Rising Sea Levels Why it is a Threat and the Proposed Solutions to Negate it Essay

In the search for answers to climate change, it is key to find a renewable energy source to
replace our key fossil fuel systems in place. Current fossil fuel systems are not only harmful to
the environment, they are not efficient and are attributed to a significant amount of deaths from
harm done to the air as well as direct accidents during production. Nuclear power is not only a
more reliable source than many other renewable energy sources, it is also far safer when it comes
to indirect and direct accidents. Nonetheless, many other energy sources have been experimented
and with and most either are either not as efficient or not implementable on as large a scale as
nuclear power. Nuclear power should be seen as a means to fill the void left by the growing
demand of energy. In order to meet the growing demand for sustainable energy, in the wake of
the impending danger of climate change, Nuclear Power would have to expand to make up 25%
of worldwide energy by 2050. Currently, nuclear power makes up 15.7% of worldwide
electricity so to achieve this goal, nuclear power production would need to triple on a global
scale (Worldwide Nuclear Association). The Harmony programme is a current global initiative
by the nuclear industry to provide a framework for action with a goal to remove key barriers in
the way of growth.
While the urgency to find an alternate energy source is more so than ever, the overall
need for electricity is also growing. Currently, only 1 out of 6 people in the world have access to
electricity (Worldwide Nuclear Association). Due to the growth of both the economy and
population, along with the rapid expansion of urbanization, there is no doubt there will be a
rapidly growing demand for energy. “The United Nations (UN) estimates that the world’s
population will grow from 7.6 billion in 2017 to 9.7 billion by 2050. The process of urbanisation
– which currently adds a city the size of Shanghai to the world’s urban population every four
months or so – will result in approximately two-thirds of the world’s people living in urban areas
by 2050 (up from 55% in 2018),” (Worldwide Nuclear Association). But not just any type of
energy, clean renewable energy as the goal is to meet this rapidly growing demand while
simultaneously reducing the harmful emissions of greenhouse gases. Nuclear power serves an
important role as it is safer but also more efficient than other energy sources. The first step to the
large scale implementation of nuclear energy is to moderately phase out fossil fuel. While there
are many frameworks that describe primary energy sources, the most referenced is done by the
IEA, “Among the most widely-referenced organisations in this regard is the IEA. Each year, the
IEA releases its World Energy Outlook (WEO 2019), setting out the current situation and
presenting a number of forward-looking scenarios,” (Worldwide Nuclear Association). This
work outlines multiple policies and methods to meet the demands it outlines. When put in
quantifiable terms, the WEO 2019 states that global energy demands would grow by at least 25%
by 2040. Now to meet these needs, assuming there will be no decrease in global GDP, energy
needs would double. To meet these demands, WEO outlines multiple policies and scenarios to
allow for the flexibility of changing times, ““The report’s ‘Current Policies Scenario’ considers
only policies firmly enacted at the time of writing, whilst the ‘New Policies Scenario’ – the
central scenario, renamed ‘Stated Policies Scenario’ in WEO 2019 – incorporates policies firmly
enacted as well as an assessment of the results likely to stem from announced policy intentions.
In each recent WEO report, a third scenario is included that starts with a vision of how and over
what timeframe the energy sector needs to change – primarily to decarbonise – and works back
to the present,” (Worldwide Nuclear Association).
Through these multiple scenarios, there are consistent factors. One factor that is
consistent through all scenarios is the reduction of fossil fuels. One way or another, the current
state dominated by fossil fuels must come to an end, “reduced modestly across the scenarios,
declining from 81% of total primary demand in 2018, to 74% in the Stated Policies Scenario and
58% in the Sustainable Development Scenario. Despite the relative decrease, the absolute
amount of energy consumed either directly or indirectly through the burning of fossil fuels
increases by 13% to 2040 in the Stated Policies Scenario, and decreases by just one-third in the
Sustainable Development Scenario. The proportion of final energy consumption that is in the
form of electricity increases from 19% in 2018, to 24% in the Stated Policies Scenario, and to
31% in the Sustainable Development Scenario,” (WEO 2019). Following these changes are the
changes in the means of production of electricity. Methods of shifting the primary energy source
are also outlined in each of the scenarios of the WEO, “In 2018, 64% of the electricity generated
globally was through the burning of fossil fuels. Whilst the Stated Policies Scenario sees this
figure reduced to 48% of the total, absolute electricity generation from fossil fuels increases
under the scenario by 16% to 2040. The Sustainable Development Scenario sees the fossil fuel
share of generation markedly reduced to just 21% of total generation by 2040, with absolute
generation less than half that in 2018,” (WEO 2019).
