Climate Change considerations on where to live?

[Montecfo]

They close Needles highway in the winter because they don't plow the roads. My favorite winter activity is parking our car at Sylvan Lake and walking up Needles highway. We like to have a picnic at the Needle formation or just past the tunnel. Blue skies, clean white snow on the ground, breathtaking scenery and absolutely no people. Heaven on earth : )

That sounds fantastic! Certainly a beautiful part of the world.

 

[tb001]

It’s an interesting question. We too approached the where to live with a big focus on the climate part and less on the change part. Mainly because most of what’s predicted with change is a worsening of what’s already happening to some extent now.

I was very interested in the SE US, for the warm weather and ocean/water proximity. Having grown up on the east coast, DH was adamantly against it because of hurricane and flooding worries.

So instead we’re in SoCA where the weather is great all but two months of the year in the summer. But the fire risk is high enough that we’ve had trouble getting insurance. We moved here two years ago and home owners insurance has nearly doubled in that time.

We were in prime overdue earthquake country before we moved and that definitely played into me wanting to leave the area. We’re now not in a high fault area, as far as we know, but ironically have felt more quakes here in the last two years than we did in 15 yrs in the Bay Area.

I grew up in tornado alley but living there, it wasn’t a big deal. Kind of like earthquakes feel in CA.

Personally, looking at all of the climate risks, I would take hurricanes in a heartbeat. You can somewhat control your exposure and you can see it coming and get out. You have adequate warning. Fires, earthquakes, tornadoes, etc... can all come up with zero warning.

 

[Oilcan]

But lakes do not have universally rising water levels. The oceans do, primarily due to ice melt in Greenland and Antarctica, as well as warming ocean water temperatures that makes the volume expand. Since all oceans are connected, the process is worldwide and universal.

Lakes, on the other hand, often suffer from evaporation losses due to higher ambient temperatures or improper water management of tributary rivers, which actually leads to shrinkage. Look at what's happening at the Dead Sea (actually a lake) which is nowadays living up to its name and really dying, or the Aral Sea which was a one of the largest lakes in Asia and has lost about 90% of its surface area in a mere 30 years. In the US, there are Lake Powell and to a lesser extent Lake Mead that are drying up rapidly and water levels have dropped about 100 ft from their earlier levels.

The latter ones are a real pity, they were my favorite boating places in the US because of their breathtaking scenic beauty, but they have now lost most of their charm.

Okay I'll admit upfront I'm ignorant and a total dummy when it comes to anything involving science.

That being said I always am hearing about climate change and global warming and with the earth getting warmer the ice melts, causing the oceans to rise.

However I remember doing an experiment where if you fill a glass with water to the rim and with ice cubes in it and freeze it, it will overflow. If you do the same thing and warm it up so the ice melts, the level will go down.

What am I misunderstanding and am I the only dummy here?

 

[Ronstar]

But lakes do not have universally rising water levels. The oceans do, primarily due to ice melt in Greenland and Antarctica, as well as warming ocean water temperatures that makes the volume expand. Since all oceans are connected, the process is worldwide and universal.

Lakes, on the other hand, often suffer from evaporation losses due to higher ambient temperatures or improper water management of tributary rivers, which actually leads to shrinkage. Look at what's happening at the Dead Sea (actually a lake) which is nowadays living up to its name and really dying, or the Aral Sea which was a one of the largest lakes in Asia and has lost about 90% of its surface area in a mere 30 years. In the US, there are Lake Powell and to a lesser extent Lake Mead that are drying up rapidly and water levels have dropped about 100 ft from their earlier levels.

The latter ones are a real pity, they were my favorite boating places in the US because of their breathtaking scenic beauty, but they have now lost most of their charm.

I understand how higher temperatures lead to more evaporation. I read some time ago that increased evaporation is at least partly responsible for Lake Powell and Lake Mead low water levels. Lake Powell was down approximately 110' the last time I was there. I read that there is some consideration to draining Lake Powell and storing the water in Lake Mead. This would lead to less evaporation overall due to less water surface area. I also read that experts may believe that Lake Powell has a leak.

But these instances are in stark contrast to Lake Michigan's high water issues. Lake Michigan is near a record high. It doesn't take much a storm for Lake Michigan to overflow across the lakeshore bike path and Chicago's Lake Shore Drive. I'm not suggesting that Lake Michigan is rising because of the same reasons that the oceans are rising.

