What's with the radiation hazards?

I'm guessing submerged nuke plants are teh bad.

But in only two spots? There have to be more nuke plants underwater than that.

Well, one looks like it's where Chernobyl would be, the other one... Three Mile Island, perhaps? Maybe something to do with the way the two are sealed?

Nuh-uh. I think that map is a bit suspect. Melting Arctic ice wouldn't raise the ocean levels significantly, as the ice is already floating, and the amount of ice in Antartica would only raise ocean levels by about 200 feet. Just playing around in Google Earth for a few minutes showed that the bulk of North America has a greater elevation than that.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Every scrap of ice melting on the surface raises the sea level by ~630 feet. Its enough to have a huge impact, but nothing like what that map projects.

I should know, my only Science Fair ribbon was on that very subject, 20+ years ago. I think I have my old maps in the garage somewhere...

Well, Wikipedia indicates that there is 30 million cubic kilometres of water in the Antarctic ice sheet. Dispribute that evenly over the surface are of the world's oceans (361 million square kilometers) and that results in 0.083 cubic kilometers of water for each square kilometer of ocean, which I believe works out to about 83 meteres, or 271 feet. Now, because of the sloshing factor over low-lying areas, this factor would be reduced somewhat, which may account for the generally-held figure of around a 200 feet increase in ocean levels.

... and hopefully my math is better than my typing. Please excuse all the mispellings, I shouldn't have had that thrid cup of coffee.

It can't be wrong. I found it on the internet!

Hi-5, apostropher! Not only will we be beach-front, but the radiation will keep the rents cheap!

Woohoo!

Also, we've now seen that map and read its refutations on the internet. Do they cancel each other out now? Am I free to base a dystopic sci-fi story on the map? Am I compelled to do so? It's all so confusing.

I like "Newer York" in the upper Rockies.

Hey, double-plus, is that 30 million cubic km melted water, or ice? Ice is less dense than water; this might help us if the figure is for ice.

It's Waterworld! The great and powerful Costner demands your obedience.

how does Greenland affect your calculations?

Hey, double-plus, is that 30 million cubic km melted water, or ice? Ice is less dense than water; this might help us if the figure is for ice.

Ice. So the water level will go up 77 meters, not 83, taking into consideration the expension factor of water to ice (1.07).

Oh, if my semi-suicidal grade 10 science teacher could only see me now.

how does Greenland affect your calculations?

Very little, as the Antarctic ice sheet is 90% of all fresh water on Earth, including the Great Lakes, all rivers, ponds, and all of the glaciers.

Water also expands when warmed. Ocean "baseline" would be much higher. But more weight of water from melted ice on the relatively thin oceanic crust could cause it to sink as well. They should balance out... No need to worry about anything.

Water also expands when warmed. Ocean "baseline" would be much higher.

Assuming that the added water was heated to boiling point, the ocean level would then go from the earlier calculated 77 meters to just over 80 meters, and would make an already exciting calamity almost unbearable.

(Mr. Science Note - volumn change in water from near freezing to boiling is around 4.3%)

I'm really hoping you'll be bored this afternoon.

Just sayin'.

Apos mate

I believe the south of Australia is about 200 ft higher than the north, which is the leading part of a continental plate that is sliding under another.
Canberra would be dry, too. (600 metres above sea-level)

With all this scientific chit-chat, you're all missing the best part...boogie boarding to see the Dalai Lama!