Currently, nuclear power is making up over 10% of worldwide electricity, but Nuclear
power’s full potential in meeting energy demands is not being taken advantage of. Nuclear
Power is especially suited for situations that require large-scale and reliable electricity demands.
Nuclear power is also fully acquitted and proven to be reliable and predictable making it perfect
to meet the demands of the rapid urbanization taking place (Worldwide Nuclear Association).
MIT published a massive two year study that showed the need for expanding Nuclear power
worldwide, but more importantly also outlined methods to achieve this. These methods included
ways to reduce the cost of building new nuclear capacity while also creating a level playing field
that would allow all low-carbon generation technologies to compete on their merits (MIT 2018).
The study found that “While a variety of low- or zero-carbon technologies can be employed in
various combinations, our analysis shows the potential contribution nuclear can make as a
dispatchable low-carbon technology. Without that contribution, the cost of achieving deep
decarbonisation targets increases significantly,” (MIT 2018). The study proposes three
recommendations to achieve this goal.
The first recommendation had to do with the construction of new nuclear power plants
and methods to make this process smoother, “An increased focus on using proven project/
construction management practices to increase the probability of success in the execution and
delivery of new nuclear power plants,” (MIT 2018).
The second recommendation has to do with the actual process of constructing nuclear
power plants, “A shift away from primarily field construction of cumbersome, highly sitedependent plants to more serial manufacturing of standardized plants,” (MIT 2018).
The next recommendation has to do with safety regulations and policies, “A shift toward
reactor designs that incorporate inherent and passive safety features,” (MIT 2018).
The fourth recommendation is dealing with creating decarbonization policies and creating
a level playing field for all technologies, “Decarbonization policies should create a level playing
field that allows all low-carbon generation technologies to compete on their merits,” (MIT 2018).
The fifth point is to make testing for new technologies easier, “Governments should
establish reactor sites where companies can deploy prototype reactors for testing and operation
oriented to regulatory licensing,” (MIT 2018).
The last recommendation posed a system of government programs, “) Governments
should establish funding programs around prototype testing and commercial deployment of
advanced reactor designs using four levers: (a) funding to share regulatory licensing costs, (b)
funding to share research and development costs, (c) funding for the achievement of specific
technical milestones, and (d) funding for production credits to reward successful demonstration
of new designs,” (MIT 2018).
Irene Hong (25765566)
Professor Sarah Hanson-Kegerreis
Writing 39C
23 February 2020
Rising Sea Levels: Why it is a Threat and the Proposed Solutions to Negate it
One of the serious dangers formed by climate change is rising sea levels. Coastal
communities, marine life, and life overall is steadily being impacted by the effects of rising sea
levels. Thermal expansion, melting glaciers, loss of Greenland and Antarctica’s ice sheets, and
greenhouse gases are all contributing to the increasing temperatures within the world’s waters.
National Geographic journalist Christina Nunez states a few of the major consequences from
rising sea levels involve “devasting effects on coastal habitats … [causing] destructive erosion,
wetland flooding, aquifer and agricultural soil contamination with salt, and lost habitat for fish,
birds, and plants.”. Nunez also explains that low-lying coastal areas are becoming so flooded that
people are already being forced to migrate to higher ground. While these effects are more
threatening to coastal communities and marine life, other consequences involve more dangerous
weather patterns, such as hurricanes and typhoons, and the loss of internet and telephone
services. The National Climate Assessment reports that since the early 1980’s “models, on
average, project an increase in the number of the strongest (Category 4 and 5) hurricanes.”. This
evidence is linked to how local sea surface temperature changes is one of the main causes for the
increase in life-threatening weather patterns. Kimberly Amadeo, a writer for thebalance.com
with 20 plus years of senior-level experience regarding economics and business strategies, states
that “by 2033, rising sea levels will flood 4,000 miles of fiber optic cables that deliver the
internet and telephone services.”. Amadeo reports that relocating the cables would only be
expensive and stalls time before they are inevitable destroyed. Because sea levels are constantly
rising, countries have come up with different solutions in order to negate the consequences as
much as possible. Some solutions include raising seawalls and lifestyle changes, from planting
more trees and other vegetation to eating less meat. The best proposed and seemingly easiest
solution, however, is to reduce as much carbon footprint as possible from the public and reduce
greenhouse gases from emitting countries.
