[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Data shows warming eventually will shrink Great Lakes



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Gary Stock <gstock@net-link.net>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dave Dempsey wrote:
> 
> Global warming could lower water levels in Lake Michigan and Lake
> Huron by 5 feet over the next century, according to new data 
> generated for a United Nations study of climate change.
>
> http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-10/117069215385550.xml&coll=8


>From the article:

   A 5-foot drop in Lake Michigan water levels would widen beaches
   by about 100 feet, according to hydrologists at the U.S. Army 
   Corps of Engineers in Detroit...


Considering approximate total shoreline, in miles:

   Michigan   1,600
   Erie         870
   Huron      3,820
   Superior   2,800
   Ontario      720
             ------
              9,810 shoreline miles (much adjacent to Michigan)

At a width of 100 feet (let's save the bathymetric and geometric
subtleties for later), that means about 120,000 acres of "new land" to
come -- about 188 square miles -- the equivalent of five standard townships.


I think I asked most of the essential questions last summer:

> Would these areas be preserved?   If not all of them, which ones?

> Would these areas be granted building permits?  Perhaps, in 
> return for protecting equal expanses of quality habitat outside
> the historical lake boundaries?  Who will identify those 
> receiving zones?  
>
> Will wetland permits be required?  Will mitigation standards be
> applied?
>
> Would these areas be zoned for temporary uses only?  (For zoning
> purposes, many land uses that seem "permanent" are not:  for 
> example, legally, a gravel pit may be treated as a "temporary" use.)
>
> What kind of insurance will be required for building in a lake bed?
>
> Will the newly exposed thread of "dry" land around each lake be
> exploited as the least controversial location for major 
> transportation corridors?  No farms, no wetlands, no habitat,
> cheap through eminent domain... seems ideal to the folks who 
> want to push it through.  What about for a new airport?  What
> about for a new spaceport?
>
> As usual, I'm just pointing out options a decade or two before 
> "the system" gets into it.  Once the realization of potential 
> profits arises, it'll be too late to demand any meaningful
> decisionmaking...

I expect I'll need to send along reminders of these questions from time
to time, over the next decade or two...

GS

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Stock                                        gstock@unblinking.com
UnBlinking                                   http://www.unblinking.com/
Googlewhack                                 http://www.googlewhack.com/

     The best proof for a claim that terrorists are crazy or evil
     would be to acknowledge that the White House is full of them

==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================