Increased temperatures in the midwest apparently are responsible for increased summer rainfall, and responsible for current winter rainfall that used to be snow in past winters. Increased temperatures carry more water vapor than previous cooler temps, resulting in more heavy rainstorms. Thus the rising Lake Michigan.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...0200619-ntztvazvynf7bgbro3cgkp2diy-story.html

 

[USGrant1962]

Okay I'll admit upfront I'm ignorant and a total dummy when it comes to anything involving science.

That being said I always am hearing about climate change and global warming and with the earth getting warmer the ice melts, causing the oceans to rise.

However I remember doing an experiment where if you fill a glass with water to the rim and with ice cubes in it and freeze it, it will overflow. If you do the same thing and warm it up so the ice melts, the level will go down.

What am I misunderstanding and am I the only dummy here?

Only ice on land that melts contributes to sea level increases - so basically the Antarctic but not the Artic. And glaciers; but they have been receding since the last ice age about 10,000 years ago.

 

[Gumby]

Okay I'll admit upfront I'm ignorant and a total dummy when it comes to anything involving science.

That being said I always am hearing about climate change and global warming and with the earth getting warmer the ice melts, causing the oceans to rise.

However I remember doing an experiment where if you fill a glass with water to the rim and with ice cubes in it and freeze it, it will overflow. If you do the same thing and warm it up so the ice melts, the level will go down.

What am I misunderstanding and am I the only dummy here?

Unlike many substances, where the solid phase is more dense than the liquid phase, ice at 31.999 deg. is actually less dense than liquid water at 32.001 deg. (which is why ice floats in your glass). And a good thing too, else it would continually build up at the ocean floor and eventually cause the earth to turn into a giant ice ball. The problem is that the glaciers are on land right now, not in the ocean. If they melt into the ocean or slide off the land and float in the ocean, that raises water level because you are adding water that previously was not there. The same as putting ice in a glass of water - the level will go up.

Now, above the melting point of 32 deg. water becomes less dense as the temperature increases, like most substances. That means for the same amount of mass, it will occupy a greater volume. So, raising the average temperature of the ocean will cause its level to rise, even if the glaciers do not melt.

 

[Leo1277]

I understand how higher temperatures lead to more evaporation. I read some time ago that increased evaporation is at least partly responsible for Lake Powell and Lake Mead low water levels. Lake Powell was down approximately 110' the last time I was there. I read that there is some consideration to draining Lake Powell and storing the water in Lake Mead. This would lead to less evaporation overall due to less water surface area. I also read that experts may believe that Lake Powell has a leak.

But these instances are in stark contrast to Lake Michigan's high water issues. Lake Michigan is near a record high. It doesn't take much a storm for Lake Michigan to overflow across the lakeshore bike path and Chicago's Lake Shore Drive. I'm not suggesting that Lake Michigan is rising because of the same reasons that the oceans are rising.

Increased temperatures in the midwest apparently are responsible for increased summer rainfall, and responsible for current winter rainfall that used to be snow in past winters. Increased temperatures carry more water vapor than previous cooler temps, resulting in more heavy rainstorms. Thus the rising Lake Michigan.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...0200619-ntztvazvynf7bgbro3cgkp2diy-story.html

Thanks for the details about Lake Michigan; as a part time Michigander I go there often, but I somehow had missed this story. I guess it shows that local effects can have different consequences for different inland bodies of water. Let's just hope that the next years will bring less rain and the situation will stabilize, but in the long term this may indeed turn into a fundamental problem.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

One thing to keep in mind about water levels and property elevation is not just the possibility of flooding but also erosion. A number of water front houses where I grew up were high up above the water level but ended up being condemned due to waves eroding the cliffs below. The same thing is happening here in California in some locations. A study from UC San Diego found almost half of the coastline in California is vulnerable to erosion.

 

[jebmke]

Not all of the “Upper East Coast“ is created equal. Looking at historical storm paths Last night - In the past 150 years no hurricane has made (First) landfall in Virginia or Maryland. The storms that impact both states make landfall further south as they tend to move in a NE direction. Storms weaken as they move 1) north and 2) over land. Only one category 3 storm Recorded in this Time period. Believe that Hit the Outer Banks and went over Virginia Beach, then back out to sea. Carolina’s, Delaware, and New Jersey However do get direct hits due to geography.

The dangerous side of the hurricane is the eastern side. Isabel ran up west of the Chesapeake Bay (so the bay was on the east side of the storm) but the circulation shoved so much water up the bay that it swamped a lot of the bay coast.

 

[Out-to-Lunch]

I understand how higher temperatures lead to more evaporation. I read some time ago that increased evaporation is at least partly responsible for Lake Powell and Lake Mead low water levels. Lake Powell was down approximately 110' the last time I was there. I read that there is some consideration to draining Lake Powell and storing the water in Lake Mead. This would lead to less evaporation overall due to less water surface area. I also read that experts may believe that Lake Powell has a leak.

