Warming a threat to coastal states: On Earth Day, rise in sea levels noted

April 23, 2006, The Post and Courier, Charleston SC
by David Slade

An Environmental Protection Agency Web site aimed at explaining global warming to children begins a discussion about rising sea levels like this: "Have you ever built a sand castle on the beach, close to the ocean on wet sand?"

We know what will happen to the sand castle, so it's easy to imagine what could happen to marshes, wetlands and other low-lying property in coastal South Carolina if sea levels rise as predicted this century, due to global warming.

This Earth Day weekend, some who live in the Lowcountry during this time of rising seas are asking what they can do to reduce global warming and the many threats that it brings.

"Global warming is on my mind," said Lynne Lovelace, a middle school science teacher from Johns Island who attended an Earth Day event in North Charleston on Saturday with her grandchild.

"I think people can't get away from seeing that it's happening," she said. "All you can do is go forward."

Sea levels are rising already, and at the same time much of the Atlantic Coast is slowly subsiding.

"Along the coast we have a number of areas that are particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise," said Greg Carbone, of the University of South Carolina's Department of Geography, during a symposium on global warming Monday in Columbia. "We know already that we are experiencing erosion along the coast, and sea-level rise will only make that worse."

The sea level in Charleston is estimated to be about 9 inches higher today than it was in 1900, and is expected to rise at least 19 inches more by 2100, according to the EPA.

"Global warming is still a 'Fantasy Island' thing for most people," said Janet Smyth, of West Ashley. "You would think all the people on the islands would be very concerned about it."

Scientists and environmentalists are walking a tightrope between trying to warn the public and policy makers about the dire scenarios, and trying to convince people that it's not too late to take action, to reduce emissions from burning fossil fuels that are warming the planet.

"We know now that most of the heat from greenhouse gases has gone into the oceans," said Bill Chameides, chief scientist for the nonprofit group Environmental Defense and a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

"If we fail to act we could pass a threshold in as little as 30 years that will commit the world to the melting of the Greenland ice shelf and a 20-foot increase in sea level," he said at the symposium with Carbone.

In February, scientists at the California Institute of Technology and University of Kansas reported that Greenland's glaciers are melting about twice as quickly as had been previously thought.

Sea levels are rising because water expands and takes up more space as it warms, and because polar ice is melting. Rising seas make coastal areas more vulnerable to hurricanes, and some studies have concluded that warmer oceans are producing stronger hurricanes.

Chameides believes that if the United States, the world's single largest producer of greenhouse gases, can stop increasing emissions during the first half of the century and then reduce them, the Greenland ice shelf scenario could be avoided. Seas are expected to rise for centuries, however, because of the oceans' ability to store carbon and heat.

City and state governments, and some corporations, have taken a leadership role in reducing emissions, while the federal government has struggled to find a solution that a majority of lawmakers will embrace.

Sens. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and John McCain, R-Ariz., have proposed capping many industrial emissions at 2000 levels by 2010, but other lawmakers fear that reducing emissions would hurt the economy, and some remain unconvinced that human activities are responsible for global warming.

"We're trying to find policies that will not harm the economy and will accomplish our goals," said Matthew Rimkunas, legislative aide to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., at a conference in January. "None of the legislation that's been proposed does those things, so Senator Graham has been, unfortunately, unable to support them."

Environmental groups differ on the best approach to reducing emissions. Some, like Environmental Defense, believe the key is an emissions-trading system that would reward companies that use or develop the best technology. Others, like the Sierra Club, think requiring better fuel economy for cars and trucks is the most important step.

Chameides believes states that take a lead role promoting energy-saving technology will gain an advantage in coming years.

"It's like, who's going to be the new Silicon Valley, with low-carbon high technology," he said.