Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AnimalMuppet 1745 days ago
> Especially since there are likely useful public works projects that could be done to mitigate damage from climate change anyway.

If you did public works to protect against this, then they would help you against climate change. But if you did public works to protect against climate change, they would not protect against this, because this is maybe 3 times worse. (Nobody that I have ever heard is talking about an 80 foot sea level rise from climate change.)
2 comments
ethbr0 1745 days ago
There are some dual-purpose systems.

E.g. ensuring New Orleans' pumps are in working condition, and a levee system is built to survive overtopping without collapsing.

The difference between a crisis and a catastrophe is how quickly mitigation kicks in after an event.

link
omgwtfbyobbq 1745 days ago
The cost of protecting against this would be very high. The marginal cost of additions to blunt the effects of a tsunami in addition to protecting against climate change might not be that much.
link