But these instances are in stark contrast to Lake Michigan's high water issues. Lake Michigan is near a record high. It doesn't take much a storm for Lake Michigan to overflow across the lakeshore bike path and Chicago's Lake Shore Drive. I'm not suggesting that Lake Michigan is rising because of the same reasons that the oceans are rising.

Increased temperatures in the midwest apparently are responsible for increased summer rainfall, and responsible for current winter rainfall that used to be snow in past winters. Increased temperatures carry more water vapor than previous cooler temps, resulting in more heavy rainstorms. Thus the rising Lake Michigan.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...0200619-ntztvazvynf7bgbro3cgkp2diy-story.html

It may be worth noting that a mere 7 years ago, Lake Michigan/Huron was at a record LOW. IMHO, 7 years is an awfully short time to go from record lows to record highs. As I said in my first post (and, I think, you tacitly acknowledged), these climate-change effects can work both ways.

 

[Canoeboy]

The dangerous side of the hurricane is the eastern side. Isabel ran up west of the Chesapeake Bay (so the bay was on the east side of the storm) but the circulation shoved so much water up the bay that it swamped a lot of the bay coast.

Agree, primary concern for most of coastal Bay Area of Virginia is flooding due to storm surge, not structural wind damage. Wind does however knock out power quite frequently. The locals often point out to me where high water came to on their properties During Isabel.

At 60’ elevation I’m comfortable that storm surge will not be an issue for me Despite living on the Middle Peninsula sticking into the Chesapeake. About a hundred feet east of me the elevation drops to around 10 feet. Maybe I’ll be able to walk to the beach in my old age!

 

[Montecfo]

Agree, primary concern for most of coastal Bay Area of Virginia is flooding due to storm surge, not structural wind damage. Wind does however knock out power quite frequently. The locals often point out to me where high water came to on their properties During Isabel.

At 60’ elevation I’m comfortable that storm surge will not be an issue for me Despite living on the Middle Peninsula sticking into the Chesapeake. About a hundred feet east of me the elevation drops to around 10 feet. Maybe I’ll be able to walk to the beach in my old age!

Lots of low lying areas in DC metro that flood during heavy rains. Isabel was a Cat 2 when it hit. Lots of rain but otherwise pretty mild as hurricanes go. I recall going to a college football game in Blacksburg after it hit. Rained steadily the entire game but that was pretty much it. Next day was beautiful.

 

[Rianne]

I live in the Black Hills of South Dakota. We are definitely at risk for forest fires, esp after the pine beetle moved through. But I feel fortunate that the BHNF fire managers are pretty aggressive about fire management, including prescribed burns, clearing etc. The state also has a nice incentive for private land owners, a reduction in your property taxes if you thin your trees ( it requires a certain amount of acreage to be involved). Our neighbors just went through the process. We own 40 acres and will be applying next year.

I like the winters here. Granted, I lived in Alaska and loved it there too. Spent the first 30 years of my life in Florida but couldn't wait to get out. Hate heat and humidity. Spent 9 months in Seattle area and hated the 9 months of no sun and constant rain. Everybody has different ideas of what constitutes ideal weather! I feel like South Dakota offers the perfect mix for me. We might get cold (It's gets colder in the Eastern part of our state. It's not so bad where we are) and snow but it is pretty sunny even through the winter. As a matter of fact, we are completley off grid with solar, no poles with electrical lines to our house.

I discovered as long as I have sunshine on my face, I'm happy. Even if it is 20 degrees F outside.

You've got me daydreaming about moving to South Dakota. I loved the Michigan winters when we lived there. Snow combined with sun is one of the most beautiful pictures I can think of. Give me 15 degrees, snow and sunshine and I've got 5 layers of clothes on and a long long walk planned for the day.

 

[Bamaman]

About the only tangible proof of cyclical changes in the Mid South is the lack of snow. While we used to get 2 good snows on average, now we're in an ice belt--seldom any snow more than a dusting.

Some years are hotter and wetter than others. The rains were really often from October, 2019 until May, 2020, but then they came and went. Then about July, things went dry and the local cotton & corn crops are going to be just average.

The Deep South remains a hot place in Summers, but we're fortunate to have 4 distinct seasons. All our homes are well air conditioned, and we're glad to live with it.

