I've wondered how the seashore would change. Here's a partial description: This would be if all the pole ice melted, an unreal scenario. The text description has disappeared on me, sorry. Thank you, old laptop! Frank
Great map! I suppose the moral is, don't sign a 99 year lease in any of those cities! I'd like to see a map of the north pacific coastline during the last ice-age maximum when ocean levels were 400 feet lower than at present. If I were looking for evidence of early americans, I'd look along the beaches at that level.
From memory... if all ice melted, it would raise sea levels about 250' above current levels. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/m...ew-shoreline-maps/#/ice-melt-globe-opener.jpg Not sure if this is the future as everything I have read suggests sea level rise of 20' possible over the next 200 years. Here is a fun map for different heights, up to 60 meters (197'). http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/
So why if you fill a glass or jug with water then add ice till it overflows then leave it , no more overflows the level actually goes down, only the ice above sea level will add to the oceans volume but as over 90% of an iceberg's volume (and mass) is underwater see how much of a floating substance lies below the surface of fresh water : the fraction is equal to that substance's mass density in g/cm³. ... BECAUSE the ice structure takes up more volume than the liquid water molecules, hence ice is less dense than liquid water. What is the exact change in volume of the water when it freezes as ice? Example: Calculate the volume in a 100 g ice cube with a density of 0.92 g per mL. Don't worry about ice melting ... worry about air pollution ... and the Bee population ...
10 percent of the ice floating in the sea would only cancel itself out. However, vast amounts of ice are not floating in the sea. Therefore in your glass example, adding more ice cubes would indeed overflow the glass.
You would have to quantify 'vast amounts' and if we are saying that 'ALL ICE EVERYWHERE' were to melt then that would apply but in popular analysis people are usually referring to the polar regions only in which case my point stands ... ice above a certain height would still be there.
There is a very large part of Antarctica above sea level with ice on top of it, as in millions of square miles.
No, but it does prove the point that oceans will not remain static as you suggested due to all ice floating in the ocean, but actually rise due to some melting of Antarctic ice and Greenland's ice, which is NOT floating in the ocean.
Yes I agree that they will rise due to what you say but I don't think it is as threatening as some believe whereas if we loose our Bee population there wont be anyone around to get wet At present, the honeybee population in the United States is less than half of what it was at the end of World War II. This past winter, 23.2 percent of America's managed honeybee colonies were lost. The figures were worse during the year prior, bees are dying at a disturbing rate, and something needs to change. The US government has stated that bees are now dying at an economically unsustainable rate. Indeed, in the United States alone, bees contribute to $15 billion in crop value. Without them, agriculture as we know it would collapse. It sure has been good chatting with you on such an important issue.
As the topic seems to be about sea level rise, I am glad to hear we can agree. As to bees, that could be the topic of another thread you might wish to start, imo.