Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Will sea level rise cause Boston, NYC and Philly to gradually shift their cores inland a bit, as opposed to right on top of the water now? So in a hundred years, will West Philly be like Center City now, and will Manhattan move up towards the Bronx or into the NJ suburbs? Or will these cities keep their downtowns right as they are and just build insane flood prevention systems? How long can this go on for? Or will we find a permenant solution to sea level rise?
Will sea level rise cause Boston, NYC and Philly to gradually shift their cores inland a bit, as opposed to right on top of the water now? So in a hundred years, will West Philly be like Center City now, and will Manhattan move up towards the Bronx or into the NJ suburbs? Or will these cities keep their downtowns right as they are and just build insane flood prevention systems? How long can this go on for? Or will we find a permenant solution to sea level rise?
How exactly will a city center "move"? All major cities are built out for the most part so "moving" a downtown into another neighborhood would essentially require the demolition of dozens of preexisting buildings which is never likely to happen because the cost to seize that land via eminent domain would be astronomical. It would also require a city to alter its entire infrastructure to compensate for higher development elsewhere. And city council doesn't build buildings--private developers do. Developers decide where they want to build and they are permitted or denied to build what they want by the city council. So unless demand is so high that developers are likely to turn over a profit (which would be unlikely due to land values dropping after something as devastating as a flood or sea levels rising), developers would just invest elsewhere.
And building a sea wall is not "insane". Manhattan is already underway with a new sea wall plan if memory serves me right.
Will sea level rise cause Boston, NYC and Philly to gradually shift their cores inland a bit, as opposed to right on top of the water now? So in a hundred years, will West Philly be like Center City now, and will Manhattan move up towards the Bronx or into the NJ suburbs? Or will these cities keep their downtowns right as they are and just build insane flood prevention systems? How long can this go on for? Or will we find a permenant solution to sea level rise?
Moving NYC to New Jersey would require crossing a river into another state's territory - doubt it will happen. Not only will it no longer be in NYS, unless we move state borders but I assure you NJ won't have that, but the river is a sudden, stark divide that makes it NOT a gradual move. Manhattan is built right up to the waterfront. Next building would have to be in New Jersey if you want to go any further west.
To answer your question, in the sake of NYC particularly but also any over city… no. Not feasible, not cheap to move a city like that. It would have to happen over decades and decades to not severely interrupt daily life and the economy, and sea level rise would probably outpace that time period anyway.
What cities will do is implement ways to stop the water, like build sea walls. There will be a way to figure out how to push water out of the way, which logically would of course cause it to rise more elsewhere, but whatever. Big cities are all that matter, right?
Also, why do you ask just about NE cities? Sea level rise will affect basically anywhere coastal, I've seen the projection maps, for what they're worth. Florida will basically be totally gone, for one.
Most of New York City is actually fairly far above Sea Level, considering it's a coastal city. This is very clear if you ever drive on the highways surrounding Manhattan, and see the gigantic cliffs leading up to the core of the city.
The biggest issue NYC would face with a moderate sea level rise is it could lose all its airports. The residential neighborhoods, however, would be mostly safe, with the exception of areas in Southern Brooklyn and Queens like Coney Island.
Now, if all the ice caps melted, and the sea level rose by 60 meters, NYC would be kinda screwed, insofar as it would be mostly underwater. But the U.S. would have tons of other issues at that point too, like Florida no longer existing. At even with a 60 meter rise, interestingly, Midtown and the Financial District would still be above sea level, so there's no reason that NYC would be totally abandoned (or to see gondolas swarming among the submerged skyscrapers).
The oceans have been "eroding" the beaches slowly for eons. practically the whole east coast are barrier islands which as the waves erode the ocean side the sands blow across and build up the bay side. An ongoing process. No need to worry though as our coastal city's aren't going to be under water any time soon. This fear mongering from the media is going too far. "OMG, the sea level has risen 3 ft in the last month! We're DOOOOOOMED!" is said as they take a measurement at high tide this time around instead of dead low like last time. Gotta make their point!
The marinas I am familiar with have the water rising and falling with the tide and is on the same level as it was years ago. The only times the docks are flooded and you have to step up considerably more to board a boat is during a strong northeaster. That goes the other way as well.
Yes Manhattan is in decent shape because it's above sea level. but the NYC metro area as a whole is f***cked. Southern Brooklyn, Jersey City, Newark, Souther Queens, Long Island and Staten Island are all severely in danger of sea level rise. So even if Manhattan is secure, the region as a whole has a LOT of danger ahead. Philly is actually in danger too. And when I mentioned cities "retreating", i didn't mean all at once. I was talking about a slow transition over many years, maybe 50 years plus. You couldn't see this happening, where developers start building sky scrapers in higher, safer areas, and eventually this becomes like a new downtown?
Another question... will man be able to stop sea level rise/global warming in the future, with technologies? Refreezing the ice caps? Putting sulfer in the air to deflect sunlight? I could see us controlling natural forces in 100 or 200 years. can u?
lol, isn't philly already like 70 miles inland from the coast? I doubt rising sea levels is an extreme concern as opposed to cities like NYC and Miami....where they quite literally sit on the immediate coastline.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
