NC Legislators Propose Banning Prediction of Sea Rise

NC Legislators Propose Banning Prediction of Sea Rise

May, 30, 2012, by David

Advertise on NR

Recently an NC scientific panel determined we should prepare for a 1 meter rise in sea level by 2100.  A risky proposition for the NC coastal low lands.  The estimate was considered conservative as other east coast states like Maine and Florida have  their own estimates as high as 2 meters. For certain parties though, that estimate is too threatening to economic development and therefore needs revising.   

Last week McClatchy described the events leading up to the legislation:

Federal authorities say the North Carolina coast is vulnerable because of its low, flat land and thin fringe of barrier islands. A state-appointed science panel has reported that a 1-meter rise in sea level is likely by 2100.

The calculation, prepared for the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission, was intended to help the state plan for rising water that could threaten 2,000 square miles. Critics say it could thwart economic development on just as large a scale.

A coastal economic development group called NC-20 attacked the report, insisting the scientific research it cited is flawed. The science panel last month confirmed its findings, recommending that they be reassessed every five years.

But NC-20, named for the 20 coastal counties, appears to be winning its campaign to undermine them.

The Coastal Resources Commission agreed to delete references to planning benchmarks – such as the 1-meter prediction – and new development standards for areas likely to be inundated.

The N.C. Division of Emergency Management, which is using a $5 million federal grant to analyze the impact of rising water, lowered its worst-case scenario prediction from 1 meter (about 39 inches) to 15 inches by 2100.

Today, Raleigh writer Scott Huler weighs in on the issue for Scientific American:

The key language is in section 2, paragraph e, talking about rates of sea level rise: “These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900. Rates of seas-level rise may be extrapolated linearly. …” It goes on, but there’s the core: North Carolina legislators have decided that the way to make exponential increases in sea level rise – caused by those inconvenient feedback loops we keep hearing about from scientists – go away is to make it against the law to extrapolate exponential; we can only extrapolate along a line predicted by previous sea level rises.

Which, yes, is exactly like saying, do not predict tomorrow’s weather based on radar images of a hurricane swirling offshore, moving west towards us with 60-mph winds and ten inches of rain. Predict the weather based on the last two weeks of fair weather with gentle breezes towards the east. Don’t use radar and barometers; use the Farmer’s Almanac and what grandpa remembers.

Read Scott's complete post here:

Read More

Politics, Other posts by David.


NC LegistlatorSea LevelCoast


  • Roy
    06/01 07:52 AM

    I can’t believe more people aren’t pissed about this. This is madness. We are banning scientific research! Has the anti-amendment 1 movement really burnt out all of the progressive people in North Carolina from further protests?

  • Duke of Prunes
    06/04 11:01 AM

    It’s really getting embarrassing to live in this state. WTF.

  • John
    06/05 08:10 PM

    This is what NC and America got when moderately dissappointed people stayed home on election day 2010 and let the crazies run the table with some of the most ignorant people ever to take an oath of office.  Guess what people? It will happen again and only get worse if we don’t get out there and toss these ignoramuses out of office in November.  Just go read the NC Republican Party platform.  It’s enough to scare the crap out of any progressive person and an insult to anyone who makes decisions using facts and science. 
    Oh….and in case anyone has any doubt about how they really feel about gay people, you’ll notice that they specifically exclude gay people from their anti-discrimination language….seriously, it’s not that they just forget to mention them, they specifically point out that they are not included.  So much for their “love the sinner but hate the sin” bull crap.

Share Your Thoughts

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.