Proposed Solution #1: Funding Seawalls
One of the proposed solutions to rising sea levels include seawalls. Seawalls are onshore
structures that prevent storm surges and waves from flooding the land, protecting roads, houses,
and other structures near the edge of the beach (e-education.psu.edu). While seawalls act as first
step in stopping higher tide waves, the proposed solution to raise seawalls is one that seems to be
the least effective, in terms of financial support and realistic outcomes. It is estimated to cost
around 416 billion dollars in the United States alone, with coastal states expected to pay at least
ten billion dollars each in the next twenty years (Holden). As the building cost of seawalls is
extremely expensive, another question emerges for the country; who will be responsible for
paying the high price?
One of the coastal states in danger from rising sea levels is Florida. Florida is estimated
to pay around 76 billion dollars for 9,243 miles of seawalls by 2040, currently all being funded
by taxpayers and property owners (climatecosts2040.org). With the path that Florida is going
down in order to prevent their communities from being flooded, budget cuts will have to be
made from local schools and expanding important services to the people, such as hospitals and
emergency services, will also be delayed. By 2048, an estimated 64,000 Florida homes will be
dealing with chronic flooding and Miami beach homes could pay up to 17 million dollars in
higher property taxes due to flooding by 2030 (Amadeo). This also impacts the local business of
Floridians, as property values will drop, forcing residents to vacate their homes, and floods will
ruin roads and critical infrastructure, leaving local business to rot (climatecosts2040.org).
Although seawalls are acting as a standalone barrier for both the people and land, the cost,
materials, and time needed to build more seawalls seems to be a temporary solution to an
inevitable problem that continues to be a threat. As seawalls are indeed a step in the right
direction and are important to keeping the people safe, it is safe to assume that a different
solution may be a better alternative to combating rising sea levels.
Proposed Solution #2: Planting More Trees and Reducing Deforestation
Another proposed solution to sea level rise is to plant more trees and reduce
deforestation. Trees and other vegetation absorb carbon dioxide (CO2) in our atmosphere,
cleaning the air and providing oxygen (treepeople.org). Deforestation aids climate change
because as more trees are being cut down, habitats, people, and the atmosphere are being
dramatically impacted. Richard Hilderman, a blogger for motherearthnews.com with a Ph.D. in
microbiology, notes deforestation causes severe flooding because “removal of [the] forest leaves
little vegetative cover to hold heavy rains … and will also trigger mudslides”. Sea levels rising
are also affecting the trees the world needs in order to combat climate change. A journalist for
climatechange.org, John Upton, reports that “the poison that kills the trees is salt, delivered to
their roots by rising tides.”. Dead trees point out the prehistoric changes in water levels to
scientists (Upton). Planting more trees and cutting down deforestation may aid in combating
climate change and reduce sea level rise; however, the reality of this proposed solution is a
process that will take time to take effect.
A scholarly article written by a team of scientists, Jean-Francois Bastin, Yelena Finegold,
et al., report that in order to mitigate climate change, a trillion new trees must be planted. They
argue that the restoration of trees prove to be the most effective strategy for combatting climate
change. Journalist Nikola Alexandre, however, argues that planting more trees will not
necessarily be the only step needed to stop climate change. While in theory it seems to be the
next logical step to combat climate change, 2.2 billion acres of land (roughly the size of China)
must be available to host the new trees. In addition to having enough land space to plant trees,
the cost of planting a tree is estimated to be around $3,000 per hectare (10,000 square meters).
