That image is misleading, of course. The sea levels are rising each year and some island nations may vanish in about 50 years. Well, that assumes they don't find ways to counteract the rising seas. I wonder if some of these islands could not raise high berms or dykes to protect them against the seas. Of course, that assumes man can build a wall strong enough to keep out the entire ocean. But if the Netherlands can do it then why not other nations?
On the other hand, the greatest threat to mankind may come from the storms that are forming over warm oceans. These storms create havoc on land. They destroy beaches, inundate freshwater coastal systems with sea water, and destroy thousands of homes. In countries like the United States where people can buy insurance or turn to the government for help, a few storms per year may not seem bad. But in poor nations where people lived in crowded poverty-stricken neighborhoods, they won't have much help when their homes are wiped away by floods and rising tides.
Here in the United States we have to make some decisions for our future generations. The Oklahoma dust bowl of the 1930s may return simply because of shifting rain patterns. The first dust bowl was created by bad farming practices. President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed a smart scientist to pioneer modern farming techniques, such as planting rows of trees between plowed fields to act as wind breaks. Will we be lucky enough to find another agricultural guru who will restore the American plains to their former health?
Rain patterns change for very complicated reasons. What I find alarming is that settlement patterns are not following the rain patterns. The western United States is, by and large, expected to grow warmer and dryer over the next few decades. The problem is so drastic at this stage that California is investing in water reclamation technologies on an unbelievable scale. 40 years ago they were considered too expensive. Now they are considered to be indispensable.
And yet people continue to move to California. I'm not sure why. Housing shortages in the San Francisco Bay Area have made it nearly impossible for anyone who isn't a Ph.D. employed by a technology company to live west of the bay. And the neighborhoods on the east side have become more expensive over the past few years. If you earn $300,000 a year in some parts of California you cannot afford a mortgage.
In my opinion, the next apocalypse will begin with changes in our economy. People won't be able to keep up with changes in demand for skilled laborers. They won't be able to find jobs to support their families at the levels of comfort several generations of Americans have known. This means people will have to compromise on housing, schooling, and transportation. And that means they will have to find new places to live (and work).
That means we should be looking for good places to live now, before we need them. These could be small towns with access to adequate water supplies and highways. It's still possible to live 20-30 minutes from work and commute, but you may have to compromise on which side of the major metropolitan area you move to. On the other hand, maybe as more people earn a living over the Internet they'll be able to move out to the countryside and dispense with the big city life. That was always the American dream anyway, was it not?
So find yourself a plot of land where you can raise your own vegetables. Install some solar panels and wind turbines to generate your own electricity. Set up a water recycling station so you don't have to worry too much about drought. And plant some trees around the landscape so you have something beautiful to look at, help pull carbon out of the atmosphere, and have some wood to burn when things get really bad.
The more self-sustaining we become in terms of our lifestyles the less dependent we'll be if there is an economic breakdown. Imagine living in a world devastated by a mysterious alien invasion. All the cities are destroyed and all the factories shut down. But all the people living in the countryside are fine. What would you need to survive out there, assuming the aliens leave you alone? That's a mental exercise, not a prognostication.
I think we'll be fine overall because we have plenty of land. Some countries won't be so fortunate. Central African nations that have rich, lush jungles should do fine, too. Nations that border on the dry Sahara desert will struggle to feed themselves. They need water. Maybe a new water-based economy will develop where nations rich in water resources sell billions of barrels of water to other nations (via pipelines). The great news about a water pipeline is that if it breaks it's just fresh water. There won't be much environmental damage.
But if living close to an ocean is dangerous then so is living close to a river. In fact, we have learned from numerous flood events along the Ohio and Mississippi rivers that people who live in flood zones can be just as vulnerable to a few rain storms as people living along the coast are vulnerable to great ocean storms. Maybe we should develop land use policies that restrict settlement by rivers so that they can naturally flood their banks and rebuild the ancient ecologies we have all but destroyed.
By pushing communities deeper inland we'll create new jobs to build new infrastructure. These jobs could be designed to maintain sustainable infrastructure after it is built. Local communities may have to appeal to state and regional governments for permission to shift their boundaries, but it will be worthwhile if we all agree that building for a long-term future is less expensive than rebuilding flooded towns over and over again.
Families can avoid last-minute emergency relocation decisions by choosing inland communities for their next homes. There are many to choose from, and many that would be grateful for the new tax revenues and neighbors. If you can work from home then why not buy a home that is less expensive, easier to maintain, and which has a longer-term future than a home in a crowded coastal city?
