5comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
 Sergio Pena Jul 19, 2014 04:36  |
Excellent idea, I was astonished. In Valparaíso, Chile in the 1880 such an idea was considered to be implemented with from one side of the bay to the other side of the bay using to create a reef preventing the consecuence of big storms and now, to prevent the consecuences of a tsunami. It is feasible. The cost is not that high and gives the opportunity to create a "marine agronomy" as pointed out by yourself. Be aware, however, about the regulations involved, particularly local regulations about the quality of the line and the plants to be used in order to get the reef. You have not include references in your proposal.
|
 Mark Capron Jul 19, 2014 08:54  | Proposal contributor
Dear Sergiopena,
Indeed, coral reefs and natural rock formations are the original invisible breakwaters. Their drawbacks include not rising with the tide and storm surge to retain maximum wave dampening and not lowering to allow maximum recreational (or natural wave scour) when unneeded.
Your thoughts on the issues are perceptive. Are you interested in consulting on a prototype installation in Chile? You'll need to find the funding.
|
Mark Capron Jul 31, 2014 08:01 | Proposal contributor
Scientists are discussing yet another sudden GHG-triggered disaster which suggests our adaptations need to be even more robust than we have been considering.
Yet another GHG-triggered disaster would be a repeat of the Laki, Iceland volcano eruptions of 1783. These eruptions appear to have caused drought-based starvation as far as Egypt and Japan in addition to starvation on and closer to Iceland. See http://volcanism.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/on-this-day-the-laki-eruption-begins-1783/. The scenario is:
1. The weight of Icelands glaciers suppress volcanic eruptions.
2. GHG-warming melts the glaciers and relieves the restraining pressure.
3. The volcanoes erupt sooner then they would if the glaciers were intact.
|
 Climate Colab Aug 6, 2014 08:15 |
The Climate CoLab adaptation contest team appreciates the time that you took to submit this proposal. This is an interesting initial concept, but there are a lot of questions that are currently unanswered and a lot of work left to do on this proposal. A good starting point would be to identify key partners and sources of funding that would allow you to move forward. The judges recommend considering the following questions: Where would these go? Who would decide where they go? What are they designed to do? Are the costs commensurate with the benefits? What would the impacts to the sides of the flexible barriers be? How would they be activated? Who would decide this? What impact would they have on normal coastal activities? What property rights would have to be acquired to latch the barriers to the ocean floor? What concrete support is there that these will reduce impacts from increasing coastal storms or storm intensity? While your proposal is not advancing to the semi-finals this year, the contest team wishes you the best of luck in your endeavors and would love to see a proposal from you next year incorporating this feedback.
|
 Hemant Wagh Mar 8, 2015 04:41 |
A 50 to 100 meter wide thicket of coconut trees grown all along the coastline with prohibition of new private utility construction in this zone would help as well. Advantages- 1) greening 2) naturally grown organic coconuts available free of cost 3) barrier against high velocity waves 4) byproducts of coconut trees usable without felling the trees. Rights of usage for coconut tree products can be given to collectives of settlements along the coastline and their participation sought in erecting such a thicket. This would be applicable in the tropical/subtropical areas where coconut trees would grow easily. For other areas the variety of tree for growing such thicket may be different. Isolated tree would get uprooted easily but the thicket would be able to resist the storm pressures better. Kindly consider submitting such a project, I will work with you in this case.
|