With these barriers, governments are hesitant to fund large projects in order to plant more trees
and reduce deforestation. Some countries, such as Ethiopia and India, promise to plant an
upward of 570 million trees in total (Alexandre). While it may be another step in the right
direction, the logistics of planting a trillion trees in a short time span is shaky. Proper funding,
time, and land space must be provided in order to make a difference in rising sea levels and
climate change overall.
Proposed Solution #3: Reducing Greenhouse Gases from Emitting Countries and
Reducing Carbon Footprint from the Public
The main greenhouse gases (GHG) are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous
oxide (N20), and fluorinated gases (hydrofluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, etc.) as reported by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The concerning consequence from greenhouse gases
is the thinning of the atmosphere, leading to the warming of the Earth. A warmer Earth will most
likely lead to more evaporation and precipitation overall, and warmer oceans that will expand
due to thermal expansion (NASA). The seemingly best proposed solution is to reduce
greenhouse gases from emitting countries and for each individual person to take steps to lower
their carbon footprint. Renee Cho, a staff blogger for the Earth Institute of Columbia University
with a background in conservation and sustainability for environmental sustainability, informs
the public about easy ways to reduce carbon footprint. She reports the several ways to reduce
carbon footprint from eating less meat “(14.5 percent of manmade global greenhouse gas
emissions)” to “changing incandescent light bulbs to light emitting diodes” as incandescent light
bulbs “waste 90 percent of their energy as heat.”. She also includes some tips for the frequent
shopper, such as buying quality lasting clothes, using a reusable bag, and supporting companies
that are sustainable and environmentally responsible. A quick internet search can help to list
companies that are environmentally conscious and taking the proper steps to reduce their carbon
footprint. These seemingly small lifestyle changes can create a huge impact overall if people are
committed to taking the right steps to reduce their carbon footprint.
For emitting countries, the Paris Agreement was an environmental accord created in 2015
and signed by nearly every nation in 2016. Journalist Melissa Denchak reports that this
agreement provides aid for developing countries from developed countries in climate mitigation
and adaptation efforts, and commitments from all major emitting countries to cut their pollution
and to uphold these commitments into the future. Despite the proposed changes, journalist
Kieran Mulvaney reports “global carbon emissions increased 1.7 percent in 2017 … and 2.7
percent in 2018…”. Fossil fuels significantly impact water resources, leaving a dent in usable
freshwater. The public must uphold governments responsible and to encourage their
governments to take the proper steps to reduce emissions. With the combined help of the public
and their governments, global carbon emissions can be reduced.
While it may seem discouraging to see the increase in global carbon emissions, some
countries are taking the lead in reducing emissions. Morocco, for instance, reports “generating 42
percent of its electricity production from renewables by 2020, and 52 percent by 2030.”
(Mulvaney). It is also reported that Morocco has implemented the Noor Ouarzazate complex, the
world’s largest concentrated solar farm, covering an area size of 3,500 football fields and
generating enough electricity to power two cities the size of Marrakesh (Mulvaney). Morocco
may not be as large as other emitting countries but proves to take climate change seriously and
upholds its commitments. This shows that countries with less land space can still take steps to
negate carbon emissions through renewable energy sources and proper investments.
India is another country that leads as a global leader in renewable energy. India is
projected to generate “40 percent of its power through renewables by 2030” and may achieve
their target a decade early (Mulvaney). Although India is working on utilizing renewable energy,
its ‘National Energy Plan’ to build new coal-fired power plants can counter the positive effects
from using renewable energy. The easiest solution for countries to take seems to be to invest in
renewable energy instead of fossil fuels. Leading examples from several countries show that it is
possible to reduce the amount of global GHG with proper commitments and accountability.
Renewable energy can range from wind turbines to solar panel farms and provides many
benefits to both the Earth and its people. One major benefit is that these renewable energies
provide little to no amount of global warming emissions. The Union of Concerned Scientists
affirms that “increasing the supply of renewable energy would allow us to replace carbonintensive energy sources and significantly reduce US global warming emissions.”. The
organization also reports that “studies have repeatedly shown that renewable energy can provide
a significant share of future electricity needs, even after accounting for potential constraints.”.
This shows that enough renewable energy can make a difference in combatting climate change.
