English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

u know when u get a glass in water and then turn it upside down. then all the water is kept in by this vacum.....well in theory we could do this on a bigger scale and do it numerous times in different places all over the world and in effect water levals would drop! only problem is lifting that kinda weight. other than that it should work..right?

2007-08-06 00:21:50 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment Global Warming

14 answers

For God's sake don't give up your full-time job ! - !

2007-08-06 00:46:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

The problem is one of scale. Amancalledchuda (above) has done the math which illustrates the size of the task in hand.

Other people have put forward other ideas for lowering the sea level and in each case the problem is scale. So far the only vaguely feasible option is one to pump sea water onto the Antarctic interior where it would freeze on contact and remain as ice for many thousands of years.

The problem can be illustrated by looking at the amount of ice that melts each year. In 2006 there was a net loss of 882 cubic kilometres of ice, that works out to be 123 tons for every person on the planet.

These ideas only address the issue of rising sea levels, there are of course many other consequences which, in the short term at least, are more devastating.

Sea levels are currently rising by an average of 3mm a year and the rate is accelerating. By the year 2100 sea levels are expected to have risen by about 750mm. In a few places we can build defences to protect low lying communities, in most places we can't and the only viable solution will be the migration of people to higher land. About 200 million people will be forced to move.

Rather than addressing the single issue of sea level rises it may be better to treat the cause - greenhouse gas emissions. Perhaps a better solution would be to expand existing technologies and so remove surplus greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

2007-08-06 12:19:02 · answer #2 · answered by Trevor 7 · 0 2

Rising water levels are not the only possible threat that "global warming" predicts. In fact if global warming is real and continues water will become a problem in at least two ways... The ocean levels will rise.(the problem everyone talks about, but really isn't that huge of a problem, not like the water is gonna rise all at once and flood cities) The 2nd problem is fresh water for drinking will become more scarce which is a much worse problem.

Your solution wouldn't really help either of those problems. And where are you gonna get the giant glass, and how would you support it?

2007-08-06 09:05:29 · answer #3 · answered by Eric 3 · 2 1

It’s a nice idea in theory, but the problem with it is one of scale. You’re not taking into account just how BIG the oceans are. They cover 140 MILLION square miles.

I’ve just done a few quick calculations on what it would take to change the sea level by one single inch… If you were to build a “cup” 10 miles square, i.e. so that it covered 100 square miles of ocean, you would need to lift it over 22 MILES into the sky to lower sea level by a single inch.

Obviously, we’d use many smaller versions, but then your problem is resources. I doubt that there’s enough metal in all the world to build the millions of cups we’d need. Certainly, the cost of doing this would far, far outweigh the cost of simply letting the sea level rise happen and dealing with the results.

So, a nice idea, but…

2007-08-06 10:22:24 · answer #4 · answered by amancalledchuda 4 · 2 2

Energy and work as defined in physics would be equivalent to simply pumping water into one or several continents to create inland seas. Materials wise, the inland seas would be cheaper.

But you have to ask the question, "Why?" Sea level rise over the next 100 years will likely be slower than any period of warming since the last ice age. As amancalledchuck said, it would be cheaper dealing with the consequences.

2007-08-06 10:49:31 · answer #5 · answered by 3DM 5 · 3 1

How exactly would lowering world water levels help solve global warming?

2007-08-06 10:54:20 · answer #6 · answered by ML 2 · 1 0

Have you ever seen the ocean? It is pretty big.

Here is an idea: iron fertilization of the oceans. Promotes plankton growth, which sequesters CO2, increases albedo, and helps increase fish populations, too.

2007-08-06 11:01:05 · answer #7 · answered by freedom_vs_slavery 3 · 2 0

Nope

2007-08-06 17:03:42 · answer #8 · answered by Blue F 2 · 0 0

By George, I think you've solved the dilemma! Let's get the UN on the phone right now, contact CNN and set up a news conference!

2007-08-06 10:20:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Keep taking the drugs

2007-08-06 08:44:26 · answer #10 · answered by Bob the Boat 6 · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers