Investing in cheap ocean front real-estate

[cheap]

Clearly anyone with beach front property is at risk, so I am willing to get you out of the mess you're in, as a sign of good faith and generosity I am willing to pay you each $1 for your soon to be worthless property.

http://www.news.com.au/national/clim...-1227061439094

Climate Council report predicts rising sea levels will cause $200 billion of damage to coastal infrastructure by 2100

THE Gold Coast would lose its beaches. Sydney’s Opera House would flood every day instead of every 100 years. And 48,000 Victorian homes would be swallowed. All by the end of the century.

They’re the predictions in the latest report by the Climate Council, which assesses the nation’s vulnerability to rising sea levels by 2100.

The report Counting the Costs: Climate Change and Coastal Flooding, warns that more than half the Australian coastline is vulnerable to recession from the rising ocean, with 80 per cent of the Victorian coast and 62 per cent of the Queensland coast at risk.

Authors of the report suggest the Gold Coast, which hosts over 11 million visitors a year could be the hardest hit.

The beach is one of the main drawcards for visitors and as sea levels rise, there is no opportunity for the beach to move landwards because of the adjacent high-rise developments.

Rising sea levels would also cause headaches for Sydney, with today’s one-in-100-year flood to occur every day or so by 2100.

And all of these consequences would come at a cost.

The report says that more than $200 billion of Australia’s coastal infrastructure is at risk if the worst-case scenario for sea level rises comes true.

There would be damage to roads, rail lines, hospitals, commercial properties, homes, ports and power stations with a 1.1 metre sea rise by the end of the century.

The council, which replaced the Climate Commission abolished by the Abbott Government, predicts sea levels will rise by between 40cm and a metre by 2100.
However, it says a 1.1 metre increase is not out of the question, an outcome that would put $226 billion in infrastructure at risk of inundation.

Almost 250,000 homes were at risk of the worst-case sea level rise, along thousands of commercial buildings, 75 hospitals, five power stations, 120 ports and up to 35,000km of roads and rail lines.

Report author Professor Will Steffen urged Australia to cut its greenhouse gas emissions, saying failure to do so would be “extremely painful and expensive”.

“The potential threats to Australia, where the majority of us live on the coast are disproportionately large,” he said in a statement.

“We’re talking about the loss of beaches, property, infrastructure and commercial assets worth billions to our economy.”

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by cheap

Clearly anyone with beach front property is at risk, so I am willing to get you out of the mess you're in, as a sign of good faith and generosity I am willing to pay you each $1 for your soon to be worthless property.

Not a problem, Graeme Connors has the problem solved.

Have a listen to "A beach house in the Blue Mountains"

[GREGL]

In a little place called Wooli on the coast eat of Grafton the locals had a petition going along the lines of "save wooli ". This little beachside hamlet is for the majority built on a peninsular between a beach and a river of which maybe 5 to 10 K's is only maybe 300 mtrs wide tapering to the river mouth.
Now this area is where all the valuable real estate is. The problem developed when council came to the decision not to put any more money into erosion protection, with some EXPERT predicting the sea would break through in 50 YEARS time.
As you can imagine a slight price correction happened, suddenly the market was inundated with property at never before seen prices, for all of 12 mths or so! Now it appears back to it's pre hysteria levels.
It all sounds a bit 1984 to me. Personally I am more worried about what people are going to eat after our water table has been destroyed by raping the land with CSG mining.

[Franco Cozzo]

At the end of the day, if we don't look after the planet its going to kill us all eventually.

Might not be in Gen X/Y/Z's lifetime but the people who are born in 2050 or there abouts will see some serious side effects if we keep on doing what we are and don't make any changes.

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

At the end of the day, if we don't look after the planet its going to kill us all eventually.

Might not be in Gen X/Y/Z's lifetime but the people who are born in 2050 or there abouts will see some serious side effects if we keep on doing what we are and don't make any changes.

exactly

too much relying on Professor Google by people these days

we used to rely on real experts like scientists/CSIRO but certain politicians and their shock jock mates can now produce a seemingly convincing case against anything these days, hence why we have 'climate sceptics'.
Seems a game to ridicule others with random 'facts' from the net rather than respecting years of study and science that show we are facing a huge problem.

[cheap]

Originally Posted by xxx000

exactly

too much relying on Professor Google by people these days

we used to rely on real experts like scientists/CSIRO but certain politicians and their shock jock mates can now produce a seemingly convincing case against anything these days, hence why we have 'climate sceptics'.
Seems a game to ridicule others with random 'facts' from the net rather than respecting years of study and science that show we are facing a huge problem.