Another benefit from renewable energy sources is the improvement of public health. Coal and
natural gas plants emit air and water pollution that is linked to multiple health issues, such as
cancer, premature death, breathing problems, and neurological damage. Because renewable
energy sources that create little to no emissions, public health can be improved and provides an
increase in economic benefits such as stable energy prices and an increase in jobs (UCSUSA).
Renewable energy seems to be the best proposed solution in combating climate change and
provides health and economic benefits for the people.
Conclusion
Livable land and habitats are slowly being swallowed and poisoned by rising sea levels.
From the thinning of the atmosphere because of dying trees to an increase in global GHG
emissions, combatting climate change seems to be helpless. With the right information and steps,
however, countries have a chance of reducing the effects of climate change. The public can also
take daily steps to decrease their carbon footprint and make lifestyle changes to reduce wasted
energy. Trees, habitats, and life overall can be improved with the proposed solutions. While
rising sea levels is inevitable, the combined efforts of both the people and its governments can
slow the process and eventually lead to proper future investments that can handle the upcoming
tides.
Sources Cited
Alexandre, Nikola. “Reforestation Is Not Necessarily about Planting More Trees.” Climate
Change | Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 18 Jan. 2020,
www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/reforestation-necessarily-planting-trees
200116113657413.html.
Amadeo, Kimberly. “Rising Sea Level and What You Can Do About It.” The Balance, The
Balance, 1 Aug. 2019, www.thebalance.com/sea-level-rise-and-climate-change-4158037.
Bastin, Jean-Francois, et al. “The Global Tree Restoration Potential.” Science, vol. 365, no.
6448, Apr. 2019, pp. 76–79., doi:10.1126/science.aax0848.
“Benefits of Renewable Energy Use.” Union of Concerned Scientists,
www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy
use?gclid=Cj0KCQiA4sjyBRC5ARIsAEHsELFiFUsa_Co7CRhT_dVwQTrrLuPZsE5S
U6LKhOQM45wy3AUaLlecwaAmryEALw_wcB&utm_campaign=CE&utm_medium=
earch&utm_source=googlegrants.
Butler, Rhett A. “The Impact of Deforestation.” Mongabay, Mongabay, 9 Feb. 2020,
rainforests.mongabay.com/09-consequences-of-deforestation.html.
Cho, Renee. “The 35 Easiest Ways to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint.” State of the Planet,
26 Aug. 2019, blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2018/12/27/35-ways-reduce-carbon-footprint/.
“CILab: Greenhouse Gases Effect on Global Warming.” NASA, NASA, svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/20114.
Climate Costs in 2040, www.climatecosts2040.org/costs/florida.
Denchak, Melissa. “Paris Climate Agreement: Everything You Need to Know.” NRDC, 2 Dec.
2019, www.nrdc.org/stories/paris-climate-agreement-everything-you-need-know.
“Extreme Weather” National Climate Assessment, nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report
findings/extreme-weather.
Holden, Emily. “Seawalls to Protect US against Rising Oceans Could Cost $416bn by
2040.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 20 June 2019,
www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/20/us-rising-seas-defense-seawalls-cost
report.
Mulvaney, Kieran. “Climate Change Report Card: These Countries Are Reaching
Targets.” World Climate Change Report Card: These Countries Are Meeting Goals, 19
Sept. 2019, www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/climate-change-report
card-co2-emissions/.
Nunez, Christina. “Sea Level Rise, Explained.” Sea Level Rise, Facts and Information, 27 Feb.
2019, www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/#close
Ogden Publications, Inc. “The Effect of Deforestation on the Climate and Environment
Understanding Climate Change Blog.” Mother Earth News,
www.motherearthnews.com/nature-and-environment/the-effect-of-deforestation-on-the
climate-and-environment.
“Overview of Greenhouse Gases.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 11 Apr. 2019,
www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases.
“Seawalls.” Seawalls | Coastal Processes, Hazards, and Society, www.e
education.psu.edu/earth107/node/1062
“Top 22 Benefits of Trees.” TreePeople, 26 Jan. 2018, www.treepeople.org/tree-benefits.
Upton, John. “’Ghost Forests’ Appear As Rising Seas Kill Trees.” Climate Central, 15 Sept.
2016, www.climatecentral.org/news/ghost-forests-appear-as-rising-tides-kill-trees-20701.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment