming of the climate is good for the Polar Regions since they would get more ice through the natural process. That might have some disadvantages in other areas, because the melting of the ice from the Polar Regions is not without a merit. One of the merit is this particular harsh region could become more habitable where there will be more lands opened for farming, for housing, and industrial development leading to a huge economic activity that will boost the outcome in agriculture and other venues. At the same time, there is an observation concerning the opening of new routes that will be advantageous for trade as well for the tourist industry. However, one disadvantage cited was it might affect the wildlife of the region where, for example, the polar bear is on the list to become extinct at the end of this century. Since the presumption is it will take many centuries for the ice of the whole region to melt away, the only inconvenience wildlife might encounter is going farther to where the dense ice is located. This by itself is advantageous since some of the wildlife is becoming a threat by coming closer to where there are human inhabitants. Overall, since everything surrounding global warming is still a hypothesis that borders fear, where if some measure is not in place now the future could be disastrous and could become out of control, it is not possible to fully rely on the grim pictures that the alarmists are painting. The reality is life goes on normally in the regions even if a few incidents of melting ice sheets into the sea had occurred. The answer for such incidents is it is the outcome of the weather variation where in the summer time it is natural that the level of the ice could get thinner in the edge area and when the winter season is around it will again attain its thickness. The proof for this is there is not yet any documentation where because of global warming the inhabitants of the area had gained more access to land for farming or for any other purpose. The outcome is the same from observations made in other areas where none of the feared apocalyptic fears had taken place. Nevertheless, if the weather becomes warmer cold regions could rip numerous advantages that include less death toll, better health, and better living condition since the summer season is short in these regions. That alone contributes to a much shorter food growing and recreation season. Other than that, if there is call for action, there is none better than to exert more effort to come up with a concrete scientific proof in the place of the presumption that is prevalent now. What the existing finding avails for the world is there are concerned groups that are claiming that there is a global warming that is causing the sea level to rise and is contributing to the melting of the ice caps, which is the habitat of wildlife such as polar bears that are feared to become extinct in the beginning the year 2100. The other major concern is the reducing of the greenhouse gases, which has a very high price tag attached to it. The findings will have to lean fully on scientific findings that would require more funding and time, but the cost involved might not be equivalent to what businesses are fearing to incur in the coming few years simply to meet certain standards that are believed to contribute in controlling the emission of certain gases into the atmosphere. If the implemented measures are scientific it will be worth the effort, otherwise it will be a waste of resources. Currently, since there is no settled scientific proof there is a division in the public’s opinion where the number of people who do not believe in global warming is much higher, no matter how inundated they are by the media and environmental groups. This might have a serious effect simply because it is the same people who cannot be convinced about the pollution level that is prevalent who are responsible in various ways to add to the pollution problem. Educating them based on hypothesis will also make the job difficult because the message they would get from such effort would vary. Another problem cited was that the existing effort through the Kyoto Protocol is to bring down the emission level back to where it was in the 1990s a premise that does not make sense since there might not be an accurate measurement in place that shows what level the emission was before the 1990s. Such shortcomings highlight that the primary effort should focus on finding a settled scientific consensus and after that, the effort of popularizing a concept based on hypothesis might dwindle down. REFERENCE 1. Bailey, R. (2004, November). Two Sides of The global warming: Is It Proven Fact or Just Conventional Wisdom? Reason Magazine. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from http://www. reason. com/news/show/34939. html 2. UN Report, Global Warming Caused by Human Activity. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from www. newstarget. com/021565. html