Of course the same scientists don't seem to have a very good track record in getting the Armageddon scenarios right, instead of termeratures rising we have have temperatures which have paused for years, sea ice which entraps scientists who were sailing to Antarctica to prove the sea ice had melted, ice sheets bigger that ever, rain never filling our dams, the list of dud predictions goes on and on.

I've go no takers with my $1 offer, so, either no one has coastal property, or no one believes the scenarios, or my offer is too low - how about $1.50.

[steve.zissou]

So Sea ice is the largest it has ever been since records started
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nati...-1227058298989

so i guess they'll change it from rising sea levels to "sea level change" like when they went from global warming to "climate change" when the maths started being a problem.

I just bought 20 acres on the beach - not to worried myself.

Even if it does rise, i'll just build canals and buildings and call it Venice v2

[mechanic]

Haven't got a clue whether the sea level will rise or not, to be honest. I do have some interesting photos of the recent high tides in Cairns though where I was up to my knees in salt water in the main street.
Personally I think $1 is $1 too much to pay for some Cairns and Gold Coast properties. They're at risk just from minor sea surges without worrying about rising sea levels, 2 meters of sand in some properties at Tully Heads and Cardwell from Yasi.
Google Earth will give a reasonable idea of height above sea level for prospective home buyers.

[Madaya]

Originally Posted by steve.zissou

So Sea ice is the largest it has ever been since records started
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nati...-1227058298989

so i guess they'll change it from rising sea levels to "sea level change" like when they went from global warming to "climate change" when the maths started being a problem.

I just bought 20 acres on the beach - not to worried myself.

Even if it does rise, i'll just build canals and buildings and call it Venice v2

I believe the situation with the sea ice is the result of Antarctic Glacier and Ice Cap Melt. As you know, salt water (and/or brine) does not freeze unless temperatures drop well below zero. The freezing point of sea water which is around 3% to 5% salt (depending on geo location) is -2 to -3 degrees centigrade.
The Ice Cap melt is basically distilled water and sits on top of the seawater as it has a lower density. In other words it freezes 'easier', at basically 0 degrees C.
You can chip off a piece of this new sea ice, melt it and put it in your radiator, it's that pure. Regular (normal) sea ice is frozen sea water.
These rafts of sea ice are not a good sign, in fact they are scary.

If the Arctic Ice Cap melts, no problem, excluding melt of the Greenland Ice Cap. But if Antarctica melts, we are in big trouble.

Science mates of mine say don't quote Wikipedia as a source, but this article describes clearly the melting points of various waters...and it is applicable to this thread...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine

[2011G6E]

I'm reminded of my own personal "end of the world offer" that I wheel out whenever I see religious nutbars saying the world is going to end. If I ever ran across on in person, I would make the following offer:

"I will right now sign a stat dec, witnessed by a JP or solicitor, saying that I will purchase all your worldly goods, in cash, payable within a week, at the price of one cent on the dollar. Pickup of said items is to take place one day after your stated end of the world date."

Because if you're right, then you've got a bit of cash to splurge on stuff before the end of the world and I'll never be able to collect.

But if I'M right...

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by cheap

Of course the same scientists don't seem to have a very good track record in getting the Armageddon scenarios right, instead of termeratures rising we have have temperatures which have paused for years, sea ice which entraps scientists who were sailing to Antarctica to prove the sea ice had melted, ice sheets bigger that ever, rain never filling our dams, the list of dud predictions goes on and on.

I've go no takers with my $1 offer, so, either no one has coastal property, or no one believes the scenarios, or my offer is too low - how about $1.50.

How about you pay me $1.50 for posting on this useless topic

[Ben73]

Read something in teh paper years ago about someone trying to devalue properties around Lake Macquarie due to the supposed sea rise. Residents were not happy.

I like the part of the article where it says Australia must cut it's green house gases to save the country. Honestly the sea will probably only rise by 1.09m that way instead of 1.1m

[Franco Cozzo]

China is already making some moves to clean up its problems, such as making moves to not use "dirty coal", which is going to effect us $$$ wise, maybe we should start investing in developing green power generation technologies, or improving them somehow as we will eventually lose coal exports or a significant chunk of them when other countries relying on this technology at this present time, start wanting to clean up the environment a little bit.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/risky...916-3fvpf.html

That was damn quick.

[cheap]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

China is already making some moves to clean up its problems, such as making moves to not use "dirty coal", which is going to effect us $$$ wise, maybe we should start investing in developing green power generation technologies, or improving them somehow as we will eventually lose coal exports or a significant chunk of them when other countries relying on this technology at this present time, start wanting to clean up the environment a little bit.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/risky...916-3fvpf.html

That was damn quick.

Yeah that's what the Green lobby would want people to believe, except China is the worlds leading producer/miner/user of coal (by a huge amount). Cheap power is what China requires, our coal isn't that cheap and they can get cheaper coal elsewhere.

Being in dispute with Clive Palmer isn't helping Aussie coal either.

[Stefan]

Isn't Tim Flannery part of this mob?

The same guy that said it would never rain again and so Govco built a desalination plant.

I can't believe he still gets a platform to spruik his stupidity after that, billions of dollars wasted.

[chevypower]

All these cars causing global warming some 2 million years ago, ending the ice age 12,000 years ago. How inconsiderate! We have to do something!

[2011G6E]

Sorry, but demand for coal is massively on the increase. Germany is even going back to coal because of stupid decisions like listening to the greens and going away from nuclear.

A modern society needs constant, on demand, base load power...and solar and bird-chopping windmills don't do that, and never will do that. If your country is too weak to go nuclear, there's only two real answers...gas or coal, full stop.

But then I'm old enough to remember being told in the early seventies at school that the world is heading for another ice age.

Which, technically is true...we're actually still in an ice age. The planet doesn't normally have ice at both poles...that's very unusual in Earths history. We are still in an "inter-glacial" between big freezes. Some of these have been very short in the past, but some have been very long. Guess we just have to hope we're in a "long" one this time.

It's interesting to think that our entire 10,000 years of civilization has arisen during one brief unseasonably temperate and relatively stable segment of Earths climate history...it's normally much hotter or colder than we see now. We just got lucky to evolve to the stage of civilization to match up with this "pleasant weather".
Of course we've seen upheavals...take the Great Barrier Reef for instance. Greens would have us believe it's always been there and always will. Nope...it's, amazingly, only 14,000 years old. Where the reef now stands was once low lying flat coastal planes, and the islands we now see were coastal hills and peaks. The sea level rose "suddenly" at that time by a couple of hundred meters during a "melt water pulse" event that rose sea levels all over the planet, flooding flat coastal areas everywhere. The reef wasn't there once, and it will inevitably disappear again one day. It's pretty, but don't for a second think coral reefs are a permanent feature of the environment.

The world wasn't finely tuned and formed just to suit man, a stable, absolutely unchanging system which will never ever alter.
The climate will change again, for better or worse (to our tiny point of view) and there is literally nothing we can do about it.

[Franco Cozzo]

Thats not what the news article is saying, says by 2015 China wants to limit what coal its using, from that news article:

The Chinese government is to limit the use of imported coal with more than 16 per cent ash and 3 per cent sulphur from January 1, 2015 in a bid to improve air quality, especially in cities such as Beijing and around Shanghai.

According to an analysis by Macquarie Bank, consultant Wood Mackenzie has indicated the ban could affect more than half of Australia's thermal coal exports to China, although the ban is also likely to hit Indonesian coal.

Part of the measures disclosed on Tuesday include slashing China's coal import volumes by 50 million tonnes over the balance of this year alone, which could hit the Australian industry hard, they said. ''Both the miners and the power companies are doing it hard in the slowdown, and the measures are aimed at giving both some room to manoeuvre,'' one industry source said.

''[Australian coal exports are] typically around 5500 kilocalories and 24-25 per cent ash. So we've got big problems,'' Bruce Jacques of IHS McCloskey Coal said. Some coal producers may be able to reduce the level of ash by washing the coal to meet the tighter controls, although this involves additional cost and many producers would be unwilling to pursue this option, he said.

ASSUMING thats correct, thats going to have a bit of an impact.

I'm not suggesting we attempt to replace the coal powerplant with green energy but a bit more of it to supplement what we have now wouldn't really hurt, would it?

Lots of people now already have solar panels on their house, maybe make it mandatory that any new house has to have a 5KW solar setup? It would add maybe $15K to the price of a house?

[Grunter]

I don't pretend to understand either point of view that well, but I can't help thinking that it shouldn't matter if climate change is causing the planet to cool or warm, and is either caused by man or it's part of a normal earth cycle (or both). That it is changing, should be the focus.

Because it seems that while both arguements continue to rage on the cause, nothing seems to being done to deal with the effects it may have on current ways of life (infrustructre, those possibly immediately most affected), irrespective of the cause.

[mik]

Well China probably wants to do something because at times over there you can cut the smog with a steak knife.
But for all the climate doomsday bs ...... im over it, the doomsayers reckon the deniers are in bed with the oil companies and mining companies, the doomsayers neglect to mention there is also billions of dollars to be made by those selling doom.
They come out with statements like oh but 97% of scientist s agree man is the only influence on global climate. ........

yet when one of their own scientists opens up and publicly says I think we made an error in the calculations and are overstating the severity of climate change considerably,
and is then sacked for it one has to be even more skeptical if you where not already a skeptic of the constant doom predictions.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

China is already making some moves to clean up its problems, such as making moves to not use "dirty coal", which is going to effect us $$$ wise, maybe we should start investing in developing green power generation technologies, or improving them somehow as we will eventually lose coal exports or a significant chunk of them when other countries relying on this technology at this present time, start wanting to clean up the environment a little bit.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/risky...916-3fvpf.html

That was damn quick.

Don't worry about China not buying our coal, India will buy as much as we can supply.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by trublu

Don't worry about China not buying our coal, India will buy as much as we can supply.

Hence the new coal mine opening up in QLD to supply India, I think its ADANI which owns it.

[Ben73]

Newcastle is getting rid of it's only windmill to make room for a new coal port.
With the amount of money that has been spent over the past few years helping expand the coal industry, I really doubt that it will winding down production any time soon. There is going to be someone out there using coal for a long time to come.

[BHDOGS]

Bugger the people on the beach if they dont wanna do **** all about the ocean rising then let there houses rot.

[malazn mafia]

By the year 2100? Guess people should stop reproducing now, and then the unfortunate souls still left behind by then can go blame their inconsiderate parents for bringing them to this hellhole.

[Juan Loco]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Sorry, but demand for coal is massively on the increase. Germany is even going back to coal because of stupid decisions like listening to the greens and going away from nuclear.

A modern society needs constant, on demand, base load power...and solar and bird-chopping windmills don't do that, and never will do that. If your country is too weak to go nuclear, there's only two real answers...gas or coal, full stop.

But then I'm old enough to remember being told in the early seventies at school that the world is heading for another ice age.

Which, technically is true...we're actually still in an ice age. The planet doesn't normally have ice at both poles...that's very unusual in Earths history. We are still in an "inter-glacial" between big freezes. Some of these have been very short in the past, but some have been very long. Guess we just have to hope we're in a "long" one this time.

It's interesting to think that our entire 10,000 years of civilization has arisen during one brief unseasonably temperate and relatively stable segment of Earths climate history...it's normally much hotter or colder than we see now. We just got lucky to evolve to the stage of civilization to match up with this "pleasant weather".
Of course we've seen upheavals...take the Great Barrier Reef for instance. Greens would have us believe it's always been there and always will. Nope...it's, amazingly, only 14,000 years old. Where the reef now stands was once low lying flat coastal planes, and the islands we now see were coastal hills and peaks. The sea level rose "suddenly" at that time by a couple of hundred meters during a "melt water pulse" event that rose sea levels all over the planet, flooding flat coastal areas everywhere. The reef wasn't there once, and it will inevitably disappear again one day. It's pretty, but don't for a second think coral reefs are a permanent feature of the environment.

The world wasn't finely tuned and formed just to suit man, a stable, absolutely unchanging system which will never ever alter.
The climate will change again, for better or worse (to our tiny point of view) and there is literally nothing we can do about it.

correct
unfortunately greenies like to perpetuate the idea that but for man, the world would be some perfect utopia in a permanent state of blissful balance.

Just look at the MASSIVE changes that have taken place in the last few thousand years. Places that history records as being verdant pasturelands and inland lakes are now nothing but desert or tundra.

[NAK302]

i'm always interested to know if the sea levels rising are that dire, why is everything associated with "envronmentally friendly" products more expensive than the products we have grown up with?
i find it interesting that no-one alive today will really know if we've been lied to by the time y2100 comes around. not that anyone would really lie to us when there's an industry that gains from government handouts.

and the other thing i find interesting is, the way people talk about mankind killing the planet, one would think we aren't a natural phenonomen of this planet. surely we're just part of that planet's evolution?

[CoupeKing]

We`ll probably be draining water from the Oceans by 2100 anyway.

[steve.zissou]

I'll believe in sea level rises when politicians start spending money on sea walls and raising the opera house as opposed to using it as an excuse to send billions to the UN to fund a infective and useless bureaucracy.

that being said, i hear it might be a good investment to buy some property around lake eyre - just wack in some pvc pipe to the coast and you'll have the 18th largest lake in the world (salt water might not help the ground water).

here's something help full for all you forward looking property investors - australia after 80m sea level rise. http://the100metreline.blogspot.com....australia.html