Too HOT and NO water - Where to live in the coming decades!

Go down

Too HOT and NO water - Where to live in the coming decades!

Post by  on Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:36 pm

Where should you live in the coming decades? With feedback amplification global warming is accelerating at an ALARMING pace. Basically you need to live where there is enough water to support crops, and not too much heat that can wither and kill agriculture.

Here are the MAPS. Everything in RED is basically game over:

Lack of Water:

Too HOT:

So far these are the rates of warming by state
. Remember a mountainous part of a state with
some elevation will not warm as much as a valley, so this is an average.
Also Florida which is already hot is not much hotter, but Arizona is baking in drought and no longer sustainable. Vermont will not be a baking desert like AZ, but the below zero temps in the winter are a thing of the past. You have to look closely at what that means in the state you choose to live in!

Here are the 10 fastest-warming states since 1970:
1 Arizona (0.639°F per decade)
2 Michigan (0.622°F)
3 Minnesota (0.620°F)
4 Wisconsin (0.616°F)
5 Vermont (0.607°F)
6 New Mexico (0.603°F)
7 Utah (0.588°F)
8 Maine (0.587°F)
9 Texas (0.575°F)
10 Massachusetts (0.568°F)

And here are the 10 slowest-warming states in that time:
39 Missouri (0.318°F)
40 Washington (0.318°F)
41 California (0.314°F)
42 Iowa (0.310°F)
43 Georgia (0.307°F)
44 South Carolina (0.292°F)
45 Oregon (0.277°F)
46 Alabama (0.275°F)
47 Nebraska (0.268°F)
48 Florida (0.246°F)

Another Map projecting temperature rise across the the lower 48

A compelling report:

Another EXCELLENT report citing Appalachia as a climate refuge:

Another Opinion

Northern California (north of the central valley), Western Oregon, and Western Washington will also be ok .
These areas currently enjoy relatively mild summertime temperatures,
and cold (but not brutal) winters. If current projections are accurate,
temperatures in this region may increase by approximately 5 degrees
Celsius during the coming 25-50 years: growing seasons will be a bit
longer, and the adequate water resources should still be sufficient
(unless increasing quantities of water are diverted southward).
(A very important comment about the above answer and a truly BEST place to live during global warming is cited below)
In all reality, there will be no truly stable areas sustainable for
large communities located on continental land masses. As the global
system absorbs more energy, the thermal highs and lows in a given area
will become far more prominent, areas such as northern California and up
into Southern Washington will experience on average a bit higher temp
but on the temperature swings they will experience extreme cold snaps
and extreme heat waves also, thus destroying much of the growing seasons
with the extreme weather swings. Perhaps upon the continents a region
such as northern California up into Washington may be "better" than
other continental regions, but it certainly is not the "Best" place to
be on our planet, not by a long shot.
Keep in mind we are dealing
with gases (air), liquids (H20, water), solids (soils) and finally…
radiant energy (sunshine). We are really talking about a system that is
being charged with more radiant energy than is familiarly normal and in
this case we've an outcome that equals additional heat. We need to
consider heat based systems, thermal absorption and transfer. A
continental environment does not represent the best of all places to be
during such an event. Not by a long shot.
Continental environments
contain more solids (soils) and solids are not thermal transfer friendly
as they are really considered thermal insulators. The two best mediums
for thermal transfer are found in one particular condition of matter -
fluids. Of fluids, liquids (like water/H2O) are far better at
transferring thermal energy compared to the other form in the state of
gases (air/our atmosphere).
The ocean plays the biggest role in
keeping a stable global temperature. Without it… we'd all be dead very
quickly. Thus the answer lays in the most responsible product for
keeping global thermal stability; the ocean. Obviously we cannot live in
the ocean without a submersible structure, but, we can certainly
surround ourselves by it upon natural land masses. The more ocean and
deep water you can get around you with a substantial island under your
feet and the closer you can get to one of the two tropic latitudes, the
better off you're going to be.
The BEST place to be located is upon
the larger remote Islands within the deep oceans near the equator or
even better situated near the tropic lines. Hawaii is a prime example as
to why such remote islands will weather best for their human
inhabitance. The surrounding ocean and its surface water temperatures
will help tremendously in stabilizing the lower elevation atmospheric
temperatures within comfortable levels. Consider Florida for example,
with temperatures that often reach 100F+ while at a latitude further
north than Hawaii. Where Hawaii experiences extremely stable year round
temperatures in the 80's near ocean elevations all the while being
situated far closer to the equator where the atmosphere should
theoretically be hotter than Florida. Florida is surrounded by vast
shoal (shallow) waters and therein lays the dilemma.
These perfect
conditions in Hawaii are due to several factors. Hawaii experiences more
moderate and stable temperatures because it is fully surrounded by deep
remote ocean waters and because it has a near stable exposure to the
sun all year round. The deep waters mix with the warmer surface waters
of the sun about the island effectively cooling the warmer waters and
keeping the island cooler during the day in the sunshine. Whereas during
the evening the warmed surface waters continue to heat the lower
elevation atmosphere via evaporation keeping the air moderately warm
during the evenings. Thus Hawaii has a near perfect natural thermal
control system built into its environment that fits human needs to near
perfection, whereas no such place can be found in a continental
Hawaii has two fairly stable factors, a near stable
solar exposure and a stable deep ocean temperature. The surface waters
about the island are locked between two opposites in energy absorption
and transmission and we've a greater mass (water) in fluid dynamics to
consider. The averaged outcome is experienced and enjoyed by the lower
elevation inhabitance of the island. Global warming will have less
influence on the temperatures in Hawaii and far greater influence on
continental land masses. Hurricanes/Typhoons may become more prevalent
in Hawaii but none the less, because of its remote location, such storms
will always be less likely an extreme threat comparatively to the
extremes that will be manifest on and around the continental
Granted things such as reefs may experience some
magnitude of demise, but the growth of food on land and such will always
be safer and yield far greater variety of crops on an island such as
Hawaii vs. a continental region in a global warming trend.

If you move to Hawaii be prepared for extremely high cost of living and you may wind up living in the rain forest eating bananas & Poi!

Join date : 1969-12-31

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum