[mogadsheu]

Macro trends in nature are strong, humans can try and mitigate but we’re ultimately takers on the trend. There might be cases where sea walls provide compelling protection along specific parts of the coast, but as a grand plan to save the existing coastline, it’s a waste.

We studied Pacifia’s cliff side/coastline degradation in hydrology class. What’s happening is that waves erode the bottom of the cliff and the rest sloughs off, like pulling Jenga blocks from the bottom of the pile. A massive sea wall could slow the rate of cliffside erosion on the time scale of a generation, But the risk/hazard will remain. I don’t see the the benefit to society for not retreating development here.

[_nosaj]

I remember studying this in high school geography.

There's a part of the east coast of England that's being eroded at a rate of a couple of metres per year due to the sea cliffs being made up of soft glacial deposits.

It's an interesting example because people can observe the effect of the sea eating the land in a very short time. Some losing homes that were once miles from the coast.

Of course this phenomenon occurs on every coastline, but it takes generations.

https://urbanrim.org.uk/Holderness.htm

[olliej]

No.

We created almost all of this - the increase in global sea level due to melting ice caps and glaciers is entirely on us. Similarly the increase in energy in the global weather systems is driven by the same source, and causes the increases in "extreme" weather, which further drives accelerated erosion of coastal regions, flooding, and droughts.

We can try to slow down the damage caused by the symptoms, and as you say, that's all we can do, but it's super important to acknowledge that humans do override "macro" trends in nature. The problem is how we undo changes we caused. Short of magically coming up with a way to dramatically remove heat from the oceans and atmosphere we are at best stuck where we are. Given we haven't made any meaningful changes in the industries causing the climate change we can't expect anything more than further acceleration of the extremes.

[nitrogen]

Even at a constant sea level we still have wave erosion.

[mogadsheu]

Geoengineering on the local scale of building sea walls to prevent cliffside erosion will almost certainly be far too expensive to justify the benefits or time it buys before the inevitable happens.

This isn’t just about global warming. It’s about the power of the ocean, possibly with increased power from the effects of global warming, tearing down a town built on a cliff.

The discussion in the article is about people building on pretty real estate that’s dangerous to inhabit, and asking the government to preserve it.