|
|
|
|
|
by jacquesm
2381 days ago
|
|
They were built with that in mind, yes. But since then they've been raised several times already and there is continuous maintenance on weak points. The real problem is the rivers, keeping water out from the seaside is actually a simpler problem than preventing the interior from being flooded once the rivers are substantially below sea level themselves. Sea dikes and fortifications can be raised (at a cost), but river dikes can't really be raised easily and besides that the water needs to go somewhere. And I did write that on larger time scales there is a real risk, and I believe that anything over several meters rise sustained would be a serious problem and would cause some of the land to revert back to the sea. But long before then you'll see the same in other countries, Italy, the UK, the USA, France, Germany and Spain all have areas that would be much harder and earlier hit than NL because they have no fortifications whatsoever as a starting point and it would take decades to plan and construct them. |
|
I guess we differ on the 'economically viable' part. but in the really long run (say greenland being free of ice) my guess is no amount of money is going to save the netherlands.