 

[Rustic23]

Central states have tornados, western states have earthquakes, the largest quake in the U.S. was the Madras quake, think Saint Louis and New York, the North has blizzards, just about everywhere has floods, the south and east coast have hurricanes and most of the pacific states have fires. And, where we live in Texas we have wet heat! Climate change over the next 20 years will have little or no effect on me, and I would not worry about it when choosing a place to retire! But if you can't stand the freakish weather possibilities, don't retire there.

 

[Dawg52]

Not sure if it's climate change related or not but we sure are having nice Fall type weather in central MS today. Sixty nine at this moment and suppose to be mid 70's most of next week.

 

[Montecfo]

Not sure if it's climate change related or not but we sure are having nice Fall type weather in central MS today. Sixty nine at this moment and suppose to be mid 70's most of next week.

Sure. Any change in weather may be attributed to climate change, which has a great deal of explanatory power. Higher or lower temps, more rain or less, flooding or drought have all been attributed to it.

 

[audreyh1]

I think it’s called a cold front. LOL! More common in the fall, winter and spring.

We are enjoying one too today in central GA. This morning was the first day in months we had to wear jackets during our walk. It’s supposed to get down into the 50s tonight! Brrrrr!

 

[Leo1277]

You've got me daydreaming about moving to South Dakota. I loved the Michigan winters when we lived there. Snow combined with sun is one of the most beautiful pictures I can think of. Give me 15 degrees, snow and sunshine and I've got 5 layers of clothes on and a long long walk planned for the day.

I wonder where in Michigan that could have been - lower Michigan where I spent way too many winters ranks just behind Seattle as the cloudiest place in the US, especially the central and western portion. You can go from November right to May without ever seeing the sun, it is prime SAD country.

After too much of this, combined with the weather in Europe where I grew up, I am now a strong believer in Florida with its abundant winter sunshine and gorgeous weather. I even like it in the summer, at least the SE is cooler than most of the traditional South and even all the way up to about St Louis - Indianapolis because of the ocean breezes.

 

[Dtail]

I think it’s called a cold front. LOL! More common in the fall, winter and spring.

We are enjoying one too today in central GA. This morning was the first day in months we had to wear jackets during our walk. It’s supposed to get down into the 50s tonight! Brrrrr!

Yeah we have our "cold" front hitting Monday with high temps all the way down to 84.

 

[audreyh1]

Mid 80s highs sound great!

 

[timo2]

I understand how higher temperatures lead to more evaporation. I read some time ago that increased evaporation is at least partly responsible for Lake Powell and Lake Mead low water levels. Lake Powell was down approximately 110' the last time I was there. I read that there is some consideration to draining Lake Powell and storing the water in Lake Mead. This would lead to less evaporation overall due to less water surface area. I also read that experts may believe that Lake Powell has a leak.

But these instances are in stark contrast to Lake Michigan's high water issues. Lake Michigan is near a record high. It doesn't take much a storm for Lake Michigan to overflow across the lakeshore bike path and Chicago's Lake Shore Drive. I'm not suggesting that Lake Michigan is rising because of the same reasons that the oceans are rising.

[/url]

So can we get a pipeline to run that Lake Michigan water down to the Colorado River?

 

[Ronstar]

So can we get a pipeline to run that Lake Michigan water down to the Colorado River?

Sure, as long as Chicago and suburbs can draw their 1 billion gallons per day first.

 

[PartIrish]

Having spent most of my life in Arizona, and watching it get hotter and drier over the past 20 years, I began researching those changes in earnest rather than relying on my anecdotal sense of change. Using NOAA/National Weather Service data, I created a spreadsheet of the number of days of 100-degrees or higher temperatures over two 20-year spans--one in the late 1950s-1970s and the other over the past 20 years. The results were shocking. In the earlier period, my city averaged 35 days per year of temps 100 or higher. In the most recent 20-year period, that figure was 68 days--nearly double. In addition, the traditional summer monsoon rains that used to deliver reliable summer relief from the heat have mostly been a bust over the last 20 years.

This research led to our decision to sell our large home in the desert and move to the PNW. I think water will become an increasing problem in the SW, and I don't want to be heavily invested in housing there in the long term. We did purchase a smaller townhouse to use for a few month every winter, but we will revisit that decision every couple of years to determine whether to keep it. Our PNW house is coastal (near Puget Sound) but at 400 feet elevation, so sea change is unlikely to affect it. Wildfire risk is considered low to moderate in our area, but we will keep an eye on it.

 

[REWahoo]

Our PNW house is coastal (near Puget Sound) but at 400 feet elevation, so sea change is unlikely to affect it.

Out of the frying pan, into the Cascadia Subduction Zone?

How bad would a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake be for the Pacific Northwest?

Executive Summary: Bad, very bad.